Mr. Brom, aye. The Pussyfooting Parliament will probably vote for whatever avoids them actually making a decision, though.
It was always thus. Thankfully they cannot buy time forever and the mood music seems to be leaning towards the impasse ending.
I think we may all be underestimating the appetite Parliament collectively has for this to continue indefinitely.
I can’t see how Boris gets an election any time soon.
SNP might want an election before Alex is in court for alleged sex crimes at the end of January.
Lib-Dems will be up for it as they expect to make gains.
Not sure what DUP would do.
Con + SNP + Lib-Dem might be enough for a one line bill.
I was talking to a Lib Dem MP recently who told me that they aren't seeking an election soon. They think they will gain seats but there're worried about the Conservatives flopping over the line thanks to Corbyn's unpopularity. What they really want is Corbyn gone.
That sounds odd.
If Jezza goes a lot of Lab > Lib-Dem switchers could go back to Labour and if someone like Starmer takes over a lot of Con > Lib-Dem Remain switchers might be tempted to go to Labour too.
For the Lib-Dems it would be much better to have an election with Jezza still leading Lab I'd have thought?
This is the only way to get a referendum through. You have to defeat the thing first, then all the waverers make "I don't like this but what can you do" faces and vote for one to get the thing done.
You then need a government / PM combination which is willing and able to deliver that referendum.
Does no one else find it strange how nuts the DUP have been going this week
Well the DUP are generally quite strange and "enraged" seems to be their default position.
That said you could well be on to something here.
The deal is a bloody good one for NI but DUP have to play to their voters who are probably even madder than the official DUP lol!
I think they'll go for the deal if they're given a bridge. It's the right thing to do. NI, massive bridge connecting it with the mainland, shows commitment to its future presence in the Union.
Which end of the bridge will the customs post be located?
I am not sure, but I think whatever checks necessary would be very easy given the basic concept of a bridge. The speed and utility of the bridge would more than compensate for any inconvenience.
Obviously drug-dealing is bad and I have no problem with the prison sentence for that, but banning rappers from using particular words?
There is no excuse for banning free speech. Ban crimes not speech.
Oh and legalise drugs so that there are no drug dealers, but that's another story.
Mr T you and I disagree on many things, but I'm with you that we need a thorough revision of the policy re drugs in this country, with a whole lot of bans lifted. The current arrangements are insane, and, among other problems, waste police time.
Indeed. I don't smoke and don't take illegal drugs and wouldn't take them if they were legalised but anyone who thinks the drugs war makes any difference whatsoever is insane. If I wanted to get cocaine or cannabis I easily could.
If it was up to me cocaine and other "Class A" drugs would be sold legally via pharmacies like Boots while cannabis would be sold like tobacco at supermarkets.
The drugs war has been comprehensively lost by the authorities.
You either decriminalise drugs, tax them and use the money for addiction treatment, or you go down the full Thailand/Singapore/Dubai route of absolutely zero tolerance and life sentences for anything more than personal use. I suspect the more liberal option would be the way for the UK to go.
I was talking to a Lib Dem MP recently who told me that they aren't seeking an election soon. They think they will gain seats but there're worried about the Conservatives flopping over the line thanks to Corbyn's unpopularity. What they really want is Corbyn gone.
The LDs want a rival party to ditch a leader who is thought to be electoral poison?
An expert in energy this morning stated that the UK is one of the World's best green energy countries and has a really good record on climate change and environmental policies
He went on to say the UK is responsible for 1% of emissions leaving the ROW at 99%
So these climate change extremist need to direct their attention elsewhere
Slightly more than 1% if you consider cumulative CO2 emissions since the industrial revolution. We are responsible for a big chunk of the problem. (Sorry I don't have a precise figure) As one of the world's richest nations, a member of the G7, permanent member of the UN Security Council, etc, the UK should be at the vanguard of addressing climate change.
Even Exxon are now advocating Carbon Capture & Storage. The world is changing.
We are at the vanguard according to this expert
He indicated the problem was 99% outside the UK and he is running a Worldwide Energy Business employing over 145,000
Sorry, but that is a really stupid argument. No single country in the world is responsible for more than a few percent of global emissions. Does that mean they can all say, "Not me, guv. It's everyone else's fault"?
I think the point was that unifying around a message of “we’re doing well relatively speaking and can do even better with moderate lifestyle changes and significant technological investment” would be a lot more helpful than Greta et al...
If it wasn't for Greta et al. we wouldn't even be talking about it. And while the UK may have been doing moderately well by picking the low-hanging fruit of eliminating coal from electricity generation, there is still a huge amount of work to do, and current policies simply won't do it. We need, for example, to already be building zero net energy housing.
This is the only way to get a referendum through. You have to defeat the thing first, then all the waverers make "I don't like this but what can you do" faces and vote for one to get the thing done.
You then need a government / PM combination which is willing and able to deliver that referendum.
That would certainly help, but as with everything the extension there are different degrees of "willing".
I assume Letwin will put his amendment to the latest MV today for a similar reason as before.
If the MV is passed unamended, Johnson will withdraw the letter and threaten No Deal to force the WAB through by 31 Oct. Letwin won't allow that.
Personally I'd call Johnson's bluff on No Deal and force him to apply the brakes at the last moment. But I recognise it is very high stakes and Letwin knows just how damaging No Deal would be.
Because it would be a straight replay of Saturday, I'm fairly sure Bercow won't allow it with good reason.
All of which is irrelevant, as our future is dependent on the largesse of the EU and the extension (if any) that they will allow.
Mr. Brom, aye. The Pussyfooting Parliament will probably vote for whatever avoids them actually making a decision, though.
It was always thus. Thankfully they cannot buy time forever and the mood music seems to be leaning towards the impasse ending.
I think we may all be underestimating the appetite Parliament collectively has for this to continue indefinitely.
I can’t see how Boris gets an election any time soon.
SNP might want an election before Alex is in court for alleged sex crimes at the end of January.
Lib-Dems will be up for it as they expect to make gains.
Not sure what DUP would do.
Con + SNP + Lib-Dem might be enough for a one line bill.
I was talking to a Lib Dem MP recently who told me that they aren't seeking an election soon. They think they will gain seats but there're worried about the Conservatives flopping over the line thanks to Corbyn's unpopularity. What they really want is Corbyn gone.
