Jezza, Blackford, Tory Swinson, Benn yawn we will never vote for anything yawn yawn.
Pathetic we need to leave with a deal.
Hopefully EU accept it and the house passes it.
100% agreed.
Funny I thought Benn was against No Deal. Opposition showing themselves as bare-faced liars.
Jezza Tory Swinson Blackford Benn Soubry all said they would do everything to stop no deal.
All fell at first hurdle today.
I think Blackford/the SNP actually do having listened to them on the radio seeing as they'd be willing to install Corbyn as PM (Or seriously consider anyone else).
That's not the case for the others right now.
I'm guessing he used his time to lay into Johnson though (Which is just politics), but I'd exclude him from that list now.
The numbers are there in Parliament to pass this so it all comes down to whether the EU back it. If the EU backs this, it gets through Parliament. So you're saying there's a 70% chance the EU rejects this.
The argument is pretty simple; whilst Tories may get more of the vote at a GE it has the potential to be spread somewhat more equally across the country, whereas the Lab / LD votes are individually localised. So if Tories do well, it is quite well everywhere. Where LDs and Lab do well they are doing very well, and where they're doing badly they're doing very badly AND these map in such a way that where Lab do very badly LDs are doing very well and visa versa.
This means, under FPTP, Lab and LD will get more bang for their buck. He uses EU and other elections to suggest the localisation effect is real (which is debatable), and the maths is difficult to run through a decent model, but the theory behind it I think holds water.
In a previous post I characterised this as the @Casino_Royale model (he was I think the first person to point this out). Con have most votes, but because it's homogeneous across GB they come second everywhere to numerically inferior but more concentrated forces. So we have
* The @Casino_Royale model: Con lion brought down by Lab/Lib/SNP/PC hyenas * The @HYUFD model: 1983 redux, Con landslide
Both are possible.
On the latest Yougov the Tories have their biggest lead over Labour since 1983 but their smallest lead over the LDs since 2005, so most likely a Tory landslide over Labour but losses to the LDs and SNP mean only a narrow Tory majority overall
Watching the HoC it feels like Boris might have cracked this.
Good idea of his (or his advisers?) to switch to a conciliatory tone.
Edit: He might have just slipped up there though... hints that it could be a referendum rather than a Stormont vote that decides NI position after 4 years.
"white-collar gangster state"....FFS. How rattled are you? Just because you have no answer to the charge that Labour will cause massive loss of tax from highly mobile labour/wealth that currently chooses to live in the UK.
If the London financial sector's USP is that our systems of allocation are the most efficient and benefit other countries that make use of them, while English law is particularly tried and trusted for financial contracts, then all well and good, and that business is likely to remain.
If its USP is that we ask no questions and you can embezzle your country (including our own) to your heart's delight while we manage your assets for you, then we might be better off without that business in the long term.
Does the financial sector suck resources out of the real sector in advanced economies? There is increasing evidence of this. Does the reliance on London finance have massive detrimental knock-on effects for the rest of the UK and its economy? Yeah, it does. Am I rattled? No-one I vote for ever wins, and nothing I want to happen ever happens, so there is no reason I should be particularly rattled right now.
As for the "charge", you're probably correct: there would be some flight after a Corbyn victory. But this is unlikely to be tested, no matter how much I don't want him to win.
The UK financial services sector contributed £75 billion in tax revenues in 2017 to 2018
It's very close though. Certainly closer than MV3. I think it'd have the numbers.
I am pretty sure this 'Boris Deal' will pass parliament if the EU accept it.
I am also pretty sure that the EU will NOT accept it.
I'm pretty sure that they will accept something close to it. After a final haggle.
And no further extensions beyond 31st October, to ensure our MPs must choose Boris's Deal or No Deal - and ending this dreadful period of Westminster's history.
Jezza, Blackford, Tory Swinson, Benn yawn we will never vote for anything yawn yawn.
Pathetic we need to leave with a deal.
Hopefully EU accept it and the house passes it.
100% agreed.
Funny I thought Benn was against No Deal. Opposition showing themselves as bare-faced liars.
Jezza Tory Swinson Blackford Benn Soubry all said they would do everything to stop no deal.
All fell at first hurdle today.
I think Blackford/the SNP actually do having listened to them on the radio seeing as they'd be willing to install Corbyn as PM (Or seriously consider anyone else).
That's not the case for the others right now.
I'm guessing he used his time to lay into Johnson though (Which is just politics), but I'd exclude him from that list now.
No all of them rejected the deal this morning.
The deal is the best way of avoiding no deal right now.
I would prefer this deal if EU agree it to Jezza walking into no 10 as leader of GONU
The PMs tone although almost certainly manufactured was persuasive.
Has anyone on this site said they oppose this deal? Especially anyone OK with leaving, whether a leaver or remainer who respects democracy [not someone who thinks we must remain at all costs]
Not that they think the EU won't agree to it, but that they oppose it. We have a selection of views on here and I've not noticed anyone rejecting it yet.
