Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
The deal is not irrelevant. Boris's deal is far superior to May's deal and dealt with the dreaded backstop.
It really isn't. Ask the DUP...
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I still think the PM will be quite happy to see a week of headlines about court cases - especially Scottish court cases - and that he’ll hope to get the Brexit Bill passed without sending the letter.
He’s obviously spoken to EU leaders about this scenario, and co-ordinated replies will be forthcoming over the next hours.
I think he'll send the letter, but won't expect a speedy reply.
And if it is a speedy reply it won't be an extension.
A response of "we can't consider this request until there's been a Meaningful Vote in Parliament" would be enough to concentrate minds.
There probably can't be a speedy reply as the European Council needs to meet in order to give one and I doubt that could be done until well into next week Heads of government are busy people
Does the European Council need to meet in person? Can they not have a teleconference?
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block a deal they may well have blown themselves up.
Grieve clearly rattled by it all on Sky. His plans are in ruins and he knows it, and hes ended his parliamentary career for nothing.
Listening to Gauke you get a feeling today just delayed the inevitable. Even without the DUP the deal looks like it has the numbers to pass. Certainly the remained protesters interviewed on the BBC calling the government fascist are doing their cause no favours. These people will be in for a huge shock when yet again they will see there is nowhere near a parliamentary majority for another referendum.
It clearly has the numbers to pass. But not without proper scrutiny. The only reason any of this is a problem is because Johnson has made leaving on 31st October so totemic.
I genuinely wonder what scrutiny is actually going to take place. There is going to be no way to change the text of the agreement. It is a simple yes/no decision, and 99% of MPs have their minds made up (or their minds made up for them).
The whole point is that we can’t know! But there is now the opportunity, for example, for Johnson to make good on the commitments he made in the House today about workers’ rights, consumer protections and environmental standards staying in line with EU ones.
How can he make good on them if the wording of the text can't change?
A government amendment to the withdrawal act would do the trick, wouldn’t it?
Listening to Gauke you get a feeling today just delayed the inevitable. Even without the DUP the deal looks like it has the numbers to pass. Certainly the remained protesters interviewed on the BBC calling the government fascist are doing their cause no favours. These people will be in for a huge shock when yet again they will see there is nowhere near a parliamentary majority for another referendum.
It clearly has the numbers to pass. But not without proper scrutiny. The only reason any of this is a problem is because Johnson has made leaving on 31st October so totemic.
I genuinely wonder what scrutiny is actually going to take place. There is going to be no way to change the text of the agreement. It is a simple yes/no decision, and 99% of MPs have their minds made up (or their minds made up for them).
The whole point is that we can’t know! But there is now the opportunity, for example, for Johnson to make good on the commitments he made in the House today about workers’ rights, consumer protections and environmental standards staying in line with EU ones.
What do these things mean in practice, would it for example oblige us to follow suit if the EU decided to mandate a four-day working week?
Hardly compatible with parliament being sovereign, is it?
Indeed. I’d understand a free trade agreement containing rules around certain areas of legislation to avoid undercutting, but people speaking this week about this subject sound like they’re talking in code. I’m trying to understand what it means in practice.
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
Remainers all thought Boris could get another deal - just not one superior to Theresa's. And they've been proved right.
Listening to Gauke you get a feeling today just delayed the inevitable. Even without the DUP the deal looks like it has the numbers to pass. Certainly the remained protesters interviewed on the BBC calling the government fascist are doing their cause no favours. These people will be in for a huge shock when yet again they will see there is nowhere near a parliamentary majority for another referendum.
It clearly has the numbers to pass. But not without proper scrutiny. The only reason any of this is a problem is because Johnson has made leaving on 31st October so totemic.
I genuinely wonder what scrutiny is actually going to take place. There is going to be no way to change the text of the agreement. It is a simple yes/no decision, and 99% of MPs have their minds made up (or their minds made up for them).
The whole point is that we can’t know! But there is now the opportunity, for example, for Johnson to make good on the commitments he made in the House today about workers’ rights, consumer protections and environmental standards staying in line with EU ones.
How can he make good on them if the wording of the text can't change?
A government amendment to the withdrawal act would do the trick, wouldn’t it?
The withdrawal act already enshrines all EU laws as UK laws.
In the future a government might change the law, but that's always the case, no Parliament can bind its successor.