That sounds odd.
If Jezza goes a lot of Lab > Lib-Dem switchers could go back to Labour and if someone like Starmer takes over a lot of Con > Lib-Dem Remain switchers might be tempted to go to Labour too.
For the Lib-Dems it would be much better to have an election with Jezza still leading Lab I'd have thought?
The problem is that Corbyn will be hung round the neck of the LDs in Con-LD marginal i.e. Vote LD, get Corbyn
Everyone is being blindsided by the 31st October deadline. What is absolutely clear is that there is a majority in the Commons to pass the WA. Given that - and given the DUP opposition to a customs union - the WA is going to pass. No wrecking amendments are going to be voted through. If it takes a week or so into November for that to happen, what does it matter?
Mr. Brom, aye. The Pussyfooting Parliament will probably vote for whatever avoids them actually making a decision, though.
It was always thus. Thankfully they cannot buy time forever and the mood music seems to be leaning towards the impasse ending.
I think we may all be underestimating the appetite Parliament collectively has for this to continue indefinitely.
I can’t see how Boris gets an election any time soon.
SNP might want an election before Alex is in court for alleged sex crimes at the end of January.
Lib-Dems will be up for it as they expect to make gains.
Not sure what DUP would do.
Con + SNP + Lib-Dem might be enough for a one line bill.
I was talking to a Lib Dem MP recently who told me that they aren't seeking an election soon. They think they will gain seats but there're worried about the Conservatives flopping over the line thanks to Corbyn's unpopularity. What they really want is Corbyn gone.
That sounds odd.
If Jezza goes a lot of Lab > Lib-Dem switchers could go back to Labour and if someone like Starmer takes over a lot of Con > Lib-Dem Remain switchers might be tempted to go to Labour too.
For the Lib-Dems would be mich better to have an election with Jezza still leading Lab I'd have thought.
Only if you assume winning seats is the Lib Dem priority. Seems to me their thinking right now is stopping Brexit. A Conservative majority, whilst not a certain outcome is possible, would kill the Lib Dem's main policy goal. So it's rational if you are thinking of policy ahead of bums on seats.
Mr. Brom, aye. The Pussyfooting Parliament will probably vote for whatever avoids them actually making a decision, though.
It was always thus. Thankfully they cannot buy time forever and the mood music seems to be leaning towards the impasse ending.
I think we may all be underestimating the appetite Parliament collectively has for this to continue indefinitely.
I can’t see how Boris gets an election any time soon.
SNP might want an election before Alex is in court for alleged sex crimes at the end of January.
Lib-Dems will be up for it as they expect to make gains.
Not sure what DUP would do.
Con + SNP + Lib-Dem might be enough for a one line bill.
I was talking to a Lib Dem MP recently who told me that they aren't seeking an election soon. They think they will gain seats but there're worried about the Conservatives flopping over the line thanks to Corbyn's unpopularity. What they really want is Corbyn gone.
That sounds odd.
If Jezza goes a lot of Lab > Lib-Dem switchers could go back to Labour and if someone like Starmer takes over a lot of Con > Lib-Dem Remain switchers might be tempted to go to Labour too.
For the Lib-Dems it would be much better to have an election with Jezza still leading Lab I'd have thought?
From a purely party advantage that would be right. If your priority was to stop Brexit then having a new Labour leader would be best.
Obviously drug-dealing is bad and I have no problem with the prison sentence for that, but banning rappers from using particular words?
There is no excuse for banning free speech. Ban crimes not speech.
Oh and legalise drugs so that there are no drug dealers, but that's another story.
Mr T you and I disagree on many things, but I'm with you that we need a thorough revision of the policy re drugs in this country, with a whole lot of bans lifted. The current arrangements are insane, and, among other problems, waste police time.
Indeed. I don't smoke and don't take illegal drugs and wouldn't take them if they were legalised but anyone who thinks the drugs war makes any difference whatsoever is insane. If I wanted to get cocaine or cannabis I easily could.
If it was up to me cocaine and other "Class A" drugs would be sold legally via pharmacies like Boots while cannabis would be sold like tobacco at supermarkets.
Quite. I don't smoke either (anything). Alcohol, yes! For several years I managed the pharmacy end of the Needle Exchange scheme ion the district where I worked, which was, we found popular; users were aware of the dangers. The other two big advantages of legalisation of course would be quality control and the opportunity for taxation.
Everyone is being blindsided by the 31st October deadline. What is absolutely clear is that there is a majority in the Commons to pass the WA. Given that - and given the DUP opposition to a customs union - the WA is going to pass. No wrecking amendments are going to be voted through. If it takes a week or so into November for that to happen, what does it matter?
I wouldn't go so far as to say it's *clear*, but yup, I think that's right.
Heard Justine Greening on R4 this morning talking about her hope for a 2nd referendum. She mentioned her discussions with parliamentary colleagues on the issue and said that "there is a sense, actually, that this needs to be decisioned"
I'm sure this sort of anthimeria* is part of the evolution of the language, but I always hate to hear them for at least the first few times.
*learnt this word so I didn't have to say "verbing"
Does no one else find it strange how nuts the DUP have been going this week
Well the DUP are generally quite strange and "enraged" seems to be their default position.
That said you could well be on to something here.
The deal is a bloody good one for NI but DUP have to play to their voters who are probably even madder than the official DUP lol!
I think they'll go for the deal if they're given a bridge. It's the right thing to do. NI, massive bridge connecting it with the mainland, shows commitment to its future presence in the Union.
A bridge to nowhere? Where do you suggest that this bridge go to? Across the North Channel to Stranraer perhaps? Or maybe you favour a link to the southern tip of the Kintyre peninsula?
I contend that you know precisely nothing about civil engineering and even less about economic geography.
It's not fair to come to such a narrow judgement. There are whole swathes of knowledge and understanding that luckyguy1983 lacks, not just engineering and economics. I've seen him display a rich and varied depth of ignorance on a wide range of subjects.
Everyone is being blindsided by the 31st October deadline. What is absolutely clear is that there is a majority in the Commons to pass the WA. Given that - and given the DUP opposition to a customs union - the WA is going to pass. No wrecking amendments are going to be voted through. If it takes a week or so into November for that to happen, what does it matter?
