Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The loss of DUP support means Johnson needs to make 10 more ga

245

Comments

  • eek said:

    eek said:

    I suspect no Member State could ever agree to the proposition that it should be prevented from removing persons who are unable to demonstrate their right to do so, despite 2 (or in the case of a deal 3) years to do so.
    Then it should be made much, much, much simpler and easier to demonstrate that right.

    The system May designed is a farce. Why should EU residents living here have to have a record of every trip out of the country they ever made when that wasn't a requirement when they made it? And all the other farces.

    System should be much simpler.

    Question 1: Are you an EU citizen.
    Question 2: Do you live here?

    Here is your Settled Status.
    You can't do that as Leavers voted for those people to leave. How dare you make it easy for them to stay.

    For most leavers, every possible hurdle must be used to ensure everyone they don't know can't stay in the UK.

    Sorry to be blunt but that is the attitude of every leaver I know. It's always we don't want you here but Patel who runs the corner shop and Marius who helps in are lovely why do they have to leave.
    It is quite categorically not my view
    So why did you vote to Leave?
    I did not vote leave, I voted remain but respect the vote subject to a deal which we now have
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Stocky said:

    OllyT said "My money is on leaving with Johnson's deal followed fairly quickly by a GE with a Tory majority."

    Please can you explain where this mythical GE is coming from?

    Of course, the Opposition can thwart an election till 5 May 2022, if they all wish.

    The question is whether that is electorally sensible. My view is it is not.
  • eek said:

    eek said:

    I suspect no Member State could ever agree to the proposition that it should be prevented from removing persons who are unable to demonstrate their right to do so, despite 2 (or in the case of a deal 3) years to do so.
    Then it should be made much, much, much simpler and easier to demonstrate that right.

    The system May designed is a farce. Why should EU residents living here have to have a record of every trip out of the country they ever made when that wasn't a requirement when they made it? And all the other farces.

    System should be much simpler.

    Question 1: Are you an EU citizen.
    Question 2: Do you live here?

    Here is your Settled Status.
    You can't do that as Leavers voted for those people to leave. How dare you make it easy for them to stay.

    For most leavers, every possible hurdle must be used to ensure everyone they don't know can't stay in the UK.

    Sorry to be blunt but that is the attitude of every leaver I know. It's always we don't want you here but Patel who runs the corner shop and Marius who helps in are lovely why do they have to leave.
    It is quite categorically not my view
    So why did you vote to Leave?
    He didn't. And it wasn't part of the Leave campaign it is bullshit that you are spinning.

    I did vote leave and it is not my view and I don't know any leaver who believes that. Seems to be some fevered imagination of yours that you have come up with. Seek help.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_P said:

    Labour are in danger of turning brexit into their poll tax

    This is exactly backwards

    Brexit is BoZo's poll tax.

    He owns it, 100%. If it happens (I think it will), he will own the subsequent fall out.

    Brexit will be at least as despised as the Poll tax, and the Tories will suffer for it.
    Agreed. Sad to say I think Big_G’s Tory tribalism has reasserted itself.
    The party has re-united and so I of course I will rejoin. Boris has achieved a deal and stops no deal on the 31st . That was my demand and it was why the sacking of the 21 prompted my resignation.

    All but three of them are now firmly behind Boris so why would I not be happy to see my party unite
    But Boris is still quite happy to No Deal if parliament will let him, so I'd hold off for a bit.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405
    edited October 2019

    eek said:

    I suspect no Member State could ever agree to the proposition that it should be prevented from removing persons who are unable to demonstrate their right to do so, despite 2 (or in the case of a deal 3) years to do so.
    Then it should be made much, much, much simpler and easier to demonstrate that right.

    The system May designed is a farce. Why should EU residents living here have to have a record of every trip out of the country they ever made when that wasn't a requirement when they made it? And all the other farces.

    System should be much simpler.

    Question 1: Are you an EU citizen.
    Question 2: Do you live here?