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
Remainers all thought Boris could get another deal - just not one superior to Theresa's. And they've been proved right.
That's not true, plenty, myself included, did not think he would get another deal at all.
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
lol - I think people on both sides read too much into these things. Not much has really changed and it is the level of suspicion BJ generates due to his nefarious behaviour that has got us to where we our today...
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
Remainers all thought Boris could get another deal - just not one superior to Theresa's. And they've been proved right.
The deal is vastly superior if you're a leaver, which is why leavers have united behind it.
For those who wanted BINO they should just campaign to revoke Article 50 rather than pretend they want a Brexit.
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block a deal they may well have blown themselves up.
Grieve clearly rattled by it all on Sky. His plans are in ruins and he knows it, and hes ended his parliamentary career for nothing.
Grieve is a strange fellow. He has tied himself in knots trying to come up with some weird justification for the actions he takes. Yet he does not appear to be able to come out and say “yes I think the decision the people took was wrong and I want to do everything in the rule book to stop us leaving the EU” which surely must be his main motivation.
I would have much more respect for him if he’d just be frank and honest.
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
I think the EU will delay the decision on an extension but some of the media speculating that they might wait till 31 st October are talking nonsense .
The EU won’t risk that knowing that it could end up with no deal .
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
Remainers all thought Boris could get another deal
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block a deal they may well have blown themselves up.
Grieve clearly rattled by it all on Sky. His plans are in ruins and he knows it, and hes ended his parliamentary career for nothing.
Grieve is a strange fellow. He has tied himself in knots trying to come up with some weird justification for the actions he takes. Yet he does not appear to be able to come out and say “yes I think the decision the people took was wrong and I want to do everything in the rule book to stop us leaving the EU” which surely must be his main motivation.
I would have much more respect for him if he’d just be frank and honest.
At least the Lib Dems are honest. Grieve is a shyster.
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
The UK deserves to be punished for voting the wrong way meme is alive & well I see.....
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
That's fine, as your opinion, but your initial suggestion was to subcontract the view of whether it was better or not to the DUP, and being frank I hardly trust their judgement.
I shall get around to reading it eventually, but I doubt I will be enlightened much by doing so.
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
Remainers all thought Boris could get another deal - just not one superior to Theresa's. And they've been proved right.
That's not true, plenty, myself included, did not think he would get another deal at all.
Some were convinced he wanted No Deal.
At least there can be no doubt about it anymore. All the nonsense about Remain MPs not passing deals because they didn't think the ERG would is now proven nonsense. The Lib Dems elected as Labour and Tory MPs on a pledge to implement the result of the referendum are shown up as the liars they are.
First they demand a vote on a deal, then they wont vote for a deal, now they wont allow a vote on a deal.
Pulpstar said: "One of the valid objections raised here to May's deal - that it wasn't accepted by leavers has been satisfied by this deal, it clearly IS acceptable to leavers."
Yep. That`s why even though I didn`t vote to leave I prefer this deal to May`s. You can`t have a binary referendum and then deny the victors the spoils.
Why not? Wouldn't it be better for the government, in this case a Leaver led one but it's irrelevant, to come up with a deal with majority support? Which this deal appears not to have, either in parliament or in the country at large? Or at least for the government to try to do so?
Listening to Gauke you get a feeling today just delayed the inevitable. Even without the DUP the deal looks like it has the numbers to pass. Certainly the remained protesters interviewed on the BBC calling the government fascist are doing their cause no favours. These people will be in for a huge shock when yet again they will see there is nowhere near a parliamentary majority for another referendum.
It clearly has the numbers to pass. But not without proper scrutiny. The only reason any of this is a problem is because Johnson has made leaving on 31st October so totemic.
I genuinely wonder what scrutiny is actually going to take place. There is going to be no way to change the text of the agreement. It is a simple yes/no decision, and 99% of MPs have their minds made up (or their minds made up for them).
The whole point is that we can’t know! But there is now the opportunity, for example, for Johnson to make good on the commitments he made in the House today about workers’ rights, consumer protections and environmental standards staying in line with EU ones.
How can he make good on them if the wording of the text can't change?
A government amendment to the withdrawal act would do the trick, wouldn’t it?
The withdrawal act already enshrines all EU laws as UK laws.
In the future a government might change the law, but that's always the case, no Parliament can bind its successor.
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
Remainers all thought Boris could get another deal
Citation required.