Let's see what happens.
So far the establishment elite have blocked Brexit at every turn. I'll believe it when I see it.
At least with Mays deal there would have been time for a short pause to draw breath between the exit date and the next negotiations. Even if we leave in ten days the arguments about the future relationship will need to start pretty much immediately, and on that the tory party is still very split.
It doesn't matter though, does it? Isn't it the case that once we Brexit the FTA is in the hands of the government and does not need Parliamentary approval? That's why I cannot see a No Deal happening at the end of next year - especially if the UK really does want Canada minus minus. That should be pretty easy to negotiate now that the Irish border issue has been sorted, if (and I guess it could be a big if) the UK understands what the consequences of that will be for access to the single market.
Everyone is being blindsided by the 31st October deadline. What is absolutely clear is that there is a majority in the Commons to pass the WA. Given that - and given the DUP opposition to a customs union - the WA is going to pass. No wrecking amendments are going to be voted through. If it takes a week or so into November for that to happen, what does it matter?
Let's see what happens.
So far the establishment elite have blocked Brexit at every turn. I'll believe it when I see it.
We voted to Leave
The vast majority of MPs then stood at a GE promising to implement the result
Those MPs demanded a vote on the deal, and voted NO three times.
Now a deal is likely to pass
The MPs vote to not have a vote
And people have convinced themselves it isn't a stitch up. Lord have mercy
I assume Letwin will put his amendment to the latest MV today for a similar reason as before. ...
Several people have made this point, but I don't understand it. The amendment has done its job, the letter had been sent because the Benn Act was triggered. Boris can't un-send it, nor can he do anything to frustrate the request (because of the Padfield principle). Therefore, there's no need for the same amendment to be tabled, surely?
I'm not 100% sure that the Padfield principle would apply if parliament approves an unamended MV. He's sent the letter. He could use the approval of the MV as the reason to write another one saying an extension is no longer required. I suspect the EU would reserve its position in case a No Deal was in prospect. But I can't be 100% sure. Johnson would use the uncertainty to blackmail MPs to pass the WAB in short order. Letwin demands 100% certainty that No Deal won't happen.
Does no one else find it strange how nuts the DUP have been going this week
Well the DUP are generally quite strange and "enraged" seems to be their default position.
That said you could well be on to something here.
The deal is a bloody good one for NI but DUP have to play to their voters who are probably even madder than the official DUP lol!
I think they'll go for the deal if they're given a bridge. It's the right thing to do. NI, massive bridge connecting it with the mainland, shows commitment to its future presence in the Union.
Which end of the bridge will the customs post be located?
I am not sure, but I think whatever checks necessary would be very easy given the basic concept of a bridge. The speed and utility of the bridge would more than compensate for any inconvenience.
LOL.
We shud bild a brij to Merica cos Trump is grate and I like cheezburger.
I was talking to a Lib Dem MP recently who told me that they aren't seeking an election soon. They think they will gain seats but there're worried about the Conservatives flopping over the line thanks to Corbyn's unpopularity. What they really want is Corbyn gone.
The LDs want a rival party to ditch a leader who is thought to be electoral poison?
Yes, because the Lib Dems do not want Corbyn's unpopularity to lead to a majority for the party that opposes their main policy goal. It might not be the way you would play it, but it has its own logic.
Heard Justine Greening on R4 this morning talking about her hope for a 2nd referendum. She mentioned her discussions with parliamentary colleagues on the issue and said that "there is a sense, actually, that this needs to be decisioned"
I'm sure this sort of anthimeria* is part of the evolution of the language, but I always hate to hear them for at least the first few times.
*learnt this word so I didn't have to say "verbing"
I also heard that abomination on R4.
I suppose once it has been decisioned it can be actioned.
Heard Justine Greening on R4 this morning talking about her hope for a 2nd referendum. She mentioned her discussions with parliamentary colleagues on the issue and said that "there is a sense, actually, that this needs to be decisioned"
I'm sure this sort of anthimeria* is part of the evolution of the language, but I always hate to hear them for at least the first few times.
*learnt this word so I didn't have to say "verbing"
Heard Justine Greening on R4 this morning talking about her hope for a 2nd referendum. She mentioned her discussions with parliamentary colleagues on the issue and said that "there is a sense, actually, that this needs to be decisioned"
I'm sure this sort of anthimeria* is part of the evolution of the language, but I always hate to hear them for at least the first few times.
*learnt this word so I didn't have to say "verbing"
I also heard that abomination on R4.
I suppose once it has been decisioned it can be actioned.
I assume Letwin will put his amendment to the latest MV today for a similar reason as before. ...
Several people have made this point, but I don't understand it. The amendment has done its job, the letter had been sent because the Benn Act was triggered. Boris can't un-send it, nor can he do anything to frustrate the request (because of the Padfield principle). Therefore, there's no need for the same amendment to be tabled, surely?
I'm not 100% sure that the Padfield principle would apply if parliament approves an unamended MV. He's sent the letter. He could use the approval of the MV as the reason to write another one saying an extension is no longer required. I suspect the EU would reserve its position in case a No Deal was in prospect. But I can't be 100% sure. Johnson would use the uncertainty to blackmail MPs to pass the WAB in short order. Letwin demands 100% certainty that No Deal won't happen.
I don't think that's right, because the Benn Act already takes account of the possibility that, after an extension is requested or even granted, the Withdrawal Agreement can specify leaving the EU at an earlier date (in accordance with Article 50). But IANAL, let alone a constitutional L!
Remain extremists have convinced themselves that Boris backers will flock to The Brexit Party. I cant see it at all.
If you want Brexit there is little point in supporting TBP.
If a GE arrives before the UK's exit is agreed then the leave vote will coalesce predominantly around the Tories (bar some no-go areas where TBP would be the challenge to Lab).
The problem for Lab/LD's plus assorted minors of course is they are fishing in the same electoral pond.
Voting through the deal prior to a GE is in the two main parties interests but works against the LD's and SNP.
Heard Justine Greening on R4 this morning talking about her hope for a 2nd referendum. She mentioned her discussions with parliamentary colleagues on the issue and said that "there is a sense, actually, that this needs to be decisioned"
I'm sure this sort of anthimeria* is part of the evolution of the language, but I always hate to hear them for at least the first few times.
