Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Just a little bit of history repeating?

13567

Comments

  • Yes and no on this article.

    Yes, Johnson's lead is potentially fragile. It's a volatile time, he's flattered by a split opposition (absolute Tory share fairly low, with a sizeable "not Johnson" element), Corbyn enjoys a campaign, Johnson has scandal potential.

    BUT... Johnson is no May and 2019 Corbyn is no 2017 Corbyn. Johnson is unlikely to hide, and opinion has firmed against Corbyn - including a view that he's no longer the anti-politician, and indeed is soiled by Brexit errors and antisemitism handling.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,591
    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Mr. Alex, I disagree. A second referendum is eminently possible.

    Mr. NorthWales, that elbow, as well as being idiotic thuggery, may well have cost France the win.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    Trying to stay a step ahead of this, the general rule of brexit is that any apparent success has hilarious adverse consequences. A good hilarious adverse consequence of Boris's deal is the DUP voting through a referendum out of spite. But this will produce a success for parliamentary remainiacs, which then invites some other hilarious adverse consequence. One might be just losing the referendum, but somehow that doesn't feel spicy enough.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Oh it's going to court. Aiden won't miss a chance like that. I think your assessment is right but there is the counter story of "humiliation". Neither are correct of course. Parliament passed a ridiculous law so that it had yet more opportunities not to make an actual decision. The PM has complied with it but it far from clear what, if anything, it will actually achieve.

    I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.

    I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.

    We’re in the end game. From here it’s Johnson’s Deal, a general election followed by a deal or revoke. The EU can live with any of those, so they’ll offer one more extension (if necessary) to enable one of those outcomes. The high likelihood, though, is that Johnson’s deal will be where we end up, on or around 31st October.

    The only way that Johnson's deal passes now is if the EU says no and it becomes a straight choice between deal or no deal. If there is an actual extension there will be no departure before a GE the outcome of which, as TSE points out in his thread header, should not be taken for granted.

    I think you’re being way too bleak. It’s very clear to me Johnson’s deal has majority support in the house - as Johnson himself says in his second letter, I believe. The EU will not risk a no deal from here having finally got it off the table.

    The progress of the WAIB is going to be tortuous and slow. I will be amazed if Boris can get it through Parliament before the 31st unless the EU say this is it.

    Why does it matter if it takes a few weeks longer?

  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    kle4 said:

    I think this fails, but if Labour whips hard for it, this might be quite close now:

    https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1185835835859652608?s=20

    DUP now likely to be on board, so I think it passes since several of the ex cons will back it too. Good news. Terrible for Boris who has lost momentum and will lose even more votes on it I should think - will he end up opposing his own bill?
    Is it really terrible for Boris? Suppose his real aim is to win a general election and be prime minister for the next five years, and that Brexit at the end of the month is secondary to that. Delay and a forced referendum might be inconvenient but on the other hand, might help in a general election.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,263
    Chris said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    So more of Jolyon's crowd fund money down the drain......

    https://twitter.com/JoshuaRozenberg/status/1185790773347926016?s=20

    Yet he still plans to continue his Scottish court case against the government tomorrow. People donating to him have more money than sense, at some point (and it possibly came close to happening last week) a judge somewhere is going to declare him a vexatious litigant for trying to turn everything the government does into a court case.

    Isn’t it the court itself that has said it will sit tomorrow? When it does, it will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and the case will be over. The PM has done what he said he would never do. There was no Cummings master plan - just a very good spin operation, which most of the media is swallowing wholesale. It is very, very impressive.

    The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
    Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
    Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.

    If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.

    Surely it was a mistake for Johnson to say he wouldn't comply. It would have been better to criticise it as strongly as he wanted to, but make it clear that of course he would comply with the law.
    I am not clear that Johnson has ever said he won't comply with the law.

    He has afaik addressed *actions*, always leaving open the possibility of other ways of complying, which may have been technical but seem to have been effective as a trigger for remainers of various ilks.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,720

    Trying to stay a step ahead of this, the general rule of brexit is that any apparent success has hilarious adverse consequences. A good hilarious adverse consequence of Boris's deal is the DUP voting through a referendum out of spite. But this will produce a success for parliamentary remainiacs, which then invites some other hilarious adverse consequence. One might be just losing the referendum, but somehow that doesn't feel spicy enough.

    Boris Johnson calling a border poll out of spite?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    Most of Labour + Lib Dems + SNP + PC + Green + sympathetic ex-Labour + DUP is about 310, I think.

    There aren't enough ex-Conservatives willing to back a fresh referendum and there are too many Labour rebels.
    Yes, I think the only way to make the numbers work for a second referendum is if the WA is otherwise stalled and Brexit stalled with it, and you can appeal to some of the pro-deal people to back the referendum to get it done. It's hard to get the numbers for a referendum that looks like it's standing in the way of getting it done.
  • Great win for the lads - but the French made it easier
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    Go Wales!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Mr. NorthWales, aye, but you can only beat your opponents. And if one of them's a thick thug, well, that's not your fault.

    I hope Japan win the next match. If they do, that'll be 3/4 of the semi-finalists from the Northern Hemisphere.
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,138
    DavidL said:


    The problem is on what terms the extension is granted. Do we keep paying £200m a week into the pot for example? Are we allowed to terminate the extension early? These things need to be agreed and Boris is clear that he is not agreeing anything.