If he offered the EU something that was far preferable to them than Theresa's - as this patently is - then it's obvious the EU would snap his hand off.
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
The only thing that motivates Flint is job preservation: Her job! She will look well if she votes (against what she really thinks)for the BJ deal and he then gets the election and she consequently loses...
There genuinely is a need for legislation to be properly looked at. If they extended until then, we could have a MV and take the time. Dare they come back and ask for that date rather than January? It was smart of the Benn Act to specify a date like that.
One of the valid objections raised here to May's deal - that it wasn't accepted by leavers has been satisfied by this deal, it clearly IS acceptable to leavers.
That's not obviously true either.
May was not acceptable to Leavers. BoZo is. The deal is irrelevant.
Which says much about Leavers in general...
I preferred May's deal but then again I voted to remain - leaver's consent as Meeks and others have put it a few times on here is very important.
Funnily enough, now the EU have agreed to this deal, I’m actually more comfortable with May’s deal.
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.</blockquote
Ireland cannot afford to take on the north. The EU cannot afford to subsidise Scotland.
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
Remainers all thought Boris could get another deal
Citation required.
If he offered the EU something that was far preferable to them than Theresa's - as this patently is - then it's obvious the EU would snap his hand off.
That "Remainers all thought Boris could get another deal"
Got some quotes to back up that, shall we say, slightly extravagant assertion?
Pulpstar said: "One of the valid objections raised here to May's deal - that it wasn't accepted by leavers has been satisfied by this deal, it clearly IS acceptable to leavers."
Yep. That`s why even though I didn`t vote to leave I prefer this deal to May`s. You can`t have a binary referendum and then deny the victors the spoils.
Why not? Wouldn't it be better for the government, in this case a Leaver led one but it's irrelevant, to come up with a deal with majority support? Which this deal appears not to have, either in parliament or in the country at large? Or at least for the government to try to do so?
This deal might well have majority support in parliament. It is tight, but if it is not a majority it is not far from one.
The country at large is a different matter of course, but majority support among our rules is almost there.
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
Not only that but we'll be allowing a foreign entity, over which have zero influence, to exercise political and economic power over a sizeable chunk of our country. Surely that's the very definition of treachery.
None of these battles would be happening had the British voters elected a majority government with a mandate for a Brexit deal, a year after the sainted referendum. But they did not. If they do so next time, then it will be easy. If not again, then it will be hard.
Darn those voters for caring about all the other things in the manifestos and that Governments can do.
One of the valid objections raised here to May's deal - that it wasn't accepted by leavers has been satisfied by this deal, it clearly IS acceptable to leavers.
That's not obviously true either.
May was not acceptable to Leavers. BoZo is. The deal is irrelevant.
Which says much about Leavers in general...
I preferred May's deal but then again I voted to remain - leaver's consent as Meeks and others have put it a few times on here is very important.
Funnily enough, now the EU have agreed to this deal, I’m actually more comfortable with May’s deal.
This is May's deal with the transition into alternative arrangements from the backstop frontloaded.
Even a delay of 48 hours changes the dynamic and brings the concessions made by Johnson in order to be able to claim victory under greater scrutiny. The theoretical majority for the deal could evaporate quickly.
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
Not only that but we'll be allowing a foreign entity, over which have zero influence, to exercise political and economic power over a sizeable chunk of our country. Surely that's the very definition of treachery.
Sizeable chunk? By what measurement do you make that assertion? Economic? Population? Natural resources?
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
Not only that but we'll be allowing a foreign entity, over which have zero influence, to exercise political and economic power over a sizeable chunk of our country. Surely that's the very definition of treachery.
Those who are still leavers, or respect the referendum-ers, are already behind this deal, I think Remainers performing a 180 and trying to persuade leavers the deal is not leavey enough for them is not a winning move.
Baker and Grieve on Sky atm with Baker sounding reasonable and statesmanlike of the two of them talking about compromise . . . what is happening? Have we slipped into a parallel universe?
Remainers completely lost the plot today.
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
The only thing that motivates Flint is job preservation: Her job! She will look well if she votes (against what she really thinks)for the BJ deal and he then gets the election and she consequently loses...
She, in comparison with far too many MPs elected on both sides of the house, has been honest and consistent.
Later in that thread he says "The only way Brexit can happen on 31 October is disorderly under the terms of Article 50.... in other words, if @BorisJohnson does absolutely nothing, the EU withdraws from the UK on 31 October."