*learnt this word so I didn't have to say "verbing"
I do not see how it works to ban specific words because it is all about context. The offence - if there is one - is presumably incitement to break the law. You can only assess this by listening to the whole track inc the video and asking yourself, "Does that incite a person to break the law?" If the answer is "Yes" then LOCK THAT RAPPER UP! Otherwise, he must free to carry on going about his everyday rapping.
The not sending a letter thing is honestly the biggest load of guff. I get a feeling there are actually quite a lot of people disappointed that he DID send the letter
The people who should be disappointed are the ones who believed him when he said he wouldn't
Does no one else find it strange how nuts the DUP have been going this week, given they were basically in the room all of last week and the week before, when the regulatory alignment issue was first put on paper (basically the biggest part of the compromise from which all else follows)?
What's also odd is this latest statement from them that they would vote against a Customs Union amendment, given it's probably their best hope of crashing the deal.
What also struck me as odd on Saturday was that Kate Hoey, basically the 11th member of the DUP at this point, voted against Letwin.
I don't claim to understand Northern Ireland politics much at all but I can't help but think they're not as upset as they are claiming to be and this is a lot of fireworks to impress their core voters prior to an imminent election. And it's all good politics because Bojo has told them he's got the numbers without them anyway. So everyone goes back to their voters happy and they're all good friends again after the election if it's hung / tight majority.
I don't make political bets but I do carry currency risk and I'm buying sterling.
Heard Justine Greening on R4 this morning talking about her hope for a 2nd referendum. She mentioned her discussions with parliamentary colleagues on the issue and said that "there is a sense, actually, that this needs to be decisioned"
I'm sure this sort of anthimeria* is part of the evolution of the language, but I always hate to hear them for at least the first few times.
*learnt this word so I didn't have to say "verbing"
What would have been wrong with a good, old-fashioned 'decided'?
Heard Justine Greening on R4 this morning talking about her hope for a 2nd referendum. She mentioned her discussions with parliamentary colleagues on the issue and said that "there is a sense, actually, that this needs to be decisioned"
I'm sure this sort of anthimeria* is part of the evolution of the language, but I always hate to hear them for at least the first few times.
*learnt this word so I didn't have to say "verbing"
What would have been wrong with a good, old-fashioned 'decided'?
It would sound a bit too decisive for anything related to Brexit.
Heard Justine Greening on R4 this morning talking about her hope for a 2nd referendum. She mentioned her discussions with parliamentary colleagues on the issue and said that "there is a sense, actually, that this needs to be decisioned"
I'm sure this sort of anthimeria* is part of the evolution of the language, but I always hate to hear them for at least the first few times.
*learnt this word so I didn't have to say "verbing"
Never seen that but it's only one step away from actioned. Erskine May uses negatived a lot which is probably fine but looks weird to me.
Vote against a customs union Vote against a referendum Vote against the deal
The likely result being the deal passes but they can say they stayed true to their principles
And as was discussed on 5 live business this morning NI receive a fantastic deal that a substantial majority want and the DUP retain their purity
Yes, that's exactly it.
The only tweak is that isn't not about purity.
The DUP slaughtered the UUP for agreeing the GFA. The UUP has been limbering up to kill the DUP over the WA. Now the DUP can vote against the WA (and hence see off the UUP) safe in the knowledge that it will go through anyway.
The not sending a letter thing is honestly the biggest load of guff. I get a feeling there are actually quite a lot of people disappointed that he DID send the letter
The people who should be disappointed are the ones who believed him when he said he wouldn't
Taking people for fools his entire life
It was a negotiating strategy.
Parliament attempted to hamstring that approach.
It resulted in a deal despite their best efforts.
It's funny how opponents of Leave/Boris don't get this. Repeatedly saying we were leaving by Oct 31 has got us a deal that will pass (if they let anyone vote on it). Who cares if its in November or December?
If someone values a house at 500k and bids 400k for it, they haven't mugged themselves off if they end up buying it for 475k eventually. The joke is on the people who wanted to buy it, but are laughing at him for paying the sale price, whilst they sit in a house they don't like.
At least with Mays deal there would have been time for a short pause to draw breath between the exit date and the next negotiations. Even if we leave in ten days the arguments about the future relationship will need to start pretty much immediately, and on that the tory party is still very split.
It doesn't matter though, does it? Isn't it the case that once we Brexit the FTA is in the hands of the government and does not need Parliamentary approval? That's why I cannot see a No Deal happening at the end of next year - especially if the UK really does want Canada minus minus. That should be pretty easy to negotiate now that the Irish border issue has been sorted, if (and I guess it could be a big if) the UK understands what the consequences of that will be for access to the single market.
I guess it then depends on the government majority during that negotiation process, if the Tories under Johnson have a clear majority I can see your path being pretty likely. If its the current commons or another hung parliament, it will still be messy as parliament can bring down the govt.
At least with Mays deal there would have been time for a short pause to draw breath between the exit date and the next negotiations. Even if we leave in ten days the arguments about the future relationship will need to start pretty much immediately, and on that the tory party is still very split.
It doesn't matter though, does it? Isn't it the case that once we Brexit the FTA is in the hands of the government and does not need Parliamentary approval? That's why I cannot see a No Deal happening at the end of next year - especially if the UK really does want Canada minus minus. That should be pretty easy to negotiate now that the Irish border issue has been sorted, if (and I guess it could be a big if) the UK understands what the consequences of that will be for access to the single market.
There is likely to be an amendment to the WAB that places final approval of any FTA with parliament. I think that is likely to pass. IIRC Johnson has already promised that. This would place it in law rather than in BJ's slippery mind.
Also several mps who said they support a customs union have said they will not now
With the DUP against a customs union and others it does look as if the custom union amendment is unlilely to pass
Furthermore in the Downing Street briefing this morning the PM spokesperson has said if a custom union is attached it changes everything and the PM will stop the deal and call an election
Everyone is being blindsided by the 31st October deadline. What is absolutely clear is that there is a majority in the Commons to pass the WA. Given that - and given the DUP opposition to a customs union - the WA is going to pass. No wrecking amendments are going to be voted through. If it takes a week or so into November for that to happen, what does it matter?