    The Benn Act is pretty clear here. If the EU offer exactly 31st Jan Boris *must* accept it. For some other EU offer, either: (1) Boris accepts it (not happening, as you say) or (2) motion put to parliament saying "we accept the extension", and Boris obliged to accept the EU offer unless parliament vote it down. So effectively it's the Commons that agrees to the terms. As the man on the spot Boris could argue for some tweaking of the text, though if it plays out like the April extension he's not in the room while the decisions are made and won't have any leverage on the substance anyhow. Effectively we get a 'take it or leave it' offer of an extension, but in practice that's what we'd have got anyway even with a PM who wanted an extension, IMHO.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,132
    edited October 2019
    Amber Rudd who voted for Letwin has personally told Boris she will now support the deal
  • DavidL said:

    ‪From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.‬

    They would all pass. This government is a long way short of a majority. The risk for Boris is that it gets to the point the ERG says we are not backing the bill. To me the loss of momentum as a result of Letwin's imbecilic behaviour yesterday is likely to prove fatal. Only a refusal to extend by the EU can save Boris now.
    And this to me is the great mystery.

    Why is Olly Letwin still a Conservative MP.

    He has a trail of fuckwitted disaster going back to his 'disco and drugs' thoughts in 1985 yet at no point the Conservative party have taken him to one side and said "Sorry about this Oliver but I'm afraid you're not up to the job".
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751
    MattW said:

    Chris said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:


    Yet he still plans to continue his Scottish court case against the government tomorrow. People donating to him have more money than sense, at some point (and it possibly came close to happening last week) a judge somewhere is going to declare him a vexatious litigant for trying to turn everything the government does into a court case.

    Isn’t it the court itself that has said it will sit tomorrow? When it does, it will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and the case will be over. The PM has done what he said he would never do. There was no Cummings master plan - just a very good spin operation, which most of the media is swallowing wholesale. It is very, very impressive.

    The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
    Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
    Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.

    If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.

    Surely it was a mistake for Johnson to say he wouldn't comply. It would have been better to criticise it as strongly as he wanted to, but make it clear that of course he would comply with the law.
    I am not clear that Johnson has ever said he won't comply with the law.

    He has afaik addressed *actions*, always leaving open the possibility of other ways of complying, which may have been technical but seem to have been effective as a trigger for remainers of various ilks.
    Well, I don't think he's ever said "I won't comply with the law" in so many words. But obviously he has said many times he wouldn't request an extension, which the law clearly required him to do.
  • DavidL said:

    ‪From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.‬

    They would all pass. This government is a long way short of a majority. The risk for Boris is that it gets to the point the ERG says we are not backing the bill. To me the loss of momentum as a result of Letwin's imbecilic behaviour yesterday is likely to prove fatal. Only a refusal to extend by the EU can save Boris now.
    And this to me is the great mystery.

    Why is Olly Letwin still a Conservative MP.

    He has a trail of fuckwitted disaster going back to his 'disco and drugs' thoughts in 1985 yet at no point the Conservative party have taken him to one side and said "Sorry about this Oliver but I'm afraid you're not up to the job".
    He is standing down so not relevant really
  • Wales show the importance of luck in big tournaments.

    I'd fancy them to reach the final now.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    Amber Rudd who voted for Letwin has personally told Boris she will now support the deal

    It will only take 2-3 to back a ref.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    Every single Labour MP will vote for a vote of no confidence.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,865
    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    There are currently 288 Conservatives. Of the 21 they can probably count on 15 to support them. That gets them to 303. Everything then turns on the number of Labour rebels. From yesterday they can probably count on a maximum of 6. 309 is not enough to stop this.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    Hodges:

    "Corbyn is the most useless, incompetent, inadequate, unqualified, disingenuous, cowardly person to ever hold senior political office in the United Kingdom."

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Mr. Richard, possible, but neither the Springboks nor Japan would be pushovers.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Hmmmm interesting discussions this morning.
    Referendum - DUP might support as a spoiler but even then there are a number of labour leavers who will not support it but might not necessarily support the deal. There is then the problem of implementing it, the govt wont bring the legislation forward, it cant be done on SO24s, so it's basically an election if it passes.
    VONC - again DUP might change tack but it risks accidental no deal and it definitely leads to an election
    I think the deal passes, we exit on or near the 31st October and then Corbyn collapses the govt and we move to an election in early to mid January if the dec 12th date is missed
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478

    Great win for the lads - but the French made it easier

    Not one of their finest. Still, a win's a win. South Africa or Japan next.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,591
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    I'd be surprised if any Labour MPs refused to support a VONC in Bozo. That would certainly be a career ending move. Possibly one or two of the retirees but not enough to prevent it passing if the DUP supported it.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Rudd 'might retake the whip'
    Her protestations about no negotiations look daft now
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    edited October 2019

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    Every single Labour MP will vote for a vote of no confidence.
    Normally. But if they're committing to probably facing deselection or are standing down by voting through the WAIB would they not abstain? Career ending, but why commit to the deal then vote out the government before the deal can happen?

    Theres no logic to holding firm and trying to pass the WAIB and then voting to prevent the WAIB from passing .
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,534

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    Most of Labour + Lib Dems + SNP + PC + Green + sympathetic ex-Labour + DUP is about 310, I think.

    There aren't enough ex-Conservatives willing to back a fresh referendum and there are too many Labour rebels.
    Yes, I think the only way to make the numbers work for a second referendum is if the WA is otherwise stalled and Brexit stalled with it, and you can appeal to some of the pro-deal people to back the referendum to get it done. It's hard to get the numbers for a referendum that looks like it's standing in the way of getting it done.
    I think that's right, and I don't understand the pessimism of DavidL and other Leavers - I think the deal will pass quite easily (20 majority?) and we'll just have some tidying up over amendments to the Withdrawal Bill.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478

    Trying to stay a step ahead of this, the general rule of brexit is that any apparent success has hilarious adverse consequences. A good hilarious adverse consequence of Boris's deal is the DUP voting through a referendum out of spite. But this will produce a success for parliamentary remainiacs, which then invites some other hilarious adverse consequence. One might be just losing the referendum, but somehow that doesn't feel spicy enough.