What powers does the EU have to convene an earlier session? I can’t believe that if legislation was passed next week they wouldn’t be able to get an approval vote earlier.
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
Not only that but we'll be allowing a foreign entity, over which have zero influence, to exercise political and economic power over a sizeable chunk of our country. Surely that's the very definition of treachery.
Sizeable chunk? By what measurement do you make that assertion? Economic? Population? Natural resources?
It's certainly bigger than the Isle of Wight, or Gibraltar, and look how the Spanish go on about that.
The counter question to Stark Dawning is, does Mr Johnson and his allies think NI is *really* part of 'the country'?
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
Not only that but we'll be allowing a foreign entity, over which have zero influence, to exercise political and economic power over a sizeable chunk of our country. Surely that's the very definition of treachery.
And that "sizeable chunk of our country" can withdraw from that arrangement should they so wish. Surely thats the very definition of democracy?
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
Not only that but we'll be allowing a foreign entity, over which have zero influence, to exercise political and economic power over a sizeable chunk of our country. Surely that's the very definition of treachery.
Sizeable chunk? By what measurement do you make that assertion? Economic? Population? Natural resources?
It's certainly bigger than the Isle of Wight, or Gibraltar, and look how the Spanish go on about that.
The counter question to Stark Dawning is, does Mr Johnson and his allies think NI is *really* part of 'the country'?
Wasting money again - the cloud source must be busy
Also they do seem to think Boris or more likely our EU Ambasador serving the letter is a big humilation for Boris
After today the narrative has moved on
Personally, I will be relieved if he sends the letter. My opinion does not change about him: Not up to the job, BJ has terrible judgement and the author of his own political misfortune. His language and poor strategic interjections have instigated this mess...
My guess is that the EU will grant an extension and make clear it is the last one. That should get the job done. A delay is not going to hurt Johnson now. From here the only thing that could is No Deal.
As long-standing PBers know, I was a fan of Letwin even when he was a mainstream Thatcherite Eurosceptic - intelligent, nice and willing to accept argument showing he was mistaken (a very rare characteristic in the Commons).
Even a delay of 48 hours changes the dynamic and brings the concessions made by Johnson in order to be able to claim victory under greater scrutiny. The theoretical majority for the deal could evaporate quickly.
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
Not only that but we'll be allowing a foreign entity, over which have zero influence, to exercise political and economic power over a sizeable chunk of our country. Surely that's the very definition of treachery.
You mean just like they have for the last many years.
Even a delay of 48 hours changes the dynamic and brings the concessions made by Johnson in order to be able to claim victory under greater scrutiny. The theoretical majority for the deal could evaporate quickly.
Ever hopeful but with the 10 conservatives voting with Letwin, including Letwin himself, saying they will vote for the deal and another 10-15 labour and independent mps in favour the deal for based on todays votes would be 326 - 331 v 302 - 297
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
Not only that but we'll be allowing a foreign entity, over which have zero influence, to exercise political and economic power over a sizeable chunk of our country. Surely that's the very definition of treachery.
Those who are still leavers, or respect the referendum-ers, are already behind this deal, I think Remainers performing a 180 and trying to persuade leavers the deal is not leavey enough for them is not a winning move.
The Leavers sold out ages ago. They're now essentially a Boris cult - their aims and preferences are unrecognisable from those of the old euro-sceptic movement of yesteryear.
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
What rot the 2nd point is. If the EU can afford to subsidise: Bulgaria, Romania, Poland, Croatia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovak Republic, Greece, Estonia, the Czech Republic, Portugal, Slovenia, Cyprus and Malta - all of whom have a significantly lower GDP per capita than Scotland - then it can affor to 'subsidise' Scotland.
Even a delay of 48 hours changes the dynamic and brings the concessions made by Johnson in order to be able to claim victory under greater scrutiny. The theoretical majority for the deal could evaporate quickly.
That is certainly the plan. It will come down to how many of the Labour deal supporters find the things they said won them over are not as firm as they thought? How committed are they to that path now?
Having declared a position it can become a lot harder to change it, which was another reason for no MV of course - the psycological effect of not approving.
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
Not only that but we'll be allowing a foreign entity, over which have zero influence, to exercise political and economic power over a sizeable chunk of our country. Surely that's the very definition of treachery.