Let's see what happens.
So far the establishment elite have blocked Brexit at every turn. I'll believe it when I see it.
We voted to Leave
The vast majority of MPs then stood at a GE promising to implement the result
Those MPs demanded a vote on the deal, and voted NO three times.
Now a deal is likely to pass
The MPs vote to not have a vote
And people have convinced themselves it isn't a stitch up. Lord have mercy
Now that No Deal is off the table, there is absolutely no reason not to vote the Johnson deal through. And it will go through. The diehard Remainers have run out of options. But the WA does also need to be scrutinised. It is a very big deal and not something that can just be waved through. If that means leaving at the end of Novermber instead of October are you really that bothered?
I was talking to a Lib Dem MP recently who told me that they aren't seeking an election soon. They think they will gain seats but there're worried about the Conservatives flopping over the line thanks to Corbyn's unpopularity. What they really want is Corbyn gone.
The LDs want a rival party to ditch a leader who is thought to be electoral poison?
It's debatable to what extent Labour is a rival party to the Lib Dems. Almost all LD target seats are currently Conservative-held. Of the few that are Labour-held, generally the numbers flatter the Lib Dems' chances. (I don't see the LDs regaining Leeds NW, Burnley, or Birmingham Yardley, and Cambridge would surprise me.)
A sane Labour leader would enable centrist voters in LD target seats to vote Lib Dem without worrying about who'll end up in No 10. After all, the Lib Dems' rise to prominence first came when Blair was leading Labour.
Right now, I suspect the Lib Dems would be best served if Labour were led by someone broadly centre-left but not overly telegenic. Keir Starmer, for example.
Heard Justine Greening on R4 this morning talking about her hope for a 2nd referendum. She mentioned her discussions with parliamentary colleagues on the issue and said that "there is a sense, actually, that this needs to be decisioned"
I'm sure this sort of anthimeria* is part of the evolution of the language, but I always hate to hear them for at least the first few times.
*learnt this word so I didn't have to say "verbing"
I also heard that abomination on R4.
I suppose once it has been decisioned it can be actioned.
Does no one else find it strange how nuts the DUP have been going this week
Well the DUP are generally quite strange and "enraged" seems to be their default position.
That said you could well be on to something here.
The deal is a bloody good one for NI but DUP have to play to their voters who are probably even madder than the official DUP lol!
I think they'll go for the deal if they're given a bridge. It's the right thing to do. NI, massive bridge connecting it with the mainland, shows commitment to its future presence in the Union.
A bridge to nowhere? Where do you suggest that this bridge go to? Across the North Channel to Stranraer perhaps? Or maybe you favour a link to the southern tip of the Kintyre peninsula?
I contend that you know precisely nothing about civil engineering and even less about economic geography.
Plus you would need planning permission from the SNP for the Scottish end - wouldn't come cheap.
At least with Mays deal there would have been time for a short pause to draw breath between the exit date and the next negotiations. Even if we leave in ten days the arguments about the future relationship will need to start pretty much immediately, and on that the tory party is still very split.
It doesn't matter though, does it? Isn't it the case that once we Brexit the FTA is in the hands of the government and does not need Parliamentary approval? That's why I cannot see a No Deal happening at the end of next year - especially if the UK really does want Canada minus minus. That should be pretty easy to negotiate now that the Irish border issue has been sorted, if (and I guess it could be a big if) the UK understands what the consequences of that will be for access to the single market.
There is likely to be an amendment to the WAB that places final approval of any FTA with parliament. I think that is likely to pass. IIRC Johnson has already promised that. This would place it in law rather than in BJ's slippery mind.
That is fair enough - and even more reason to have a general election sooner rather than later.
Everyone is being blindsided by the 31st October deadline. What is absolutely clear is that there is a majority in the Commons to pass the WA. Given that - and given the DUP opposition to a customs union - the WA is going to pass. No wrecking amendments are going to be voted through. If it takes a week or so into November for that to happen, what does it matter?
Let's see what happens.
So far the establishment elite have blocked Brexit at every turn. I'll believe it when I see it.
We voted to Leave
The vast majority of MPs then stood at a GE promising to implement the result
Those MPs demanded a vote on the deal, and voted NO three times.
Now a deal is likely to pass
The MPs vote to not have a vote
And people have convinced themselves it isn't a stitch up. Lord have mercy
Even at the most positive view they demanded meaningful votes then decided the meaningful vote was not meaningful enough so devoided the meaningful vote of meaning.
Heard Justine Greening on R4 this morning talking about her hope for a 2nd referendum. She mentioned her discussions with parliamentary colleagues on the issue and said that "there is a sense, actually, that this needs to be decisioned"
I'm sure this sort of anthimeria* is part of the evolution of the language, but I always hate to hear them for at least the first few times.
*learnt this word so I didn't have to say "verbing"
I also heard that abomination on R4.
I suppose once it has been decisioned it can be actioned.
Everyone is being blindsided by the 31st October deadline. What is absolutely clear is that there is a majority in the Commons to pass the WA. Given that - and given the DUP opposition to a customs union - the WA is going to pass. No wrecking amendments are going to be voted through. If it takes a week or so into November for that to happen, what does it matter?
Let's see what happens.
So far the establishment elite have blocked Brexit at every turn. I'll believe it when I see it.
We voted to Leave
The vast majority of MPs then stood at a GE promising to implement the result
Those MPs demanded a vote on the deal, and voted NO three times.
Now a deal is likely to pass
The MPs vote to not have a vote
And people have convinced themselves it isn't a stitch up. Lord have mercy
Now that No Deal is off the table, there is absolutely no reason not to vote the Johnson deal through. And it will go through. The diehard Remainers have run out of options. But the WA does also need to be scrutinised. It is a very big deal and not something that can just be waved through. If that means leaving at the end of Novermber instead of October are you really that bothered?
Ah I had quite a good personal reason for wanting us to leave on Nov 1st, but, that aside, it doesn't really matter.