    Here is your Settled Status.
    You can't do that as Leavers voted for those people to leave. How dare you make it easy for them to stay.

    For most leavers, every possible hurdle must be used to ensure everyone they don't know can't stay in the UK.

    Sorry to be blunt but that is the attitude of every leaver I know. It's always we don't want you here but Patel who runs the corner shop and Marius who helps in are lovely why do they have to leave.
    Leavers didn't vote for anyone living here to leave.

    Leavers voted if anything migration-related to be able to control future migration, not to eject anyone already living here.
    Ask that question in Boston, Hartlepool, Leyland or Stoke - I suspect (heck I know from focus groups) that their opinions you will hear there tie in with my argument far more than yours or BigG's.

    Heck I hear weekly about people being asked why they haven't left yet.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751

    Mr. Moonshine, I haven't seen Solo.

    I have seen The Last Jedi. Whilst not quite the abomination others have said it remains a very poor film. The tone is all over the place (dreadfully serious war situation/slapstick idiocy hopelessly intermingled early on, for example). Not to mention the jarring dialogue in the throne room scene for the 'twist'.

    And that's before we get to the insanity of a trilogy that's not even planned as a trilogy.

    Solo is an enjoyable enough romp and is worth visiting if only for Childish Gambino's portrayal of Young Lando.

    Then again I'm of the view that for adults to enjoy these films, they need to first recognise that they are all generally fairly poor when judged by a certain standard. Still entertaining though.

    How could you not be entertained by Kylo Ren brooding about the place with his impossibly high trousers before bedtime? Or Luke Skywalker milking a weird alien? Or Chewy barbecuing those cute fluffy things that every 7 year was given for Christmas that year? Some great visuals in there too. People hold Star Wars up to too high a standard.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,236
    Banterman said:

    Scott_P said:
    I said last night this was the section that would stop the bill passing.
    Yet again, idiot mp's who don't understand how to negotiate. There has to be the ability to walk away from a proposed deal if it's a bad deal. That's what this clause is about.

    Secondly, if there isn't an election by the end of 2020, this dead parliament will have crumbled into irrelevant dust. Labour will be in power after an election, won't they and be able to use their expert negotiation skills to get a great deal!
    That clause is clearly predicated on the assumption that there will be a majority Tory government in a year's time.

    Election or no election, there is no way of guaranteeing that.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704

    eek said:

    eek said:

    I suspect no Member State could ever agree to the proposition that it should be prevented from removing persons who are unable to demonstrate their right to do so, despite 2 (or in the case of a deal 3) years to do so.
    Then it should be made much, much, much simpler and easier to demonstrate that right.

    The system May designed is a farce. Why should EU residents living here have to have a record of every trip out of the country they ever made when that wasn't a requirement when they made it? And all the other farces.

    System should be much simpler.

    Question 1: Are you an EU citizen.
    Question 2: Do you live here?

    Here is your Settled Status.
    You can't do that as Leavers voted for those people to leave. How dare you make it easy for them to stay.

    For most leavers, every possible hurdle must be used to ensure everyone they don't know can't stay in the UK.

    Sorry to be blunt but that is the attitude of every leaver I know. It's always we don't want you here but Patel who runs the corner shop and Marius who helps in are lovely why do they have to leave.
    It is quite categorically not my view
    So why did you vote to Leave?
    I did not vote leave, I voted remain but respect the vote subject to a deal which we now have
    As you have said many many times before. Surprised you have to be asked that question any more.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,133
    edited October 2019

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_P said:

    Labour are in danger of turning brexit into their poll tax

    This is exactly backwards

    Brexit is BoZo's poll tax.

    He owns it, 100%. If it happens (I think it will), he will own the subsequent fall out.

    Brexit will be at least as despised as the Poll tax, and the Tories will suffer for it.
    Agreed. Sad to say I think Big_G’s Tory tribalism has reasserted itself.
    The party has re-united and so I of course I will rejoin. Boris has achieved a deal and stops no deal on the 31st . That was my demand and it was why the sacking of the 21 prompted my resignation.