My view is we should leave with virtually any deal and it meets that threshold. It seems a bit worse than Mays deal imo. Not sure what would have to be in the deal for me to reject it given the realistic if unlikely alternative possibility of no deal.
Yours is a reasonable view as is @bigjohnowls - it is what Corbyn, Swinson and especially Benn etc should be saying. It avoids no deal as they claim to be working for.
Even though its my view, I dont particularly think its what the opposition leaders should be saying, they have their own responsibilities and constituencies. The way both PMs have excluded others from negotiating influence leaves them open to argue whatever they like.
The Gov't seems to have bamboozled the remain opposition into doing absolubtely nothing substantive in parliament with the extra time yielded by the unprorogation. So in political terms the de facto position is that basically parliament was prorogued for 5 weeks.
You think that progressing the domestic violence bill is not substantive? Says a lot about you really...
Of course I welcome the bill but it was a) The Gov't's doing b) Would have been done in the new session anyway. c) Unopposed & non controversial
No it wouldn’t have it. It was binned in the proroguation.
It would have been introduced in the next session since it hadn't been progressed.
Well now the work does not need to be repeated so good job Parliament.
The work would not have needed to have been repeated as all the detailed scrutiny had been done and it could thus have been nodded through very quickly with minimal time set aside. To justify all the hyperbolic claims of a "coup" against parliament you need to have more to show than the fact that an uncontroversial piece of legislation hit the statute book a month or two earlier than it otherwise would have.
He's right. All the focus on the Backstop proposals is distracting from the *massive* shift away from all the bits that were tolerable to Labour. We are about to see the first actual pricipled opposition to the Government's direction of travel from Corbyn since the referendum result. MV4 ( on this basis ) is going to be *much* harder for Labour MPs to support than MV1 to 3.
The argument is pretty simple; whilst Tories may get more of the vote at a GE it has the potential to be spread somewhat more equally across the country, whereas the Lab / LD votes are individually localised. So if Tories do well, it is quite well everywhere. Where LDs and Lab do well they are doing very well, and where they're doing badly they're doing very badly AND these map in such a way that where Lab do very badly LDs are doing very well and visa versa.
This means, under FPTP, Lab and LD will get more bang for their buck. He uses EU and other elections to suggest the localisation effect is real (which is debatable), and the maths is difficult to run through a decent model, but the theory behind it I think holds water.
In a previous post I characterised this as the @Casino_Royale model (he was I think the first person to point this out). Con have most votes, but because it's homogeneous across GB they come second everywhere to numerically inferior but more concentrated forces. So we have
* The @Casino_Royale model: Con lion brought down by Lab/Lib/SNP/PC hyenas * The @HYUFD model: 1983 redux, Con landslide
Both are possible.
They are the extremes. The likeliest is somewhere in the middle.
Right now, I'd guess closer to the HYUFD model than the CR model.
Voters in general are more stubborn than assumed by models in which the opposition piles up behind the strongest candidate.
Agreed. 25% chance of EU agreement and 60% chance it passes the commons gives 15% which looks realistic pre Oct 31st. Post Oct 31st much harder to estimate.
Good point, the irony is all the bigging up both of tone and opposing no deal by the opposition in the last few weeks has kind of fed into helping Boris today - he can be the calm statesman seeking a deal, while any negative tone or rejecting a deal goes against what they've been saying.
True. Didnt rate Jezzas contribution today.
If EU accepts this proposal the Commons needs to pass it.
Hope Kinnock Nandy et al vote for it.
Jesters tone and style is important hope he keeps up the last 45 mins.
I disagree totally. Someone as malign and untrustworthy as Johnson must not be supported in any way by the Opposition parties that might bring him electoral advantage.
The Gov't seems to have bamboozled the remain opposition into doing absolubtely nothing substantive in parliament with the extra time yielded by the unprorogation. So in political terms the de facto position is that basically parliament was prorogued for 5 weeks.
You think that progressing the domestic violence bill is not substantive? Says a lot about you really...
Of course I welcome the bill but it was a) The Gov't's doing b) Would have been done in the new session anyway. c) Unopposed & non controversial
No it wouldn’t have it. It was binned in the proroguation.
It would have been introduced in the next session since it hadn't been progressed.
Well now the work does not need to be repeated so good job Parliament.
The work would not have needed to have been repeated as all the detailed scrutiny had been done and it could thus have been nodded through very quickly with minimal time set aside. To justify all the hyperbolic claims of a "coup" against parliament you need to have more to show than the fact that an uncontroversial piece of legislation hit the statute book a month or two earlier than it otherwise would have.
You guys will say anything to justify the unlawful prorogation of Parliament.
Interesting set of local by-elections today. There is a double vacancy in Aberdeen with both Con and SNP defending. Given the voting system in Scotland that could be complicated. There are Con defences in Cardiff and Charnwood; Ind defences in Essex and Somerset; and a LD defence in St Albans.
The numbers are there in Parliament to pass this so it all comes down to whether the EU back it. If the EU backs this, it gets through Parliament. So you're saying there's a 70% chance the EU rejects this.