    Boris Johnson calling a border poll out of spite?
    Wouldn't be surprised, although I wonder if it'll be something like 'if there's no Assembly government'.
  • kle4 said:

    Amber Rudd who voted for Letwin has personally told Boris she will now support the deal

    It will only take 2-3 to back a ref.
    I know you want to remain and see a referendum as a means to it and that is fair enough but I just do not see the numbers even with the DUP

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,724
    edited October 2019
    Chris said:

    MattW said:

    Chris said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:


    Yet he still plans to continue his Scottish court case against the government tomorrow. People donating to him have more money than sense, at some point (and it possibly came close to happening last week) a judge somewhere is going to declare him a vexatious litigant for trying to turn everything the government does into a court case.

    Isn’t it the court itself that has said it will sit tomorrow? When it does, it will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and the case will be over. The PM has done what he said he would never do. There was no Cummings master plan - just a very good spin operation, which most of the media is swallowing wholesale. It is very, very impressive.

    The case was continued to tomorrow by
    Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
    Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.

    If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.

    Surely it was a mistake for Johnson to say he wouldn't comply. It would have been better to criticise it as strongly as he wanted to, but make it clear that of course he would comply with the law.
    I am not clear that Johnson has ever said he won't comply with the law.

    He has afaik addressed *actions*, always leaving open the possibility of other ways of complying, which may have been technical but seem to have been effective as a trigger for remainers of various ilks.
    Well, I don't think he's ever said "I won't comply with the law" in so many words. But obviously he has said many times he wouldn't request an extension, which the law clearly required him to do.
    And he has applied for that extension, which Tusk has accepted.

    Letwin is right. Even supporters of the Deal should be keen for parliament to properly scrutinise it. We are going to be stuck with it for a long time, and NI in perpetuity. We all knew that a technical extension was needed for the legislation, and this is it.

    If BoZo is concerned about wasting time, then perhaps he shouldn't have wasted weeks on an illegal prorogation, and farcical Queens speech. He has no one to blame but himself for his humiliation.
  • DavidL said:

    ‪From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.‬

    They would all pass. This government is a long way short of a majority. The risk for Boris is that it gets to the point the ERG says we are not backing the bill. To me the loss of momentum as a result of Letwin's imbecilic behaviour yesterday is likely to prove fatal. Only a refusal to extend by the EU can save Boris now.
    And this to me is the great mystery.

    Why is Olly Letwin still a Conservative MP.

    He has a trail of fuckwitted disaster going back to his 'disco and drugs' thoughts in 1985 yet at no point the Conservative party have taken him to one side and said "Sorry about this Oliver but I'm afraid you're not up to the job".
    He is standing down so not relevant really
    Doubtless he'll go to the HoL so still relevant.

    And what's to stop future Olly Letwins ? Do the Conservative party have no interest in quality control of their MPs ?
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    edited October 2019

    Wales show the importance of luck in big tournaments.

    I'd fancy them to reach the final now.

    Nothing lucky about that red card. Takes a modicum of intelligence to win games. If a team is that stupid, especially in these days of TMO, they are a poor team that don’t deserve to win. Equally picking a decent kicker.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,237
    alex. said:

    A second referendum cannot realistically happen in advance if a GE I reckon.

    That is right. And a further condition is that the GE must produce a government that is not Tory led.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215
    edited October 2019

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    Every single Labour MP will vote for a vote of no confidence.
    The one Labour MP who might not is mine, Mann. He is very anti-Corbyn and heading into the Lords as a crossbencher. But the rest, 100% yes.

    The hardest Labour leaver, Hoey will vote VONC, against 2nd ref, against the deal.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,263
    Chris said:

    MattW said:

    Chris said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:


    Yet he still plans to continue his Scottish court case against the government tomorrow. People donating to him have more money than sense, at some point (and it possibly came close to happening last week) a judge somewhere is going to declare him a vexatious litigant for trying to turn everything the government does into a court case.

    Isn’t it the court itself that has said it will sit tomorrow? When it does, it will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and the case will be over. The PM has done what he said he would never do. There was no Cummings master plan - just a very good spin operation, which most of the media is swallowing wholesale. It is very, very impressive.

    The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
    Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
    Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.

    If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.

    Surely it was a mistake for Johnson to say he wouldn't comply. It would have been better to criticise it as strongly as he wanted to, but make it clear that of course he would comply with the law.
    I am not clear that Johnson has ever said he won't comply with the law.

    He has afaik addressed *actions*, always leaving open the possibility of other ways of complying, which may have been technical but seem to have been effective as a trigger for remainers of various ilks.
    Well, I don't think he's ever said "I won't comply with the law" in so many words. But obviously he has said many times he wouldn't request an extension, which the law clearly required him to do.
    That is where I would put it. Quite how this will play in a Court.
  • kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    Every single Labour MP will vote for a vote of no confidence.
    Big question. Will Corbyn agree to a vonc
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    Trying to stay a step ahead of this, the general rule of brexit is that any apparent success has hilarious adverse consequences. A good hilarious adverse consequence of Boris's deal is the DUP voting through a referendum out of spite. But this will produce a success for parliamentary remainiacs, which then invites some other hilarious adverse consequence. One might be just losing the referendum, but somehow that doesn't feel spicy enough.