    All but three of them are now firmly behind Boris so why would I not be happy to see my party unite
    But Boris is still quite happy to No Deal if parliament will let him, so I'd hold off for a bit.
    Boris is not but some ERG maybe.

    The stand out moment for me from the EU Council was Boris receiving applause from the leaders and the clear friendship that has formed between Macron and Varadkar

    This bodes well for the future FFA
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Mr. Eek, revoke (or a referendum) would actually require Parliament to make a decision.
  • eek said:

    eek said:

    I suspect no Member State could ever agree to the proposition that it should be prevented from removing persons who are unable to demonstrate their right to do so, despite 2 (or in the case of a deal 3) years to do so.
    Then it should be made much, much, much simpler and easier to demonstrate that right.

    The system May designed is a farce. Why should EU residents living here have to have a record of every trip out of the country they ever made when that wasn't a requirement when they made it? And all the other farces.

    System should be much simpler.

    Question 1: Are you an EU citizen.
    Question 2: Do you live here?

    Here is your Settled Status.
    You can't do that as Leavers voted for those people to leave. How dare you make it easy for them to stay.

    For most leavers, every possible hurdle must be used to ensure everyone they don't know can't stay in the UK.

    Sorry to be blunt but that is the attitude of every leaver I know. It's always we don't want you here but Patel who runs the corner shop and Marius who helps in are lovely why do they have to leave.
    Leavers didn't vote for anyone living here to leave.

    Leavers voted if anything migration-related to be able to control future migration, not to eject anyone already living here.
    Ask that question in Boston, Hartlepool, Leyland or Stoke - I suspect (heck I know from focus groups) that their opinions you will hear there tie in with my argument far more than yours or BigG's.

    Heck I hear weekly about people being asked why they haven't left yet.
    Bullshit. You can suspect all the bullshit you want, that does not represent leavers.

    If you're going to cast racist aspersions then how about rather than naming Midlands and Northern towns and cities then going vague you name names. There's dozens of leave voters here, if "every leaver" supports turfing out people who legally live here you shouldn't have any difficulty naming one here with that view.

    Or you can have some decency to admit it was a vile nasty aspersion that has no grounding in reality.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Nigelb said:


    If those are the election results then there'll be a *lot* of Con gains in the Midlands, North, Wales and less prosperous southern towns. After all, if the Tories underperform in some seats where there's a strong LD or SNP showing, that means they must overperform elsewhere. (Although note that there's a huge, if probably largely notional, Con-LD swing anyway which would always make itself felt in Con-LD marginals).

    i think that is a correct reading of the situation now. We only have to look at which seats Labour MPs are standing down in to see that the current MPs don't think they will hold Wrexham, or Newcastle-under-Lyme, or Ashfield.

    I think the Remainer's plan of continually thwarting Brexit is likely to end up with a harder Brexit in the long run.

    Remainers (like the DUP) would have been better advised to vote for May's deal...
    There are plenty of us who reluctantly agreed with precisely that, and had she played a better hand in Parliament, rather than conducting the process as though she had a strong majority, she might well have got it through.

    The idea that the DUP would ever have backed May's deal, is a fantasy which contributed to her failed strategy.

    Remainers like the DUP... LOL.
    My point is that the DUP are faced with a number of unpalatable options.

    They may come to regret saying No to May.

    Ditto Remainers. They may come to regret saying No to May.

    We won't know till the end, but I think the endless thwarting of Brexit means we will leave with a Harder Brexit in the long run.

    To use the hackneyed phrase, Dom has war-gamed this -- and it seems to me at the moment that he has war-gamed it correctly.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Mr. Moonshine, those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make praise The Last Jedi.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405

    eek said:

    eek said:

    I suspect no Member State could ever agree to the proposition that it should be prevented from removing persons who are unable to demonstrate their right to do so, despite 2 (or in the case of a deal 3) years to do so.
    Then it should be made much, much, much simpler and easier to demonstrate that right.