The HoC seems fairly close so certainly not 100%, but I'd tend to agree - if the EU accepts, some waverers will come on board, especially Lab leavers.
But at the same time, the clock is ticking. There's no way this is all tied up neatly by the end of the month, when Boris is intent we will leave.
The bet would also lose with a 3mth extension, as that takes it into next year.
Jezza, Blackford, Tory Swinson, Benn yawn we will never vote for anything yawn yawn.
Pathetic we need to leave with a deal.
Hopefully EU accept it and the house passes it.
100% agreed.
Funny I thought Benn was against No Deal. Opposition showing themselves as bare-faced liars.
Jezza Tory Swinson Blackford Benn Soubry all said they would do everything to stop no deal.
All fell at first hurdle today.
I think Blackford/the SNP actually do having listened to them on the radio seeing as they'd be willing to install Corbyn as PM (Or seriously consider anyone else).
That's not the case for the others right now.
I'm guessing he used his time to lay into Johnson though (Which is just politics), but I'd exclude him from that list now.
No all of them rejected the deal this morning.
The deal is the best way of avoiding no deal right now.
I would prefer this deal if EU agree it to Jezza walking into no 10 as leader of GONU
The PMs tone although almost certainly manufactured was persuasive.
Ah yes I was talking at cross purposes sorry. I meant the SNP, led substantively by Sturgeon were willing to be far more flexible in the VONC and subsequent PM arrangements than anything else. They also have a bit more of a mandate/reason than Labour & Lib Dems in particular to reject a deal at this stage given their A50 actions, manifesto, desire ultimately for an independent Scotland.
Good point, the irony is all the bigging up both of tone and opposing no deal by the opposition in the last few weeks has kind of fed into helping Boris today - he can be the calm statesman seeking a deal, while any negative tone or rejecting a deal goes against what they've been saying.
True. Didnt rate Jezzas contribution today.
If EU accepts this proposal the Commons needs to pass it.
Hope Kinnock Nandy et al vote for it.
Jesters tone and style is important hope he keeps up the last 45 mins.
I disagree totally. Someone as malign and untrustworthy as Johnson must not be supported in any way by the Opposition parties that might bring him electoral advantage.
That will hand him a majority on a plate, boris, the EU and the people versus parliament
Barnier has been put in his box by Juncker/Macron/Merkel.
They want this sorted.
Interesting how the first thing Boris did to make progress going back a month ago was fly to Berlin. Exactly what sensible Brexiteers said should be the first thing the PM should have done at the start of negotiations
There was little reason to compromise when no deal would get through Parliament anyway. Now a deal is within reach it comes down to dotting the i's and crossing the t's - Barnier has work to do, but I'd be very disappointed if it doesn't end up getting done, and I suspect so will Merkel and probably even Ursula.
The EU I think has played a straight bat. They spent some time negotiating with the UK and reached an agreement which both sides were happy with.
Now we don't seem to be happy with it and I can see why they might say "nothing to do with us, guv". How are they supposed to negotiate with anyone on the understanding that the next internal political wiggle in the UK will render any agreement reached moot? They have to draw the line somewhere.
Both sides weren't happy though, that was the issue. Even when the deal was signed it was overwhelmingly crystal clear it would never get through Parliament, the DUP, the ERG, the opposition had all made their opposition clear beforehand.
Our PM is not and never has been a unilateral dictator. If the EU thought squaring May alone was sufficient they were idiots - I do not believe they are idiots, do you?
How do you propose to negotiate with someone who you know is only transiently in the post? You must negotiate in good faith with the person in front of you which I believe the EU did. I mean that is assuming you believe the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom holds some degree of authority.
I propose you negotiate to seek a deal that can get through their Parliament and in particular I said all along the DUP as the elected representatives of the unionist community and a part of the government's majority in Parliament should have been involved with negotiating the Irish-border solution.
That runs both ways. We need to propose a deal that is acceptable to Ireland as much as they need one acceptable to our Parliament. One of the common fallacies on this board is that Juncker or Barnier or even Merkel can snap their fingers and Ireland will accept whatever our Parliament put forward. The genius of May was to make the UK, a unitary state with only 3 devolved legislatures without foreign policy competence, appear more divided than a loose confederation (or whatever) of 27 sovereign states where all have input.
So Boris gets his proposal through the Commons, which quite possible but not certain. What then? Do you really think that Merkel will snap her fingers and Ireland, who politically need to accept his idea, QMV or no QMV, will just jump into line? We tried that there for the best part of a millennium and it didn’t work. This isn’t a technical or economic issue but a deeply held emotional attachment to six counties the majority across the island feel are part of their country. The Single Market and Customs Union was imperfect cosmetic surgery which, in conjunction with the GFA, made the border tolerable. This proposal, to Ireland, makes it intolerable again.. We are talking to ourselves.