    If the second referendum were lost by Remain by a wider margin, on a higher turnout, that would be pretty crushing on a shooting yourself in the foot index. It could then lead to No Deal at the end of the transition.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    Hodges:

    "Corbyn is the most useless, incompetent, inadequate, unqualified, disingenuous, cowardly person to ever hold senior political office in the United Kingdom."

    Hodges may well be right, but it rather spoils his case that he said the same things about Ed Miliband on an almost daily basis. The boy who cried wolf.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    kle4 said:

    Amber Rudd who voted for Letwin has personally told Boris she will now support the deal

    It will only take 2-3 to back a ref.
    I know you want to remain and see a referendum as a means to it and that is fair enough but I just do not see the numbers even with the DUP

    And you may be right but I've just set out why I believe the numbers are there, so you can see it you just disagree.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    There are currently 288 Conservatives. Of the 21 they can probably count on 15 to support them. That gets them to 303. Everything then turns on the number of Labour rebels. From yesterday they can probably count on a maximum of 6. 309 is not enough to stop this.
    You are forgetting the independents for the deal and hoey/mann, that's another 7. Hermon wont vote for a 2nd ref, nor will Hopkins and there will be more than 6 labour against a 2nd referendum, there are 11 in favour of the deal for starters
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    edited October 2019

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    Most of Labour + Lib Dems + SNP + PC + Green + sympathetic ex-Labour + DUP is about 310, I think.

    There aren't enough ex-Conservatives willing to back a fresh referendum and there are too many Labour rebels.
    Yes, I think the only way to make the numbers work for a second referendum is if the WA is otherwise stalled and Brexit stalled with it, and you can appeal to some of the pro-deal people to back the referendum to get it done. It's hard to get the numbers for a referendum that looks like it's standing in the way of getting it done.
    I think that's right, and I don't understand the pessimism of DavidL and other Leavers - I think the deal will pass quite easily (20 majority?) and we'll just have some tidying up over amendments to the Withdrawal Bill.
    That tidying up will see ERG or labour votes lose backing for it. The WA will be stalled.

    I wonder how many amendments there will be .
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    Every single Labour MP will vote for a vote of no confidence.
    Big question. Will Corbyn agree to a vonc
    Not before an extension is agreed, too risky
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,627

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    I'd be surprised if any Labour MPs refused to support a VONC in Bozo. That would certainly be a career ending move. Possibly one or two of the retirees but not enough to prevent it passing if the DUP supported it.
    A VoNC would depend entirely on all the various groups of independents, and possibly the DUP. Every other non-Conservative with a party whip will vote for it or be expelled from their group. Last one was 325-306 for Theresa May.
  • Pulpstar said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    Every single Labour MP will vote for a vote of no confidence.
    The one Labour MP who might not is mine, Mann. He is very anti-Corbyn and heading into the Lords as a crossbencher. But the rest, 100% yes.

    The hardest Labour leaver, Hoey will vote VONC, against 2nd ref, against the deal.
    Is Hoey the last supporter of Labour's 1983 manifesto ?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    kinabalu said:

    alex. said:

    A second referendum cannot realistically happen in advance if a GE I reckon.

    That is right. And a further condition is that the GE must produce a government that is not Tory led.
    Again, I'm not sure Boris would have much to fear from holding a referendum. He'd probably make a better fist of it than David Cameron, and if he remains above the fray like Wilson, either result should not prove fatal to his premiership.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    Passage of the bill through the Lords should be fun. How many rounds of ping pong I wonder?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,237
    Scott_P said:
    If I were betting with either of these two characters I would be insisting that the full sum representing the potential winnings be placed on escrow with an independent third party.
  • Question for rugby experts.

    Why did France chose to go one short in the forwards rather than the backs ?

    It was their 7 man pack which led to the key two botched scrums.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    I'd be surprised if any Labour MPs refused to support a VONC in Bozo. That would certainly be a career ending move. Possibly one or two of the retirees but not enough to prevent it passing if the DUP supported it.
    A VoNC would depend entirely on all the various groups of independents, and possibly the DUP. Every other non-Conservative with a party whip will vote for it or be expelled from their group. Last one was 325-306 for Theresa May.
    From this point on we can count the 10 votes of the DUP as being reliably against the government.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215

    Pulpstar said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    Every single Labour MP will vote for a vote of no confidence.
    The one Labour MP who might not is mine, Mann. He is very anti-Corbyn and heading into the Lords as a crossbencher. But the rest, 100% yes.

    The hardest Labour leaver, Hoey will vote VONC, against 2nd ref, against the deal.
    Is Hoey the last supporter of Labour's 1983 manifesto ?
    Dunno she's completely out on her own in parliament now though.
  • Hodges:

    "Corbyn is the most useless, incompetent, inadequate, unqualified, disingenuous, cowardly person to ever hold senior political office in the United Kingdom."

    Hodges may well be right, but it rather spoils his case that he said the same things about Ed Miliband on an almost daily basis. The boy who cried wolf.
    Yes prime minister Ed M and his career since stepping down sure proved St Dan was wrong
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318
    edited October 2019
    Foxy said:



    Not sure these dalyaing tactics ARE fine and good. Remainers seem to forget, Boris's 31st October "do or die" deadline wasn't of his making. It was the deadline granted, amongst some disquiet, by the EU. It is their deadline he is trying to achieve, without the need to ask them for a further extension to some unspecified time, for some unspecified purpose.