    The system May designed is a farce. Why should EU residents living here have to have a record of every trip out of the country they ever made when that wasn't a requirement when they made it? And all the other farces.

    System should be much simpler.

    Question 1: Are you an EU citizen.
    Question 2: Do you live here?

    Here is your Settled Status.
    You can't do that as Leavers voted for those people to leave. How dare you make it easy for them to stay.

    For most leavers, every possible hurdle must be used to ensure everyone they don't know can't stay in the UK.

    Sorry to be blunt but that is the attitude of every leaver I know. It's always we don't want you here but Patel who runs the corner shop and Marius who helps in are lovely why do they have to leave.
    It is quite categorically not my view
    So why did you vote to Leave?
    I did not vote leave, I voted remain but respect the vote subject to a deal which we now have
    So you are happy for a deal that results in NI having to fill in paperwork to send anything to the UK?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    Scott_P said:

    Labour are in danger of turning brexit into their poll tax

    This is exactly backwards

    Brexit is BoZo's poll tax.

    He owns it, 100%. If it happens (I think it will), he will own the subsequent fall out.

    Brexit will be at least as despised as the Poll tax, and the Tories will suffer for it.
    It may and it may not. We cannot know how this pans out but we must leave and this is the deal that stops no deal
    Apart from Clause 30.

    You are not over the detail on this blinded by your Tory love.

    To me that Clause if not amended makes a Tory No Deal almost certain at the end of 2020.

  • Nigelb said:

    Scott_P said:

    Labour are in danger of turning brexit into their poll tax

    This is exactly backwards

    Brexit is BoZo's poll tax.

    He owns it, 100%. If it happens (I think it will), he will own the subsequent fall out.

    Brexit will be at least as despised as the Poll tax, and the Tories will suffer for it.
    Agreed. Sad to say I think Big_G’s Tory tribalism has reasserted itself.
    The party has re-united and so I of course I will rejoin. Boris has achieved a deal and stops no deal on the 31st . That was my demand and it was why the sacking of the 21 prompted my resignation.

    All but three of them are now firmly behind Boris so why would I not be happy to see my party unite
    But Boris is still quite happy to No Deal if parliament will let him, so I'd hold off for a bit.
    Boris is not but some ERG maybe.

    The stand out moment for me from the EU Council was Boris feceiving applause from the leaders and the clear friendship that has formed between Macron and Varadkar

    This bodes well for the future FFA
    Boris have approached our neighbours in a far better way than May ever did.

    May went in all guns blazing banging on about no deal with the EU in her Article 50 letter then folding whenever they put pressure on. She was both rude and weak.

    Boris has been toughest with his opponents at home, but with our neighbours he's been firmer in what he believes but been polite and friendly with them at all times. Good on him.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405

    Nigelb said:


    If those are the election results then there'll be a *lot* of Con gains in the Midlands, North, Wales and less prosperous southern towns. After all, if the Tories underperform in some seats where there's a strong LD or SNP showing, that means they must overperform elsewhere. (Although note that there's a huge, if probably largely notional, Con-LD swing anyway which would always make itself felt in Con-LD marginals).

    i think that is a correct reading of the situation now. We only have to look at which seats Labour MPs are standing down in to see that the current MPs don't think they will hold Wrexham, or Newcastle-under-Lyme, or Ashfield.

    I think the Remainer's plan of continually thwarting Brexit is likely to end up with a harder Brexit in the long run.

    Remainers (like the DUP) would have been better advised to vote for May's deal...
    There are plenty of us who reluctantly agreed with precisely that, and had she played a better hand in Parliament, rather than conducting the process as though she had a strong majority, she might well have got it through.

    The idea that the DUP would ever have backed May's deal, is a fantasy which contributed to her failed strategy.

    Remainers like the DUP... LOL.
    My point is that the DUP are faced with a number of unpalatable options.

    They may come to regret saying No to May.

    Ditto Remainers. They may come to regret saying No to May.

    We won't know till the end, but I think the endless thwarting of Brexit means we will leave with a Harder Brexit in the long run.