Good point, the irony is all the bigging up both of tone and opposing no deal by the opposition in the last few weeks has kind of fed into helping Boris today - he can be the calm statesman seeking a deal, while any negative tone or rejecting a deal goes against what they've been saying.
True. Didnt rate Jezzas contribution today.
If EU accepts this proposal the Commons needs to pass it.
Hope Kinnock Nandy et al vote for it.
Jesters tone and style is important hope he keeps up the last 45 mins.
I disagree totally. Someone as malign and untrustworthy as Johnson must not be supported in any way by the Opposition parties that might bring him electoral advantage.
I would not prioritise political advantage over leaving with a deal rather than no deal.
No Deal probably gives Lab most political advantage if it's a disaster but you cant claim to be trying to stop no deal and at the same time force the country down that route. Jezza joined Tory Swinson in the hypocrite of the year contest running this morning.
Jezza, Blackford, Tory Swinson, Benn yawn we will never vote for anything yawn yawn.
Pathetic we need to leave with a deal.
Hopefully EU accept it and the house passes it.
100% agreed.
Funny I thought Benn was against No Deal. Opposition showing themselves as bare-faced liars.
Jezza Tory Swinson Blackford Benn Soubry all said they would do everything to stop no deal.
All fell at first hurdle today.
I think Blackford/the SNP actually do having listened to them on the radio seeing as they'd be willing to install Corbyn as PM (Or seriously consider anyone else).
That's not the case for the others right now.
I'm guessing he used his time to lay into Johnson though (Which is just politics), but I'd exclude him from that list now.
No all of them rejected the deal this morning.
The deal is the best way of avoiding no deal right now.
I would prefer this deal if EU agree it to Jezza walking into no 10 as leader of GONU
The PMs tone although almost certainly manufactured was persuasive.
Ah yes I was talking at cross purposes sorry. I meant the SNP, led substantively by Sturgeon were willing to be far more flexible in the VONC and subsequent PM arrangements than anything else. They also have a bit more of a mandate/reason than Labour & Lib Dems in particular to reject a deal at this stage given their A50 actions, manifesto, desire ultimately for an independent Scotland.
Good point, the irony is all the bigging up both of tone and opposing no deal by the opposition in the last few weeks has kind of fed into helping Boris today - he can be the calm statesman seeking a deal, while any negative tone or rejecting a deal goes against what they've been saying.
True. Didnt rate Jezzas contribution today.
If EU accepts this proposal the Commons needs to pass it.
Hope Kinnock Nandy et al vote for it.
Jesters tone and style is important hope he keeps up the last 45 mins.
I disagree totally. Someone as malign and untrustworthy as Johnson must not be supported in any way by the Opposition parties that might bring him electoral advantage.
I would not prioritise political advantage over leaving with a deal rather than no deal.
No Deal probably gives Lab most political advantage if it's a disaster but you cant claim to be trying to stop no deal and at the same time force the country down that route. Jezza joined Tory Swinson in the hypocrite of the year contest running this morning.
Labour MPs who vote for his deal deserve to be deselected and to have the Whip withdrawn.
The numbers are there in Parliament to pass this so it all comes down to whether the EU back it. If the EU backs this, it gets through Parliament. So you're saying there's a 70% chance the EU rejects this.
The HoC seems fairly close so certainly not 100%, but I'd tend to agree - if the EU accepts, some waverers will come on board, especially Lab leavers.
But at the same time, the clock is ticking. There's no way this is all tied up neatly by the end of the month, when Boris is intent we will leave.
The bet would also lose with a 3mth extension, as that takes it into next year.
Actually for the latter not necessarily. If a deal is agreed in principle, leading to a small extension to get it agreed formally and through Parliament then there's no reason the MV4 can't happen before Christmas. Even if there's a 3 month extension for getting this sorted out then MV4 this year would win.
Plus once a deal is agreed it becomes much easier for Boris to agree an extension. If he comes back in two weeks saying we have a deal, we need a short technical extension in order to get this ratified then gets Brexit done with that - that is completely different from a meaningless extension with no purpose. We'd leave after a short technical election and there'd be no majority for an election before then.
Got a feeling Ireland (via the EU) will insist on a vote of the NI population be written into the deal, rather than Stormont.
Will the DUP stand for that?
If its a renewable vote by the people of NI then I think that is fair. It can't be a one-off vote.
I'd even go as far as saying that there could be one vote by the people of NI up-front then Stormont can trigger a new vote after 4 years [so if Stormont doesn't want to trigger one, none occurs]. Gives a double-lock for Ireland - both Stormont and the voters of NI.
Good point, the irony is all the bigging up both of tone and opposing no deal by the opposition in the last few weeks has kind of fed into helping Boris today - he can be the calm statesman seeking a deal, while any negative tone or rejecting a deal goes against what they've been saying.
True. Didnt rate Jezzas contribution today.
If EU accepts this proposal the Commons needs to pass it.
Hope Kinnock Nandy et al vote for it.
Jesters tone and style is important hope he keeps up the last 45 mins.