Also several mps who said they support a customs union have said they will not now
With the DUP against a customs union and others it does look as if the custom union amendment is unlilely to pass
Furthermore in the Downing Street briefing this morning the PM spokesperson has said if a custom union is attached it changes everything and the PM will stop the deal and call an election
How does the PM call an election? It is not within his power. He needs to ask the opposition parties, nicely, to hold one. And atm LD and Lab do not want one.
isam said: "The vast majority of MPs then stood at a GE promising to implement the result"
I like a lot of what you say, and the way that you say it. As a brexit neutral (narrow remain vote, almost spoilt my ballot paper) I`ve spent this weekend trying to get to grips with Boris`s deal.
It has become clear to me that his deal threatens the union in a way that May`s didn`t. But May`s deal didn`t satisfy those that won the referendum because it isn`t really Brexit (I agree).
The truth has now emerged that we cannot leave the EU to the satisfaction of those that wanted to leave it without threatening the union.
As my priority is to protect the union, I have changed my mind on a couple of areas:
1) May`s deal is better than Boris`s 2) Any deal that threatens the Union (e.g. Boris`s) must be subjected to a confirmatory referendum because of the constitutional implications that it has - which were not part of the 2016 refendum.
It takes a long deep breath to change your mind, doesn`t it.
This sounds like he's building up any old excuse to go back on his promise and vote against the deal. Incredibly transparent from Boles
Most likely way to provoke no deal.... 2nd reading passes, EU say 2 week extension to make sure all legislation passed, no further extensions and Boles and others reverse ferret in a huff and we no deal
I assume Letwin will put his amendment to the latest MV today for a similar reason as before. ...
Several people have made this point, but I don't understand it. The amendment has done its job, the letter had been sent because the Benn Act was triggered. Boris can't un-send it, nor can he do anything to frustrate the request (because of the Padfield principle). Therefore, there's no need for the same amendment to be tabled, surely?
I'm not 100% sure that the Padfield principle would apply if parliament approves an unamended MV. He's sent the letter. He could use the approval of the MV as the reason to write another one saying an extension is no longer required. I suspect the EU would reserve its position in case a No Deal was in prospect. But I can't be 100% sure. Johnson would use the uncertainty to blackmail MPs to pass the WAB in short order. Letwin demands 100% certainty that No Deal won't happen.
I don't think that's right, because the Benn Act already takes account of the possibility that, after an extension is requested or even granted, the Withdrawal Agreement can specify leaving the EU at an earlier date (in accordance with Article 50). But IANAL, let alone a constitutional L!
IANAL either but I think you are right about the Benn Act.
My point is that there is still a small amount of residual uncertainty that passing the MV today would increase. We know Johnson uses that uncertainty to blackmail MPs using the prospect of No Deal if they do not comply. Letwin will want to close that door, not to the blackmail itself but to the blackmail failing. But I think Bercow will do it for him.
Also several mps who said they support a customs union have said they will not now
With the DUP against a customs union and others it does look as if the custom union amendment is unlilely to pass
Furthermore in the Downing Street briefing this morning the PM spokesperson has said if a custom union is attached it changes everything and the PM will stop the deal and call an election
How does the PM call an election? It is not within his power. He needs to ask the opposition parties, nicely, to hold one. And atm LD and Lab do not want one.
Whenever someone says 'call an election' I try to give benefit of the doubt that they mean calling 'for' one. But he already has so the spokesman may be talking nonsense .
Also several mps who said they support a customs union have said they will not now
With the DUP against a customs union and others it does look as if the custom union amendment is unlilely to pass
Furthermore in the Downing Street briefing this morning the PM spokesperson has said if a custom union is attached it changes everything and the PM will stop the deal and call an election
How does the PM call an election? It is not within his power. He needs to ask the opposition parties, nicely, to hold one. And atm LD and Lab do not want one.
I expect he would consult the EU leaders and they would agree to the PM request for time for a GE. And if the mps decide not to the EU withdraws the extension
Does no one else find it strange how nuts the DUP have been going this week
Well the DUP are generally quite strange and "enraged" seems to be their default position.
That said you could well be on to something here.
The deal is a bloody good one for NI but DUP have to play to their voters who are probably even madder than the official DUP lol!
I think they'll go for the deal if they're given a bridge. It's the right thing to do. NI, massive bridge connecting it with the mainland, shows commitment to its future presence in the Union.
Everyone is being blindsided by the 31st October deadline. What is absolutely clear is that there is a majority in the Commons to pass the WA. Given that - and given the DUP opposition to a customs union - the WA is going to pass. No wrecking amendments are going to be voted through. If it takes a week or so into November for that to happen, what does it matter?
Let's see what happens.
So far the establishment elite have blocked Brexit at every turn. I'll believe it when I see it.
We voted to Leave
The vast majority of MPs then stood at a GE promising to implement the result
Those MPs demanded a vote on the deal, and voted NO three times.
Now a deal is likely to pass
The MPs vote to not have a vote
And people have convinced themselves it isn't a stitch up. Lord have mercy
Now that No Deal is off the table, there is absolutely no reason not to vote the Johnson deal through. And it will go through. The diehard Remainers have run out of options. But the WA does also need to be scrutinised. It is a very big deal and not something that can just be waved through. If that means leaving at the end of November instead of October are you really that bothered?
No but Johnson is. And he will look to any means to rush the WAB through with a possible threat of No Deal which is enhanced by a yes vote to the MV today.
Two problems with that. Inadequate scrutiny of the WAB and a small chance of an accidental No Deal in this bluffing game.
Also several mps who said they support a customs union have said they will not now
With the DUP against a customs union and others it does look as if the custom union amendment is unlilely to pass
Furthermore in the Downing Street briefing this morning the PM spokesperson has said if a custom union is attached it changes everything and the PM will stop the deal and call an election
How does the PM call an election? It is not within his power. He needs to ask the opposition parties, nicely, to hold one. And atm LD and Lab do not want one.
I expect he would consult the EU leaders and they would agree to the PM request for time for a GE. And if the mps decide not to the EU withdraws the extension
I sincerely doubt the EU would end an extension if we didn't hold a GE. Can you imagine the headlines if this wasn't a Brexit thing: "EU demands election before negotiations can continue - Tyrants don't respect our duly elected parliament"...