    Where the Remainers have got it wrong is misjudging Boris. To their surprise, Boris has got on really well with the EU leaders. He is making all the right noises that he is a fervent European who will be a good team player - just outside the structures of the EU. The Remainers have been dripping poison in the EU's ears, about how Brexit Britain will be an existential threat to them, and they must take all measures to stop our leaving. Except, with Boris, it doesn't feel like that.

    Boris has been trying his hardest to meet the EU's original extended deadline. I suspect that having now got the measure of the man, they will be much more inclined to help him out with peeling the Remainers' fingers off the Brexit doorframe....

    BoZo's Surrender Deal is quite popular with the EU because it gives them everything that they wanted 2 years ago, before May extracted concessions. It is wrong to conflate that with personal popularity. EU leaders are capable of being polite and diplomatic even to petulant twats.


    Exactly. This revised deal is pretty much the deal the EU offered in December 2017. Of course, they get on well with the PM. All his bluster about making a “take it or leave it” offer has proved to be just that - bluster. The EU have Britain exactly where they want it - in a weakened position. They even have British Cabinet Ministers pointing out that it makes sense to move your business to somewhere which has frictionless access to the Single Market. Like .... er ...... the Single Market.

    I fully expect the EU to do what ever it needs to to persuade businesses to relocate to the SM or to expand their operations there and any future rule changes are likely to tilt the advantages further in favour of the EU and against Britain.

    And if Britain were to rejoin it would likely be on the basis of full membership - not with any opt outs - so long-term the EU is in a better place too.

    It is possible that Britain will be able to carve out an independent future which avoids the downsides of Brexit and deals with the issues which led to the Brexit vote. I am not all sure that the thinking about what this path might be and how it might be achieved has been done, has even been started.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478

    Hodges:

    "Corbyn is the most useless, incompetent, inadequate, unqualified, disingenuous, cowardly person to ever hold senior political office in the United Kingdom."

    Hodges may well be right, but it rather spoils his case that he said the same things about Ed Miliband on an almost daily basis. The boy who cried wolf.
    I've been listening to Milliband's 'Reasons to be Cheerful' podcasts. Comes across as a sensible, kindly, thoughtful individual.
    And anyone who supports Johnson has to be an expert on people who are not fit to hold public office.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,865

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    There are currently 288 Conservatives. Of the 21 they can probably count on 15 to support them. That gets them to 303. Everything then turns on the number of Labour rebels. From yesterday they can probably count on a maximum of 6. 309 is not enough to stop this.
    You are forgetting the independents for the deal and hoey/mann, that's another 7. Hermon wont vote for a 2nd ref, nor will Hopkins and there will be more than 6 labour against a 2nd referendum, there are 11 in favour of the deal for starters
    I was including some of the ex Labour people in my 6 given the votes yesterday. I would expect the likes of Philip Hammond to vote in favour too. Like yesterday if the DUP are against the government they are in trouble.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,720
    Johnson's majority for the deal is already slipping away.

    https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1185847410720985090
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,132
    edited October 2019
    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    There are currently 288 Conservatives. Of the 21 they can probably count on 15 to support them. That gets them to 303. Everything then turns on the number of Labour rebels. From yesterday they can probably count on a maximum of 6. 309 is not enough to stop this.
    You are overlooking independents and the 19 labour mps for a deal

    Boris had 306 yesterday and on yesterdays vote he only needs 8 to move sides

    I really do not see the numbers for a referendum

    And of course if it falls that then ends the story as it is taken off the agenda by the EU in respect of their extension

    It is high stakes and if I was betting I would say 60/40 to the government seeing off the referendum
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Johnson's majority for the deal is already slipping away.

    https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1185847410720985090

    Skinner wasn't amongst the labour yes or MPs for a deal group
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    Johnson's majority for the deal is already slipping away.

    https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1185847410720985090

    And so it begins.
  • kinabalu said:

    alex. said:

    A second referendum cannot realistically happen in advance if a GE I reckon.

    That is right. And a further condition is that the GE must produce a government that is not Tory led.
    Again, I'm not sure Boris would have much to fear from holding a referendum. He'd probably make a better fist of it than David Cameron, and if he remains above the fray like Wilson, either result should not prove fatal to his premiership.
    Boris can not be above the fray!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    kle4 said:

    Passage of the bill through the Lords should be fun. How many rounds of ping pong I wonder?

    If the Lords push this too far they may as well sign a letter asking for disbandment and major reform.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,724
    We are truly through the looking glass!
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    edited October 2019

    Question for rugby experts.

    Why did France chose to go one short in the forwards rather than the backs ?

    It was their 7 man pack which led to the key two botched scrums.

    If you want to see a REALLY botched scrum, put a back in the pack. Why they didn’t make a tactical substitution of a forward for a back I think that was because they knew that they could only take on Wales in broken play, as the first half showed, and having one fewer in the backs made that impossible. Ultimately they were not quite good enough. Keeping your head is part of the game and if you can’t do that you lose games. Goal kicking is also as part of the game as any other and if you don’t have a decent enough kicker to make those easy early shots you’re also going to struggle.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    Hilarious. Now, plenty will agree with him even now, but I wonder if he realises just how much he would have condemned, say, Boris for suggesting a delay even just to do more no deal prep .
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    kle4 said:

    Johnson's majority for the deal is already slipping away.

    https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1185847410720985090

    And so it begins.
    He was a no anyway, Corbyn tweeted a video of Skinner saying he was a no before yesterdays vote
  • DougSeal said:

    Wales show the importance of luck in big tournaments.

    I'd fancy them to reach the final now.