    To use the hackneyed phrase, Dom has war-gamed this -- and it seems to me at the moment that he has war-gamed it correctly.
    I believe the best thing for the opposition to do is to force Boris to withdraw the bill.

    Otherwise like the bill pass but don't let Boris have an election. In 12 months time the mess Brexit will have created will be obvious for all to see.
  • eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    I suspect no Member State could ever agree to the proposition that it should be prevented from removing persons who are unable to demonstrate their right to do so, despite 2 (or in the case of a deal 3) years to do so.
    Then it should be made much, much, much simpler and easier to demonstrate that right.

    The system May designed is a farce. Why should EU residents living here have to have a record of every trip out of the country they ever made when that wasn't a requirement when they made it? And all the other farces.

    System should be much simpler.

    Question 1: Are you an EU citizen.
    Question 2: Do you live here?

    Here is your Settled Status.
    You can't do that as Leavers voted for those people to leave. How dare you make it easy for them to stay.

    For most leavers, every possible hurdle must be used to ensure everyone they don't know can't stay in the UK.

    Sorry to be blunt but that is the attitude of every leaver I know. It's always we don't want you here but Patel who runs the corner shop and Marius who helps in are lovely why do they have to leave.
    It is quite categorically not my view
    So why did you vote to Leave?
    I did not vote leave, I voted remain but respect the vote subject to a deal which we now have
    So you are happy for a deal that results in NI having to fill in paperwork to send anything to the UK?
    Overall and listening to Irish commentators this is a very good deal for NI and it is upto the UK and EU to negotiate a FTA asap

    Apparently 80% of business and voters actually welcome the deal
  • Scott_P said:

    Labour are in danger of turning brexit into their poll tax

    This is exactly backwards

    Brexit is BoZo's poll tax.

    He owns it, 100%. If it happens (I think it will), he will own the subsequent fall out.

    Brexit will be at least as despised as the Poll tax, and the Tories will suffer for it.
    It may and it may not. We cannot know how this pans out but we must leave and this is the deal that stops no deal
    Apart from Clause 30.

    You are not over the detail on this blinded by your Tory love.

    To me that Clause if not amended makes a Tory No Deal almost certain at the end of 2020.

    I keep asking this question but keep getting ignored. Clause 30 seems little different to clause 50(3) in operation.

    If in the future Parliament doesn't wish us to leave without an extension then what prevents Parliament from passing a future Benn Act to demand an extension?

    And if in the future Parliament doesn't want to demand an extension then Clause 30 is moot.

    So what's the big deal?
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751

    Mr. Moonshine, those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make praise The Last Jedi.

    I'd better be careful on my way home then. Don't want to suffer a jetpack malfunction and accidentally fall into a sarlacc pit to be slowly digested over a thousand years.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,006
    eek said:

    Stocky said:

    Question: If MPs attempt to amend the deal so that it is subject to a confirmatory referendum, and assuming this amendment is passes, what then?

    Am I correct in thinking that a referendum has to be part of primary legislation which can only be forwarded by the government of the day?

    Putting it another way: for there to be a referendum requires the government to want one.

    If a referendum passes Boris will withdraw the bill

    However, the numbers are not there and it is generally accepted that it will not pass
    This bill also won't pass. See TSE's post below and you will see that it merely delays No Deal by 15 months.

    No party and I suspect most of the Tory rebels are not going to support that clause.

    So once again we are in limbo but it's now certain Bozo can't be trusted.
    I think that is correct, that clause is going to be very significant. We know that the ERG strategy will be try to bring about No Deal by default and nobody trusts Johnson to stop them. It's clear that that is why they have all jumped on board Johnson's deal without a murmur of protest

    Even if the deal still does get through then this issue will feature very prominently in the upcoming GE and will make it harder for Johnson to win a big majority. He can't rule out No Deal happening because he can't guarantee a trade deal will be in place at the end of the transition period. Any attempts at a deal will be subject to all the usual ERG wrecking tactics.