Sizeable chunk? By what measurement do you make that assertion? Economic? Population? Natural resources?
It's certainly bigger than the Isle of Wight, or Gibraltar, and look how the Spanish go on about that.
The counter question to Stark Dawning is, does Mr Johnson and his allies think NI is *really* part of 'the country'?
What powers does the EU have to convene an earlier session? I can’t believe that if legislation was passed next week they wouldn’t be able to get an approval vote earlier.
They talked about special sessions the last time. Hard to think they'd sit around doing nothing for weeks on end... who am I kidding, this is the EU parliament we are talking about.
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
Not only that but we'll be allowing a foreign entity, over which have zero influence, to exercise political and economic power over a sizeable chunk of our country. Surely that's the very definition of treachery.
And that "sizeable chunk of our country" can withdraw from that arrangement should they so wish. Surely thats the very definition of democracy?
Even a delay of 48 hours changes the dynamic and brings the concessions made by Johnson in order to be able to claim victory under greater scrutiny. The theoretical majority for the deal could evaporate quickly.
Ever hopeful but with the 10 conservatives voting with Letwin, including Letwin himself, saying they will vote for the deal and another 10-15 labour and independent mps in favour the deal for based on todays votes would be 326 - 331 v 302 - 297
And the media are saying much the same
It's a disgrace that Labour MP's are voting with Boris..
Who were the Labour MPs who voted against the Letwin amendment?
One was Caroline Flint....
I don't understand what these people are doing in the Labour Party? Hopefully not for much longer
Barron, Campbell, Fitzpatrick, Mann and Hoey are all standing down at the next election/about to enter the Lords as an independent.
So they won't be Labour MPs for much longer.
That Flint is standing again demonstrates that her stance, even if she thinks it is to help her reelection, and even if you think it a terrible stance, is principled.
What powers does the EU have to convene an earlier session? I can’t believe that if legislation was passed next week they wouldn’t be able to get an approval vote earlier.
They talked about special sessions the last time. Hard to think they'd sit around doing nothing for weeks on end... who am I kidding, this is the EU parliament we are talking about.
That honeymoon with Jean-Claude and the 'helpful' EU was so ephemeral.
Even a delay of 48 hours changes the dynamic and brings the concessions made by Johnson in order to be able to claim victory under greater scrutiny. The theoretical majority for the deal could evaporate quickly.
That is certainly the plan. It will come down to how many of the Labour deal supporters find the things they said won them over are not as firm as they thought? How committed are they to that path now?
Having declared a position it can become a lot harder to change it, which was another reason for no MV of course - the psycological effect of not approving.
The labour deal supporters are, by and large, a group that want to vote for a deal purely because they fear the backlash from their constituents if they don’t. I’m not sure a couple of days extra to think about the actual terms of the deal on offer will do much to shift their minds on the issue.
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
Not only that but we'll be allowing a foreign entity, over which have zero influence, to exercise political and economic power over a sizeable chunk of our country. Surely that's the very definition of treachery.
And that "sizeable chunk of our country" can withdraw from that arrangement should they so wish. Surely thats the very definition of democracy?
An observation to treasure.
Never refuted Scotland's right to leave the Union - the objection was and is to the SNP's fatuous and fraudulent prospectus.
The deal is not irrelevant. Boris's deal is far superior to May's deal and dealt with the dreaded backstop.
It really isn't. Ask the DUP...
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
It trades off a common UK approach for the ability of part of the UK (England really) to diverge from the EU. In doing so it separates Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK. Whether rUK will actually diverge from the EU is not known at this point. It could run the gamut all the way from No Deal to Full Vassal State. The softer the Brexit agreed the less divergence there will be between NI and rUK. Arguably, the Johnson Deal allows more flexibility. Against that, the May Deal locks in UK access to EU markets. The Johnson Deal weakens the UK negotiating hand for the next and more important stage. If you are fed up with Brexit "want it done", the Johnson Deal leaves it much less done than the May Deal. It sets us up for a lot more debilitating argument.
I'm clear the May Deal is better than the Johnson one because it limits the damage for the UK somewhat.
Even a delay of 48 hours changes the dynamic and brings the concessions made by Johnson in order to be able to claim victory under greater scrutiny. The theoretical majority for the deal could evaporate quickly.