    Nothing lucky about that red card. Takes a modicum of intelligence to win games. If a team is that stupid, especially in these days of TMO, they are a poor team that don’t deserve to win. Equally picking a decent kicker.
    Its lucky to be playing against people that stupid and its lucky that its you they're playing against when they put that stupidity into action.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,627

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    I'd be surprised if any Labour MPs refused to support a VONC in Bozo. That would certainly be a career ending move. Possibly one or two of the retirees but not enough to prevent it passing if the DUP supported it.
    A VoNC would depend entirely on all the various groups of independents, and possibly the DUP. Every other non-Conservative with a party whip will vote for it or be expelled from their group. Last one was 325-306 for Theresa May.
    From this point on we can count the 10 votes of the DUP as being reliably against the government.
    I'm inclined to agree, although the whipping agreement formally remains in place between the two parties - even if it clearly broke down yesterday.

    It could go either way, but depends on either an extension until 31st Jan or later, or the Brexit Bill passing first, before Corbyn will table the motion.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318
    DavidL said:

    alex. said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:


    The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.

    Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
    I think the Govt will be entitled to argue that the “spirit” of the Act went out of the window with the passing of the Letwin amendment. The basic purpose of the Benn Act was to avert no deal (through the seeking of an extension) in the event that a deal couldn’t be agreed with the EU and supported by Parliament. The Govt met their obligation to secure a deal and offer the chance for Parliament to support or reject it. They did neither. Johnson can not honestly go back to the EU and say that an extension will be required, since he does not know that Parliament will fail to pass legislation approving the deal before October 31st. Which is in effect what he has said in the accompanying letters.

    The Benn Act required the sending of the letter in the event that Parliament had not approved a MV. Since Letwin's idiocy prevented the resolution yesterday from being a meaningful vote Boris had no choice. I think the Court will be slightly unimpressed with the antics (not actually signing it, the accompanying letters etc) but I don't really see where they go from here.
    I tend to agree. I don’t see the basis on which the court will say that the PM has been in contempt of court.

    The issues re the letters are now a distraction. The Benn Act has achieved its purpose - seeking an extension.

    What people should be focusing on is the Withdrawal Agreement Implementation Bill - its precise terms - and whether it will be voted through this week and next.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    I'd be surprised if any Labour MPs refused to support a VONC in Bozo. That would certainly be a career ending move. Possibly one or two of the retirees but not enough to prevent it passing if the DUP supported it.
    A VoNC would depend entirely on all the various groups of independents, and possibly the DUP. Every other non-Conservative with a party whip will vote for it or be expelled from their group. Last one was 325-306 for Theresa May.
    From this point on we can count the 10 votes of the DUP as being reliably against the government.
    I'm inclined to agree, although the whipping agreement formally remains in place between the two parties - even if it clearly broke down yesterday.

    It could go either way, but depends on either an extension until 31st Jan or later, or the Brexit Bill passing first, before Corbyn will table the motion.
    I’m not sure about that. Parliament continues to sit for 14 days after a vote of no confidence. 14 days is enough for now.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    Johnson's majority for the deal is already slipping away.

    https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1185847410720985090

    Skinner wasn't amongst the labour yes or MPs for a deal group
    No, but it means 1 more vote to overcome, rather than an abstention, so still adds to the headache.

    The big question - how firm are the labour rebels and the ex cons? Most of them are pretty firm. But can 3-5 be swayed? Its that tight.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293
    Nigel looks like he's got Janudice there?

    I've thought for a few months he doesn't look well.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    kle4 said:

    I think this fails, but if Labour whips hard for it, this might be quite close now:

    https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1185835835859652608?s=20

    DUP now likely to be on board, so I think it passes since several of the ex cons will back it too. Good news. Terrible for Boris who has lost momentum and will lose even more votes on it I should think - will he end up opposing his own bill?
    Do you really think a 2nd ref amendment will pass? I don’t. Not at all.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,627

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    I'd be surprised if any Labour MPs refused to support a VONC in Bozo. That would certainly be a career ending move. Possibly one or two of the retirees but not enough to prevent it passing if the DUP supported it.
    A VoNC would depend entirely on all the various groups of independents, and possibly the DUP. Every other non-Conservative with a party whip will vote for it or be expelled from their group. Last one was 325-306 for Theresa May.
    From this point on we can count the 10 votes of the DUP as being reliably against the government.
    I'm inclined to agree, although the whipping agreement formally remains in place between the two parties - even if it clearly broke down yesterday.

    It could go either way, but depends on either an extension until 31st Jan or later, or the Brexit Bill passing first, before Corbyn will table the motion.
    I’m not sure about that. Parliament continues to sit for 14 days after a vote of no confidence. 14 days is enough for now.
    You reckon Corbyn tables it tomorrow? That would be good news for my December election bet!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,237

    Again, I'm not sure Boris would have much to fear from holding a referendum. He'd probably make a better fist of it than David Cameron, and if he remains above the fray like Wilson, either result should not prove fatal to his premiership.

    But he would forfeit much support from the MPs and members of his party. I can't see him swallowing that. He would surely prefer the GE.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    I'd be surprised if any Labour MPs refused to support a VONC in Bozo. That would certainly be a career ending move. Possibly one or two of the retirees but not enough to prevent it passing if the DUP supported it.
    A VoNC would depend entirely on all the various groups of independents, and possibly the DUP. Every other non-Conservative with a party whip will vote for it or be expelled from their group. Last one was 325-306 for Theresa May.
    From this point on we can count the 10 votes of the DUP as being reliably against the government.
    I'm inclined to agree, although the whipping agreement formally remains in place between the two parties - even if it clearly broke down yesterday.