    Every Tory candidate and politician is going to get asked the same question "Are you prepared to take us out with no deal at the end of the transition period?"
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772

    Morning Brexit watchers,

    Do we have a rough timetable for today's popcorn consumption?

    Looks like 7.00pm is the second reading vote immediately followed by the programme motion
    Thanks.
  • Scott_P said:

    Labour are in danger of turning brexit into their poll tax

    This is exactly backwards

    Brexit is BoZo's poll tax.

    He owns it, 100%. If it happens (I think it will), he will own the subsequent fall out.

    Brexit will be at least as despised as the Poll tax, and the Tories will suffer for it.
    It may and it may not. We cannot know how this pans out but we must leave and this is the deal that stops no deal
    Apart from Clause 30.

    You are not over the detail on this blinded by your Tory love.

    To me that Clause if not amended makes a Tory No Deal almost certain at the end of 2020.

    BJO. I am over this detail but as many have said, if necessary the HOC can put in place another Benn act
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,192

    Scott_P said:

    Labour are in danger of turning brexit into their poll tax

    This is exactly backwards

    Brexit is BoZo's poll tax.

    He owns it, 100%. If it happens (I think it will), he will own the subsequent fall out.

    Brexit will be at least as despised as the Poll tax, and the Tories will suffer for it.
    It may and it may not. We cannot know how this pans out but we must leave and this is the deal that stops no deal
    Apart from Clause 30.

    You are not over the detail on this blinded by your Tory love.

    To me that Clause if not amended makes a Tory No Deal almost certain at the end of 2020.

    BJO. I am over this detail but as many have said, if necessary the HOC can put in place another Benn act
    Surely simpler to amend Clause 30.
    and haven't we been told how it's all the personal fault of Bercow that the Benn act exists? Bercow will be gone.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,003
    edited October 2019
    moonshine said:

    fall into a sarlacc pit to be slowly digested over a thousand years.

    And another Brexit metaphor presents itself.
  • So germany is in recession and EU are going to grant an extension...HoC can kicking incoming.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751
    OllyT said:

    eek said:

    Stocky said:

    Question: If MPs attempt to amend the deal so that it is subject to a confirmatory referendum, and assuming this amendment is passes, what then?

    Am I correct in thinking that a referendum has to be part of primary legislation which can only be forwarded by the government of the day?

    Putting it another way: for there to be a referendum requires the government to want one.

    If a referendum passes Boris will withdraw the bill

    However, the numbers are not there and it is generally accepted that it will not pass
    This bill also won't pass. See TSE's post below and you will see that it merely delays No Deal by 15 months.

    No party and I suspect most of the Tory rebels are not going to support that clause.

    So once again we are in limbo but it's now certain Bozo can't be trusted.
    I think that is correct, that clause is going to be very significant. We know that the ERG strategy will be try to bring about No Deal by default and nobody trusts Johnson to stop them. It's clear that that is why they have all jumped on board Johnson's deal without a murmur of protest

    Even if the deal still does get through then this issue will feature very prominently in the upcoming GE and will make it harder for Johnson to win a big majority. He can't rule out No Deal happening because he can't guarantee a trade deal will be in place at the end of the transition period. Any attempts at a deal will be subject to all the usual ERG wrecking tactics.

    Every Tory candidate and politician is going to get asked the same question "Are you prepared to take us out with no deal at the end of the transition period?"
    If the government doesn't want to exit without a free trade deal in Dec 2020, and the entire opposition don't want to exit without a free trade deal in Dec 2020, what difference do 30 ERGers make?

    It should also be noted that No Deal pre-Withdrawal Agreement and "No-Deal" in the free trade negotiations do not mean the same thing or have anywhere near the same outcome.

    The "No Deal Trap Door" is a storm in a teacup. Far more likely that Boris sells out the fishermen for something else in return in the FTA. It should be clear to everyone now that he really did mean it when he said he wanted to get a Deal!
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751

    moonshine said:

    fall into a sarlacc pit to be slowly digested over a thousand years.