Also several mps who said they support a customs union have said they will not now
With the DUP against a customs union and others it does look as if the custom union amendment is unlilely to pass
Furthermore in the Downing Street briefing this morning the PM spokesperson has said if a custom union is attached it changes everything and the PM will stop the deal and call an election
How many more times do some of us on here have to explain he cant just call a GE.. The FTPA means he needs a 2/3rd majority in the HoC. He could of course resign but wont do that either so in effect he is trapped. People please wake up to this.
Also several mps who said they support a customs union have said they will not now
With the DUP against a customs union and others it does look as if the custom union amendment is unlilely to pass
Furthermore in the Downing Street briefing this morning the PM spokesperson has said if a custom union is attached it changes everything and the PM will stop the deal and call an election
We are though, as discussed a little while ago, approaching the point at which an election becomes impracticable. While we're not there yet, Dec 19th, for example, would probably be unlikely to enthuse voters. Can we manage with a three-week campaign, as in Feb. '74?
The not sending a letter thing is honestly the biggest load of guff. I get a feeling there are actually quite a lot of people disappointed that he DID send the letter
The people who should be disappointed are the ones who believed him when he said he wouldn't
Taking people for fools his entire life
It was a negotiating strategy.
Parliament attempted to hamstring that approach.
It resulted in a deal despite their best efforts.
It's funny how opponents of Leave/Boris don't get this. Repeatedly saying we were leaving by Oct 31 has got us a deal that will pass (if they let anyone vote on it). Who cares if its in November or December?
If someone values a house at 500k and bids 400k for it, they haven't mugged themselves off if they end up buying it for 475k eventually. The joke is on the people who wanted to buy it, but are laughing at him for paying the sale price, whilst they sit in a house they don't like.
It worked (possibly) in conjunction with the Benn Act by the mechanism of Boris boxing himself in so much that he was compelled to drop his entire set of objections to the existing deal except for going back to the EU's previous offer of a special arrangement for NI, which was always available (in fact, preferred by the EU). A curious sort of victory.
Obviously that doesn't bother you, but it ought to.
More concerning that he lied was the thought process behind it.
The best way to become PM was to lie to the Tory selectorate. Those not willing to lie were not seen as credible to the people selecting the PM. It was clearly a lie throughout. The EU knew it was lie so it wasnt ever going to be a particularly good negotiating strategy.
The negotiation strategy "success" was to choose an option the PM had previously described as dangerous, feeble, pathetic, unstable, an outrage, forfeiting democracy, a polished turd, and akin to wearing a suicide vest.
Everyone is being blindsided by the 31st October deadline. What is absolutely clear is that there is a majority in the Commons to pass the WA. Given that - and given the DUP opposition to a customs union - the WA is going to pass. No wrecking amendments are going to be voted through. If it takes a week or so into November for that to happen, what does it matter?
Let's see what happens.
So far the establishment elite have blocked Brexit at every turn. I'll believe it when I see it.
We voted to Leave
The vast majority of MPs then stood at a GE promising to implement the result
Those MPs demanded a vote on the deal, and voted NO three times.
Now a deal is likely to pass
The MPs vote to not have a vote
And people have convinced themselves it isn't a stitch up. Lord have mercy
Now that No Deal is off the table, there is absolutely no reason not to vote the Johnson deal through. And it will go through. The diehard Remainers have run out of options. But the WA does also need to be scrutinised. It is a very big deal and not something that can just be waved through. If that means leaving at the end of Novermber instead of October are you really that bothered?
Ah I had quite a good personal reason for wanting us to leave on Nov 1st, but, that aside, it doesn't really matter.
*Or Oct 31st even!
I'm looking forward to Halloween pumpkins made into effigies of our glorious speaker when we final exit.
Also several mps who said they support a customs union have said they will not now
With the DUP against a customs union and others it does look as if the custom union amendment is unlilely to pass
Furthermore in the Downing Street briefing this morning the PM spokesperson has said if a custom union is attached it changes everything and the PM will stop the deal and call an election
How many more times do some of us on here have to explain he cant just call a GE.. The FTPA means he needs a 2/3rd majority in the HoC. He could of course resign but wont do that either so in effect he is trapped. People please wake up to this.
But he can by a one line amendment to the FTPA and a simple majority
I don't think trade talks will dominate the political agenda / public share of mind nearly as much though
Its the symbolism of us leaving the EU that matters more to most people
The effectiveness (or otherwise) of the points-based immigration controls will be much more to the front of public perceptuion on whether Brexit is working.
Cue Labour, LibDem, SNP, Green, Plaid, DUP dicking about trying to bolt unacceptable elements onto it until 10.59 pm, 31st October.....
How does the UK adding unacceptable elements to the bill change what we can actually sign on October 31?
It almost certainly doesn't but it can add additional safeguards to UK legislation such as ensuring any FTA has to be approved by parliament.
I know a subsequent government with a large majority can change UK legislation but repealing that particular law might be difficult to get through the house.
Can't see Bercow sticking around, those seeking to succeed him wouldn't be best pleased. I'm quite surprised he has decided to stand down in the first place, he could have easily dug his heels in but it's too late for him to turn the clock back now.
Mr. Brom, aye. The Pussyfooting Parliament will probably vote for whatever avoids them actually making a decision, though.
It was always thus. Thankfully they cannot buy time forever and the mood music seems to be leaning towards the impasse ending.
I think we may all be underestimating the appetite Parliament collectively has for this to continue indefinitely.
I can’t see how Boris gets an election any time soon.
SNP might want an election before Alex is in court for alleged sex crimes at the end of January.
Lib-Dems will be up for it as they expect to make gains.
Not sure what DUP would do.
Con + SNP + Lib-Dem might be enough for a one line bill.
I was talking to a Lib Dem MP recently who told me that they aren't seeking an election soon. They think they will gain seats but there're worried about the Conservatives flopping over the line thanks to Corbyn's unpopularity. What they really want is Corbyn gone.
That sounds odd.
If Jezza goes a lot of Lab > Lib-Dem switchers could go back to Labour and if someone like Starmer takes over a lot of Con > Lib-Dem Remain switchers might be tempted to go to Labour too.
For the Lib-Dems it would be much better to have an election with Jezza still leading Lab I'd have thought?
Maybe they'd rather provide the C&S to a Lab-SNP-LD government than see another 1983 result. Current polls don't lead to a Lab-SNP-LD govt.
More concerning that he lied was the thought process behind it.