I disagree totally. Someone as malign and untrustworthy as Johnson must not be supported in any way by the Opposition parties that might bring him electoral advantage.
I would not prioritise political advantage over leaving with a deal rather than no deal.
No Deal probably gives Lab most political advantage if it's a disaster but you cant claim to be trying to stop no deal and at the same time force the country down that route. Jezza joined Tory Swinson in the hypocrite of the year contest running this morning.
Labour MPs who vote for his deal deserve to be deselected and to have the Whip withdrawn.
There could be as many as 50 I support their actions if it stops no deal
Barnier has been put in his box by Juncker/Macron/Merkel.
They want this sorted.
Interesting how the first thing Boris did to make progress going back a month ago was fly to Berlin. Exactly what sensible Brexiteers said should be the first thing the PM should have done at the start of negotiations
There was little reason to compromise when no deal would get through Parliament anyway. Now a deal is within reach it comes down to dotting the i's and crossing the t's - Barnier has work to do, but I'd be very disappointed if it doesn't end up getting done, and I suspect so will Merkel and probably even Ursula.
How do you propose to negotiate with someone who you know is only transiently in the post? You must negotiate in good faith with the person in front of you which I believe the EU did. I mean that is assuming you believe the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom holds some degree of authority.
I propose you negotiate to seek a deal that can get through their Parliament and in particular I said all along the DUP as the elected representatives of the unionist community and a part of the government's majority in Parliament should have been involved with negotiating the Irish-border solution.
That runs both ways. We need to propose a deal that is acceptable to Ireland as much as they need one acceptable to our Parliament. One of the common fallacies on this board is that Juncker or Barnier or even Merkel can snap their fingers and Ireland will accept whatever our Parliament put forward. The genius of May was to make the UK, a unitary state with only 3 devolved legislatures without foreign policy competence, appear more divided than a loose confederation (or whatever) of 27 sovereign states where all have input.
So Boris gets his proposal through the Commons, which quite possible but not certain. What then? Do you really think that Merkel will snap her fingers and Ireland, who politically need to accept his idea, QMV or no QMV, will just jump into line? We tried that there for the best part of a millennium and it didn’t work. This isn’t a technical or economic issue but a deeply held emotional attachment to six counties the majority across the island feel are part of their country. The Single Market and Customs Union was imperfect cosmetic surgery which, in conjunction with the GFA, made the border tolerable. This proposal, to Ireland, makes it intolerable again.. We are talking to ourselves.
I don't propose Ireland gets this forced on them, I propose Ireland accepts this voluntarily - and possibly with a little bit of cash to help smooth any issues
For Ireland this deal is miles better than no deal at all, and the EU has 39 billion in cash coming to it that it won't without a deal, no reason a bit of that can't find its way to Dublin.
If the choice is no deal or this deal Ireland should definitely accept this deal.
Barnier has been put in his box by Juncker/Macron/Merkel.
They want this sorted.
Interesting how the first thing Boris did to make progress going back a month ago was fly to Berlin. Exactly what sensible Brexiteers said should be the first thing the PM should have done at the start of negotiations
There was little reason to compromise when no deal would get through Parliament anyway. Now a deal is within reach it comes down to dotting the i's and crossing the t's - Barnier has work to do, but I'd be very disappointed if it doesn't end up getting done, and I suspect so will Merkel and probably even Ursula.
What about Leo?
This is a miles better deal for Leo than no deal. There's elements of compromise but nothing like there would be in a no deal scenario and he can lock down a regulatory Irish Sea border now if he goes for this.
How do you propose to negotiate with someone who you know is only transiently in the post? You must negotiate in good faith with the person in front of you which I believe the EU did. I mean that is assuming you believe the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom holds some degree of authority.
I propose you negotiate to seek a deal that can get through their Parliament and in particular I said all along the DUP as the elected representatives of the unionist community and a part of the government's majority in Parliament should have been involved with negotiating the Irish-border solution.
That runs both ways. We need to propose a deal that is acceptable to Ireland as much as they need one acceptable to our Parliament. One of the common fallacies on this board is that Juncker or Barnier or even Merkel can snap their fingers and Ireland will accept whatever our Parliament put forward. The genius of May was to make the UK, a unitary state with only 3 devolved legislatures without foreign policy competence, appear more divided than a loose confederation (or whatever) of 27 sovereign states where all have input.
So Boris gets his proposal through the Commons, which quite possible but not certain. What then? Do you really think that Merkel will snap her fingers and Ireland, who politically need to accept his idea, QMV or no QMV, will just jump into line? We tried that there for the best part of a millennium and it didn’t work. This isn’t a technical or economic issue but a deeply held emotional attachment to six counties the majority across the island feel are part of their country. The Single Market and Customs Union was imperfect cosmetic surgery which, in conjunction with the GFA, made the border tolerable. This proposal, to Ireland, makes it intolerable again.. We are talking to ourselves.
I don't propose Ireland gets this forced on them, I propose Ireland accepts this voluntarily - and possibly with a little bit of cash to help smooth any issues
For Ireland this deal is miles better than no deal at all, and the EU has 39 billion in cash coming to it that it won't without a deal, no reason a bit of that can't find its way to Dublin.