Ever hopeful but with the 10 conservatives voting with Letwin, including Letwin himself, saying they will vote for the deal and another 10-15 labour and independent mps in favour the deal for based on todays votes would be 326 - 331 v 302 - 297
And the media are saying much the same
It's a disgrace that Labour MP's are voting with Boris..
Some MPs rebel, it has always been a thing. On such major votes I'm amazed its taken as long for parties to withdraw the whip, or merely consider doing so, though.
I've still not read it, so I cannot speak as to whether the deal is superior to Mays'. But I think it a mite strange that you think the DUP view on the matter is the definitive answer to that question. They regard it as inferior. That doesn't mean it is.
I think it heralds the break up of the Union.
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
Not only that but we'll be allowing a foreign entity, over which have zero influence, to exercise political and economic power over a sizeable chunk of our country. Surely that's the very definition of treachery.
And that "sizeable chunk of our country" can withdraw from that arrangement should they so wish. Surely thats the very definition of democracy?
An observation to treasure.
Never refuted Scotland's right to leave the Union - the objection was and is to the SNP's fatuous and fraudulent prospectus.
How odd. I recall Better Together assuring us that only by staying in the UK could Scotland remain in the EU. Did you not make that argument yourself? (Sorry - it was a long time ago ...)
Who were the Labour MPs who voted against the Letwin amendment?
One was Caroline Flint....
I don't understand what these people are doing in the Labour Party? Hopefully not for much longer
Barron, Campbell, Fitzpatrick, Mann and Hoey are all standing down at the next election/about to enter the Lords as an independent.
So they won't be Labour MPs for much longer.
That Flint is standing again demonstrates that her stance, even if she thinks it is to help her reelection, and even if you think it a terrible stance, is principled.
You might be right..Flint may well be principled, but those principles quite frankly do not belong in the Labour movement....
Comments
They didn't believe Boris would get a deal and so thought it would be Benn Vs No Deal.
But Boris did get a deal and by using Benn to block the deal they may well have blown themselves up.
And then asked BoZo to confirm it during the debate
In the future a government might change the law, but that's always the case, no Parliament can bind its successor.
For those who wanted BINO they should just campaign to revoke Article 50 rather than pretend they want a Brexit.
I would have much more respect for him if he’d just be frank and honest.
The EU won’t risk that knowing that it could end up with no deal .
I think it strengthens the case for a united Ireland, and for Scotland to diverge from England.
If you are a Little Englander, both of those things are a win for you.
As a Unionist, I disagree.
I shall get around to reading it eventually, but I doubt I will be enlightened much by doing so.
https://twitter.com/andrewduffeu/status/1185559254704496640?s=21
At least there can be no doubt about it anymore. All the nonsense about Remain MPs not passing deals because they didn't think the ERG would is now proven nonsense. The Lib Dems elected as Labour and Tory MPs on a pledge to implement the result of the referendum are shown up as the liars they are.
First they demand a vote on a deal, then they wont vote for a deal, now they wont allow a vote on a deal.
Incredible.
Got some quotes to back up that, shall we say, slightly extravagant assertion?
The country at large is a different matter of course, but majority support among our rules is almost there.
Also they do seem to think Boris or more likely our EU Ambasador serving the letter is a big humilation for Boris
After today the narrative has moved on
Who were the Labour MPs who voted against the Letwin amendment?
Surely they knew that last week?
If they can’t vote then the EU have no choice but to grant the extension , if that’s the case what do they do .
Offer one technical one say for a month if the deal passes , and then another longer one if it doesn’t .
The counter question to Stark Dawning is, does Mr Johnson and his allies think NI is *really* part of 'the country'?
All Deal supporters from MV3 already I think, bar Hoey who is still against.
And the media are saying much the same
A few nights in the cell may do him wonders!
Having declared a position it can become a lot harder to change it, which was another reason for no MV of course - the psycological effect of not approving.
I don't understand what these people are doing in the Labour Party? Hopefully not for much longer
Even if/when there is a GE the majority of MPs will be safely returned.
So they won't be Labour MPs for much longer.
That Flint is standing again demonstrates that her stance, even if she thinks it is to help her reelection, and even if you think it a terrible stance, is principled.
What happened to Maugham's ludicrous attempts to prevent Johnson laying the Deal before Parliament?
I'm clear the May Deal is better than the Johnson one because it limits the damage for the UK somewhat.
Edit: Sorry, it was 'very doubtful competency'.