    It could go either way, but depends on either an extension until 31st Jan or later, or the Brexit Bill passing first, before Corbyn will table the motion.
    I’m not sure about that. Parliament continues to sit for 14 days after a vote of no confidence. 14 days is enough for now.
    If there is a VONC, a PM without the houses confidence signing a treaty under prerogative powers = supreme court wet dream. Miller will be beside herself with excitement
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    kle4 said:

    I think this fails, but if Labour whips hard for it, this might be quite close now:

    https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1185835835859652608?s=20

    DUP now likely to be on board, so I think it passes since several of the ex cons will back it too. Good news. Terrible for Boris who has lost momentum and will lose even more votes on it I should think - will he end up opposing his own bill?
    Do you really think a 2nd ref amendment will pass? I don’t. Not at all.
    I do. I think its last chance for remainers and they know it. All opposition parties plus DUP, who are now opposition, and at least some of the ex cons have made noises about a referendum in the past. They plus a few labour rebels who can say the deal wont pass without it and they will support the deal side on a public vote.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    I'd be surprised if any Labour MPs refused to support a VONC in Bozo. That would certainly be a career ending move. Possibly one or two of the retirees but not enough to prevent it passing if the DUP supported it.
    A VoNC would depend entirely on all the various groups of independents, and possibly the DUP. Every other non-Conservative with a party whip will vote for it or be expelled from their group. Last one was 325-306 for Theresa May.
    From this point on we can count the 10 votes of the DUP as being reliably against the government.
    I'm inclined to agree, although the whipping agreement formally remains in place between the two parties - even if it clearly broke down yesterday.

    It could go either way, but depends on either an extension until 31st Jan or later, or the Brexit Bill passing first, before Corbyn will table the motion.
    I’m not sure about that. Parliament continues to sit for 14 days after a vote of no confidence. 14 days is enough for now.
    Enough for what?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    We need an election. This Parliament will not and can not legislate for a 2nd ref. VONC on Monday please Jeremy.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    I'd be surprised if any Labour MPs refused to support a VONC in Bozo. That would certainly be a career ending move. Possibly one or two of the retirees but not enough to prevent it passing if the DUP supported it.
    A VoNC would depend entirely on all the various groups of independents, and possibly the DUP. Every other non-Conservative with a party whip will vote for it or be expelled from their group. Last one was 325-306 for Theresa May.
    From this point on we can count the 10 votes of the DUP as being reliably against the government.
    I'm inclined to agree, although the whipping agreement formally remains in place between the two parties - even if it clearly broke down yesterday.

    It could go either way, but depends on either an extension until 31st Jan or later, or the Brexit Bill passing first, before Corbyn will table the motion.
    I’m not sure about that. Parliament continues to sit for 14 days after a vote of no confidence. 14 days is enough for now.
    You reckon Corbyn tables it tomorrow? That would be good news for my December election bet!
    No sign of it yet. I was pointing out the flaw in your logic. The Labour leadership have not apparently yet woken up to the shift in their favour.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541

    DougSeal said:

    Wales show the importance of luck in big tournaments.

    I'd fancy them to reach the final now.

    Nothing lucky about that red card. Takes a modicum of intelligence to win games. If a team is that stupid, especially in these days of TMO, they are a poor team that don’t deserve to win. Equally picking a decent kicker.
    Its lucky to be playing against people that stupid and its lucky that its you they're playing against when they put that stupidity into action.
    Wasn’t luck getting into that half of the draw to face France. Wales did well enough to top their group or they would have played England - with or without the typhoon. That bit was not luck - unless you think France would have beaten England by enough in the called off game. If you say they were “lucky” to be drawn Aus in the group stage, well then you’re saying it’s all about luck ad infinitum. France were undone by a serious bit of bone headed thuggery and not having a good enough kicker, meaning Wales were, narrowly, the better team for having fewer bits of bone headed play and having a kicker that could make his shots.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    kle4 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    I'd be surprised if any Labour MPs refused to support a VONC in Bozo. That would certainly be a career ending move. Possibly one or two of the retirees but not enough to prevent it passing if the DUP supported it.
    A VoNC would depend entirely on all the various groups of independents, and possibly the DUP. Every other non-Conservative with a party whip will vote for it or be expelled from their group. Last one was 325-306 for Theresa May.
    From this point on we can count the 10 votes of the DUP as being reliably against the government.
    I'm inclined to agree, although the whipping agreement formally remains in place between the two parties - even if it clearly broke down yesterday.

    It could go either way, but depends on either an extension until 31st Jan or later, or the Brexit Bill passing first, before Corbyn will table the motion.
    I’m not sure about that. Parliament continues to sit for 14 days after a vote of no confidence. 14 days is enough for now.
    Enough for what?
    For any business that needs doing before 1 November.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Mr. Gate, a second referendum is a credible possibility.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    I think this fails, but if Labour whips hard for it, this might be quite close now:

    https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1185835835859652608?s=20

    DUP now likely to be on board, so I think it passes since several of the ex cons will back it too. Good news. Terrible for Boris who has lost momentum and will lose even more votes on it I should think - will he end up opposing his own bill?
    Do you really think a 2nd ref amendment will pass? I don’t. Not at all.
    I do. I think its last chance for remainers and they know it. All opposition parties plus DUP, who are now opposition, and at least some of the ex cons have made noises about a referendum in the past. They plus a few labour rebels who can say the deal wont pass without it and they will support the deal side on a public vote.
    I hope you’re right but I can imagine there would be a whole load of unforeseeable consequences.
  • humbuggerhumbugger Posts: 377
    Good morning all. Lovely morning.