If the choice is no deal or this deal Ireland should definitely accept this deal.
I’m just explaining why I don’t think they will take this voluntarily. It’s an emotional issue, not an economic one. Would you become a Remainer if the EU paid us to stay? I doubt it but am prepared to stand corrected.
Good point, the irony is all the bigging up both of tone and opposing no deal by the opposition in the last few weeks has kind of fed into helping Boris today - he can be the calm statesman seeking a deal, while any negative tone or rejecting a deal goes against what they've been saying.
True. Didnt rate Jezzas contribution today.
If EU accepts this proposal the Commons needs to pass it.
Hope Kinnock Nandy et al vote for it.
Jesters tone and style is important hope he keeps up the last 45 mins.
I disagree totally. Someone as malign and untrustworthy as Johnson must not be supported in any way by the Opposition parties that might bring him electoral advantage.
I would not prioritise political advantage over leaving with a deal rather than no deal.
No Deal probably gives Lab most political advantage if it's a disaster but you cant claim to be trying to stop no deal and at the same time force the country down that route. Jezza joined Tory Swinson in the hypocrite of the year contest running this morning.
Barnier has been put in his box by Juncker/Macron/Merkel.
They want this sorted.
Interesting how the first thing Boris did to make progress going back a month ago was fly to Berlin. Exactly what sensible Brexiteers said should be the first thing the PM should have done at the start of negotiations
There was little reason to compromise when no deal would get through Parliament anyway. Now a deal is within reach it comes down to dotting the i's and crossing the t's - Barnier has work to do, but I'd be very disappointed if it doesn't end up getting done, and I suspect so will Merkel and probably even Ursula.
What about Leo?
This is a miles better deal for Leo than no deal. There's elements of compromise but nothing like there would be in a no deal scenario and he can lock down a regulatory Irish Sea border now if he goes for this.
Considering no deal leads to a united Ireland I would disagree.
Mr. That, if they're taking the same approach as they did when the obnoxious oafs blocked routes into hospitals then the police just won't be bothering enforcing that pesky law.
Yes indeed. It seems that the law is not the law for everyone
Coveney says the problems are customs and Stormont consent/veto. I think they can do this if they soften the DUP veto
The outlines for a deal are there.
Stormont consent is an important democratic principle. If NI voters are going to be subject to EU regulations then they should consent to it. There's no democratic argument against that.
Also where are the police and security services? That could be anyone/anything.
So could anything. During the Diana years, the tabloids would print paparazzi photos of blurry figures in the middle distance, screaming that the camera could have been a rifle. Sure, the protesters could have been terrorists but equally the people taking the pictures might have been wielding kitchen knives.
This was a very big vehicle parked directly outside the treasury with people swarming all over it and not looking like innocent passers by. I think there is a difference
Coveney says the problems are customs and Stormont consent/veto. I think they can do this if they soften the DUP veto
The outlines for a deal are there.
Stormont consent is an important democratic principle. If NI voters are going to be subject to EU regulations then they should consent to it. There's no democratic argument against that.
Unless you believe that the Six Counties are an illegally gerrymandered statelet occupied b British Crown forces of course. Which issue lay at the root of the foundation of Ireland’s major political parties.
My business just hit one of the missed consequences of Brexit. We need to import gas from Europe as no UK supplier. The number of ship crossings are being cut as logistic companies figure brexit will mean less trade between Europe and UK. As a result my gas prices have now risen 25% so far this year due mostly to logistics. They previously rose 25% in the last decade.
That's bad news by any standard. But it is worth remembering just how easy it is to source overseas nowadays if the UK suppliers aren't competitive. So your cost increase could easily translate to your customers switching to foreign competitors.
The argument is pretty simple; whilst Tories may get more of the vote at a GE it has the potential to be spread somewhat more equally across the country, whereas the Lab / LD votes are individually localised. So if Tories do well, it is quite well everywhere. Where LDs and Lab do well they are doing very well, and where they're doing badly they're doing very badly AND these map in such a way that where Lab do very badly LDs are doing very well and visa versa.
This means, under FPTP, Lab and LD will get more bang for their buck. He uses EU and other elections to suggest the localisation effect is real (which is debatable), and the maths is difficult to run through a decent model, but the theory behind it I think holds water.
This is a point I have made several times here before, but it should be presaged with an IF. It does rely upon the LibDem upsurge being focused in the southern Home Counties and the south west, where it would be more effective, and Labour’s vote remaining resilient (and we’re talking more remainers than leavers here) in its held seats further north. My feeling is that the former is more likely than the latter right now.
The former is also a big if. The scale of the increase in the Lib vote suggests that it is quite widespread rather than being focused only in one part of the country or in particular seats. There is something in the argument but it can be overstated. They will waste a lot of votes coming second in seats across the South even though they poll higher there than in the Midlands and North.