The best way to become PM was to lie to the Tory selectorate. Those not willing to lie were not seen as credible to the people selecting the PM. It was clearly a lie throughout. The EU knew it was lie so it wasnt ever going to be a particularly good negotiating strategy.
The negotiation strategy "success" was to choose an option the PM had previously described as dangerous, feeble, pathetic, unstable, an outrage, forfeiting democracy, a polished turd, and akin to wearing a suicide vest.
Comments
If Jezza goes a lot of Lab > Lib-Dem switchers could go back to Labour and if someone like Starmer takes over a lot of Con > Lib-Dem Remain switchers might be tempted to go to Labour too.
For the Lib-Dems it would be much better to have an election with Jezza still leading Lab I'd have thought?
You either decriminalise drugs, tax them and use the money for addiction treatment, or you go down the full Thailand/Singapore/Dubai route of absolutely zero tolerance and life sentences for anything more than personal use. I suspect the more liberal option would be the way for the UK to go.
https://twitter.com/woodstockjag/status/1186215430605737984
For several years I managed the pharmacy end of the Needle Exchange scheme ion the district where I worked, which was, we found popular; users were aware of the dangers. The other two big advantages of legalisation of course would be quality control and the opportunity for taxation.
Alice has gone through the looking glass.
Heard Justine Greening on R4 this morning talking about her hope for a 2nd referendum. She mentioned her discussions with parliamentary colleagues on the issue and said that "there is a sense, actually, that this needs to be decisioned"
I'm sure this sort of anthimeria* is part of the evolution of the language, but I always hate to hear them for at least the first few times.
*learnt this word so I didn't have to say "verbing"
So far the establishment elite have blocked Brexit at every turn. I'll believe it when I see it.
FFA BTW would have won hands down and killed off indy for decades. Another of Mr Cameron's big mistakes, ruling it out in (IIRC) 2013.
The vast majority of MPs then stood at a GE promising to implement the result
Those MPs demanded a vote on the deal, and voted NO three times.
Now a deal is likely to pass
The MPs vote to not have a vote
And people have convinced themselves it isn't a stitch up. Lord have mercy
It might not be the way you would play it, but it has its own logic.
I suppose once it has been decisioned it can be actioned.
Ms Greening should be deselected for this.
If a GE arrives before the UK's exit is agreed then the leave vote will coalesce predominantly around the Tories (bar some no-go areas where TBP would be the challenge to Lab).
The problem for Lab/LD's plus assorted minors of course is they are fishing in the same electoral pond.
Voting through the deal prior to a GE is in the two main parties interests but works against the LD's and SNP.
I do not see how it works to ban specific words because it is all about context. The offence - if there is one - is presumably incitement to break the law. You can only assess this by listening to the whole track inc the video and asking yourself, "Does that incite a person to break the law?" If the answer is "Yes" then LOCK THAT RAPPER UP! Otherwise, he must free to carry on going about his everyday rapping.
Parliament attempted to hamstring that approach.
It resulted in a deal despite their best efforts.
The only tweak is that isn't not about purity.
The DUP slaughtered the UUP for agreeing the GFA. The UUP has been limbering up to kill the DUP over the WA. Now the DUP can vote against the WA (and hence see off the UUP) safe in the knowledge that it will go through anyway.
4D chess. Or something
If someone values a house at 500k and bids 400k for it, they haven't mugged themselves off if they end up buying it for 475k eventually. The joke is on the people who wanted to buy it, but are laughing at him for paying the sale price, whilst they sit in a house they don't like.
It's like those words were incitement to murder or harming others directly.i
Queens speech votes will not happen this week
Also several mps who said they support a customs union have said they will not now
With the DUP against a customs union and others it does look as if the custom union amendment is unlilely to pass
Furthermore in the Downing Street briefing this morning the PM spokesperson has said if a custom union is attached it changes everything and the PM will stop the deal and call an election
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat
A sane Labour leader would enable centrist voters in LD target seats to vote Lib Dem without worrying about who'll end up in No 10. After all, the Lib Dems' rise to prominence first came when Blair was leading Labour.
Right now, I suspect the Lib Dems would be best served if Labour were led by someone broadly centre-left but not overly telegenic. Keir Starmer, for example.
His answer was a flat out lie.
Obviously that doesn't bother you, but it ought to.
Now stand in the corner facing the wall.
*Or Oct 31st even!
I like a lot of what you say, and the way that you say it. As a brexit neutral (narrow remain vote, almost spoilt my ballot paper) I`ve spent this weekend trying to get to grips with Boris`s deal.
It has become clear to me that his deal threatens the union in a way that May`s didn`t. But May`s deal didn`t satisfy those that won the referendum because it isn`t really Brexit (I agree).
The truth has now emerged that we cannot leave the EU to the satisfaction of those that wanted to leave it without threatening the union.
As my priority is to protect the union, I have changed my mind on a couple of areas:
1) May`s deal is better than Boris`s
2) Any deal that threatens the Union (e.g. Boris`s) must be subjected to a confirmatory referendum because of the constitutional implications that it has - which were not part of the 2016 refendum.
It takes a long deep breath to change your mind, doesn`t it.
My point is that there is still a small amount of residual uncertainty that passing the MV today would increase. We know Johnson uses that uncertainty to blackmail MPs using the prospect of No Deal if they do not comply. Letwin will want to close that door, not to the blackmail itself but to the blackmail failing. But I think Bercow will do it for him.
Two problems with that. Inadequate scrutiny of the WAB and a small chance of an accidental No Deal in this bluffing game.
Yes, that's how you "get it done" boys...
The FTPA means he needs a 2/3rd majority in the HoC.
He could of course resign but wont do that either so in effect he is trapped. People please wake up to this.
Nah.....
The best way to become PM was to lie to the Tory selectorate. Those not willing to lie were not seen as credible to the people selecting the PM. It was clearly a lie throughout. The EU knew it was lie so it wasnt ever going to be a particularly good negotiating strategy.
The negotiation strategy "success" was to choose an option the PM had previously described as dangerous, feeble, pathetic, unstable, an outrage, forfeiting democracy, a polished turd, and akin to wearing a suicide vest.
I know a subsequent government with a large majority can change UK legislation but repealing that particular law might be difficult to get through the house.