    I've concluded, after yesterday's events in Parliament, that unless the EU refuses an extension (which I think unlikely) this Parliament will not allow us to Brexit with or without a deal. It will use every tactic and device available to ensure Brexit is delayed until 2022 if necessary.

    The Letwin amendment should be seen in this context. Despite Sir Oliver's fatuous protestations to the contrary it was just another Parliamentary device to delay Brexit. For once, the Sunday Express headline has captured the position perfectly. This Remainer Parliament will not allow us to leave the EU.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Wales deserved their win. Vahaamahina should be facing criminal charges for that assault.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    humbugger said:

    Good morning all. Lovely morning.

    I've concluded, after yesterday's events in Parliament, that unless the EU refuses an extension (which I think unlikely) this Parliament will not allow us to Brexit with or without a deal. It will use every tactic and device available to ensure Brexit is delayed until 2022 if necessary.

    The Letwin amendment should be seen in this context. Despite Sir Oliver's fatuous protestations to the contrary it was just another Parliamentary device to delay Brexit. For once, the Sunday Express headline has captured the position perfectly. This Remainer Parliament will not allow us to leave the EU.

    Blame the people for electing it in a democratic vote then.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    A vote for a second ref doesn't give us a second ref, it leads to an election. A really bad tempered election
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541

    Wales deserved their win. Vahaamahina should be facing criminal charges for that assault.

    I agree. I was rooting for France but there is always that risk of a complete brain explosion when you do.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    My default expectation from here is that Brexit will take place, substantially on the latest terms secured by Boris Johnson, after a short delay. Boris Johnson might not, however, be the Prime Minister at the time.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,627

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    I'd be surprised if any Labour MPs refused to support a VONC in Bozo. That would certainly be a career ending move. Possibly one or two of the retirees but not enough to prevent it passing if the DUP supported it.
    A VoNC would depend entirely on all the various groups of independents, and possibly the DUP. Every other non-Conservative with a party whip will vote for it or be expelled from their group. Last one was 325-306 for Theresa May.
    From this point on we can count the 10 votes of the DUP as being reliably against the government.
    I'm inclined to agree, although the whipping agreement formally remains in place between the two parties - even if it clearly broke down yesterday.

    It could go either way, but depends on either an extension until 31st Jan or later, or the Brexit Bill passing first, before Corbyn will table the motion.
    I’m not sure about that. Parliament continues to sit for 14 days after a vote of no confidence. 14 days is enough for now.
    You reckon Corbyn tables it tomorrow? That would be good news for my December election bet!
    No sign of it yet. I was pointing out the flaw in your logic. The Labour leadership have not apparently yet woken up to the shift in their favour.
    I think Corbyn (well, those around him) needs to be absolutely certain there's no way that no-deal Brexit could happen in the middle of an election campaign, hence needing to wait for the extension to be agreed or the deal passed.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @Kle4, @AlastairMeeks , @DavidL Can you all show your workings ?

    FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
    And if the WAIB looks likely to pass the DUP will support a VONC and bring the whole thing crashing down. They will never accept an Irish Sea border. Never never never.
    If the WAIB looks likely to pass unamended I think sufficient labour and ex con votes would prevent a VONC from succeeding as part of committing to the deal.

    However I dont think it will pass unamended.
    I'd be surprised if any Labour MPs refused to support a VONC in Bozo. That would certainly be a career ending move. Possibly one or two of the retirees but not enough to prevent it passing if the DUP supported it.
    A VoNC would depend entirely on all the various groups of independents, and possibly the DUP. Every other non-Conservative with a party whip will vote for it or be expelled from their group. Last one was 325-306 for Theresa May.
    From this point on we can count the 10 votes of the DUP as being reliably against the government.
    I'm inclined to agree, although the whipping agreement formally remains in place between the two parties - even if it clearly broke down yesterday.

    It could go either way, but depends on either an extension until 31st Jan or later, or the Brexit Bill passing first, before Corbyn will table the motion.
    I’m not sure about that. Parliament continues to sit for 14 days after a vote of no confidence. 14 days is enough for now.
    You reckon Corbyn tables it tomorrow? That would be good news for my December election bet!
    No sign of it yet. I was pointing out the flaw in your logic. The Labour leadership have not apparently yet woken up to the shift in their favour.
    I think Corbyn (well, those around him) needs to be absolutely certain there's no way that no-deal Brexit could happen in the middle of an election campaign, hence needing to wait for the extension to be agreed or the deal passed.
    He can safely rely on the EU not engineering that.
  • DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    Wales show the importance of luck in big tournaments.

    I'd fancy them to reach the final now.

    Nothing lucky about that red card. Takes a modicum of intelligence to win games. If a team is that stupid, especially in these days of TMO, they are a poor team that don’t deserve to win. Equally picking a decent kicker.
    Its lucky to be playing against people that stupid and its lucky that its you they're playing against when they put that stupidity into action.
    Wasn’t luck getting into that half of the draw to face France. Wales did well enough to top their group or they would have played England - with or without the typhoon. That bit was not luck - unless you think France would have beaten England by enough in the called off game. If you say they were “lucky” to be drawn Aus in the group stage, well then you’re saying it’s all about luck ad infinitum. France were undone by a serious bit of bone headed thuggery and not having a good enough kicker, meaning Wales were, narrowly, the better team for having fewer bits of bone headed play and having a kicker that could make his shots.
    Wales are a great team but you're in denial if you don't think they were lucky today.

    And there's nothing wrong with being lucky, its often what the difference is from being merely great to being a world champion.
This discussion has been closed.