Since the Lib surge began, in the target seat of Brecon at the by-election the Lib vote went up 14% no more than suggested by UNS in polls at the time, while the Con vote held up surprisingly at the point of Theresa May's polling nadir. By-elections typically see much larger swings than GEs and the Tory MP was disgraced, yet the Libs just scraped home. They got a 9% increase in Peterborough and came 4th, wasting quite a lot of votes there.
For balance, 27% is correct, but it doesnt pay for the NHS. And tax system is progressive, if not progressive enough.
My Laffer curve (laminated) says the goldilocks is 63% top rate income tax on earnings over £150k. This maximizes the take and at the same time reduces the gini. But in order to optimize, I think we need to take a good hard look at the taxation of WEALTH.
A 63% top income tax rate would be the highest in the world, would lead to a mass exodus of high earners and talent abroad and thus destroy the economy and lead to an even lower tax take, see the brain drain of the late 1970s pre Thatcher
We'll chalk you down as a Laffer-curve denier then
The Latter curve shows quite clearly the higher you raise tax the lower the revenues you get past a certain point and a 63% top rate is well past that point
Ah great... I take it you have the official proven coordinates for the Laffer curve then. I've been looking for that for some time.
What I haven't seen mentioned in this tax rate discussion is imo the worst part of our tax system; employers' NI.
In order to "pay" someone £50,000pa, an employer actually has to pay (if my calcs are correct .. imcac?) £56,623
On that £50,000 the employee has to pay £4,964 in NI (12% on the £41,368 over £8,632), and £10,000 income tax (£0 on the first £12,500, 20% on the middle £25,000, and 40% on the top £12,500, so 20% overall).
This leaves the employee with £35,036, at a cost to their employer of £56,623.
£21,587 tax is paid on the £56,623, so a real rate of 38%.
I always thought employers NI was a poor tax raising method
They are not interested in compromise. Just blaming the other side.
Are you talking about Corbyn, Johnson, Swinson or the EU here ?
The EU I think has played a straight bat. They spent some time negotiating with the UK and reached an agreement which both sides were happy with.
Now we don't seem to be happy with it and I can see why they might say "nothing to do with us, guv". How are they supposed to negotiate with anyone on the understanding that the next internal political wiggle in the UK will render any agreement reached moot? They have to draw the line somewhere.
They reached an agreement that the *negotiators* were happy with.
Johnson winning the arguement this morning imo. I want to see us leave with a Deal.
Absolutely, this is a chance to put all this Parliamentary mess behind us.
Prior to this being published there was a lot of talk in the media that the EU had no incentive to compromise as they had no reason to believe any compromise would get through Parliament. There are enough declared MPs now to get this through Parliament if the EU agrees so the ball really is in their court. Accept this and we are done, they can move on without us but with our 39 billion.
I would think the lines between London and Brussels would have been busy between those who are now saying yes from Labour and the Tory exiles and their contacts over there. Would be surprised if they would come out positively without encouragement. The only real opposition might be from Dublin but the EU would be willing to help them out with any additional costs and push the UK into contributing. The people who really lose out in this scenario would be the BXP and the LDs
Has anyone on this site said they oppose this deal? Especially anyone OK with leaving, whether a leaver or remainer who respects democracy [not someone who thinks we must remain at all costs]
Not that they think the EU won't agree to it, but that they oppose it. We have a selection of views on here and I've not noticed anyone rejecting it yet.
I think it is a bad deal for both sides but it is better for the UK (marginally) than the previous load of codswallop. It will clear the air in the short term but lead to more issues and grief for all sides long term.It could also give the terrorists on both sides in NI a leg up.
The argument is pretty simple; whilst Tories may get more of the vote at a GE it has the potential to be spread somewhat more equally across the country, whereas the Lab / LD votes are individually localised. So if Tories do well, it is quite well everywhere. Where LDs and Lab do well they are doing very well, and where they're doing badly they're doing very badly AND these map in such a way that where Lab do very badly LDs are doing very well and visa versa.
This means, under FPTP, Lab and LD will get more bang for their buck. He uses EU and other elections to suggest the localisation effect is real (which is debatable), and the maths is difficult to run through a decent model, but the theory behind it I think holds water.
This is a point I have made several times here before, but it should be presaged with an IF. It does rely upon the LibDem upsurge being focused in the southern Home Counties and the south west, where it would be more effective, and Labour’s vote remaining resilient (and we’re talking more remainers than leavers here) in its held seats further north. My feeling is that the former is more likely than the latter right now.
I suspect the LDs vote would be more focused in urban areas and fall somewhat in the SW.
Mr Verhofstadt is not the voice of the MEPs. They mostly think he is a bit too strident and takes it all as a mission from god. He was put there as the anti-Farage
Mr Verhofstadt is not the voice of the MEPs. They mostly think he is a bit too strident and takes it all as a mission from god. He was put there as the anti-Farage
Verhofstadt might do a decent impression of Mr Harvey from the lovely bones but he is not, as you rightly point out, the voice of MEPs. I would think he'd do well to keep the tone cordial given that Brexit day is supposedly only 28 days away...
Comments
That's not the case for the others right now.
I'm guessing he used his time to lay into Johnson though (Which is just politics), but I'd exclude him from that list now.
The numbers are there in Parliament to pass this so it all comes down to whether the EU back it. If the EU backs this, it gets through Parliament. So you're saying there's a 70% chance the EU rejects this.
Good idea of his (or his advisers?) to switch to a conciliatory tone.
Edit: He might have just slipped up there though... hints that it could be a referendum rather than a Stormont vote that decides NI position after 4 years.
I am also pretty sure that the EU will NOT accept it.
https://news.cityoflondon.gov.uk/uk-financial-services-sector-makes-record-tax-contribution/
And no further extensions beyond 31st October, to ensure our MPs must choose Boris's Deal or No Deal - and ending this dreadful period of Westminster's history.
The deal is the best way of avoiding no deal right now.
I would prefer this deal if EU agree it to Jezza walking into no 10 as leader of GONU
The PMs tone although almost certainly manufactured was persuasive.
Right now, I'd guess closer to the HYUFD model than the CR model.
Voters in general are more stubborn than assumed by models in which the opposition piles up behind the strongest candidate.
Shameful.
But at the same time, the clock is ticking. There's no way this is all tied up neatly by the end of the month, when Boris is intent we will leave.
The bet would also lose with a 3mth extension, as that takes it into next year.
They also have a bit more of a mandate/reason than Labour & Lib Dems in particular to reject a deal at this stage given their A50 actions, manifesto, desire ultimately for an independent Scotland.
Will the DUP stand for that?
Interesting how the first thing Boris did to make progress going back a month ago was fly to Berlin. Exactly what sensible Brexiteers said should be the first thing the PM should have done at the start of negotiations
There was little reason to compromise when no deal would get through Parliament anyway. Now a deal is within reach it comes down to dotting the i's and crossing the t's - Barnier has work to do, but I'd be very disappointed if it doesn't end up getting done, and I suspect so will Merkel and probably even Ursula.
So Boris gets his proposal through the Commons, which quite possible but not certain. What then? Do you really think that Merkel will snap her fingers and Ireland, who politically need to accept his idea, QMV or no QMV, will just jump into line? We tried that there for the best part of a millennium and it didn’t work. This isn’t a technical or economic issue but a deeply held emotional attachment to six counties the majority across the island feel are part of their country. The Single Market and Customs Union was imperfect cosmetic surgery which, in conjunction with the GFA, made the border tolerable. This proposal, to Ireland, makes it intolerable again.. We are talking to ourselves.
No Deal probably gives Lab most political advantage if it's a disaster but you cant claim to be trying to stop no deal and at the same time force the country down that route. Jezza joined Tory Swinson in the hypocrite of the year contest running this morning.
Example -
Benedict buys and sells properties for a living. Just that, no building or renovation. Has a great year, makes £10m profit. Pays £3m tax.
Bruce manages a factory making precision tools. Paid £100k gross. Tax £30k.
Benedict is paying 100 times more tax than Bruce.
But which one is more valuable to the nation?
Who do we want more of?
Plus once a deal is agreed it becomes much easier for Boris to agree an extension. If he comes back in two weeks saying we have a deal, we need a short technical extension in order to get this ratified then gets Brexit done with that - that is completely different from a meaningless extension with no purpose. We'd leave after a short technical election and there'd be no majority for an election before then.
I'd even go as far as saying that there could be one vote by the people of NI up-front then Stormont can trigger a new vote after 4 years [so if Stormont doesn't want to trigger one, none occurs]. Gives a double-lock for Ireland - both Stormont and the voters of NI.
Only one has come out on top this morning.
Johnson
For Ireland this deal is miles better than no deal at all, and the EU has 39 billion in cash coming to it that it won't without a deal, no reason a bit of that can't find its way to Dublin.
If the choice is no deal or this deal Ireland should definitely accept this deal.
Or are you as rattled as you are obsessed?
Stormont consent is an important democratic principle. If NI voters are going to be subject to EU regulations then they should consent to it. There's no democratic argument against that.
Since the Lib surge began, in the target seat of Brecon at the by-election the Lib vote went up 14% no more than suggested by UNS in polls at the time, while the Con vote held up surprisingly at the point of Theresa May's polling nadir. By-elections typically see much larger swings than GEs and the Tory MP was disgraced, yet the Libs just scraped home. They got a 9% increase in Peterborough and came 4th, wasting quite a lot of votes there.
Clearly subject to GIGO
However consistent with the anecdotal response from people that I know who feel that the state taking “more than 50%” of income is unfair
It was rejected by Parliament
Or did you not notice?
The people who really lose out in this scenario would be the BXP and the LDs
I think it is a bad deal for both sides but it is better for the UK (marginally) than the previous load of codswallop. It will clear the air in the short term but lead to more issues and grief for all sides long term.It could also give the terrorists on both sides in NI a leg up.