    And another Brexit metaphor presents itself.
    Turmoil has engulfed the
    Galactic Republic. The taxation
    of trade routes to outlying star
    systems is in dispute.

    Hoping to resolve the matter
    with a blockade of deadly
    battleships, the greedy Trade
    Federation has stopped all
    shipping to the small planet
    of Naboo.

    While the Congress of the
    Republic endlessly debates
    this alarming chain of events,
    the Supreme Chancellor has
    secretly dispatched two Jedi
    Knights, the guardians of
    peace and justice in the
    galaxy, to settle the conflict...
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_P said:

    Labour are in danger of turning brexit into their poll tax

    This is exactly backwards

    Brexit is BoZo's poll tax.

    He owns it, 100%. If it happens (I think it will), he will own the subsequent fall out.

    Brexit will be at least as despised as the Poll tax, and the Tories will suffer for it.
    Agreed. Sad to say I think Big_G’s Tory tribalism has reasserted itself.
    The party has re-united and so I of course I will rejoin. Boris has achieved a deal and stops no deal on the 31st . That was my demand and it was why the sacking of the 21 prompted my resignation.

    All but three of them are now firmly behind Boris so why would I not be happy to see my party unite
    But Boris is still quite happy to No Deal if parliament will let him, so I'd hold off for a bit.
    Boris is not but some ERG maybe.

    The stand out moment for me from the EU Council was Boris feceiving applause from the leaders and the clear friendship that has formed between Macron and Varadkar

    This bodes well for the future FFA
    Boris have approached our neighbours in a far better way than May ever did.

    May went in all guns blazing banging on about no deal with the EU in her Article 50 letter then folding whenever they put pressure on. She was both rude and weak.

    Boris has been toughest with his opponents at home, but with our neighbours he's been firmer in what he believes but been polite and friendly with them at all times. Good on him.
    Varadkar can't believe his luck as this could point to a Reunited Ireland far sooner than expected. No wonder he's friendly.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    I'm willing to bet that if the 'months' of scrutiny needed were reduced to a few days that would mean Brexit postponed by a fortnight suddenly it would be abs fabs
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,006
    Stocky said:

    OllyT said "My money is on leaving with Johnson's deal followed fairly quickly by a GE with a Tory majority."

    Please can you explain where this mythical GE is coming from?

    There will be a GE within the next 6 months, the current situation is unsustainable. Bozo will want to capitalise on his poll leads once Brexit is done and Labour would look ridiculous if they opposed it. There were solid reasons for the opposition parties to oppose a GE before Oct 31st. They are about to disappear
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405
    OllyT said:

    eek said:

    Stocky said:

    Question: If MPs attempt to amend the deal so that it is subject to a confirmatory referendum, and assuming this amendment is passes, what then?

    Am I correct in thinking that a referendum has to be part of primary legislation which can only be forwarded by the government of the day?

    Putting it another way: for there to be a referendum requires the government to want one.

    If a referendum passes Boris will withdraw the bill

    However, the numbers are not there and it is generally accepted that it will not pass
    This bill also won't pass. See TSE's post below and you will see that it merely delays No Deal by 15 months.

    No party and I suspect most of the Tory rebels are not going to support that clause.

    So once again we are in limbo but it's now certain Bozo can't be trusted.
    I think that is correct, that clause is going to be very significant. We know that the ERG strategy will be try to bring about No Deal by default and nobody trusts Johnson to stop them. It's clear that that is why they have all jumped on board Johnson's deal without a murmur of protest

    Even if the deal still does get through then this issue will feature very prominently in the upcoming GE and will make it harder for Johnson to win a big majority. He can't rule out No Deal happening because he can't guarantee a trade deal will be in place at the end of the transition period. Any attempts at a deal will be subject to all the usual ERG wrecking tactics.

    Every Tory candidate and politician is going to get asked the same question "Are you prepared to take us out with no deal at the end of the transition period?"
    I suspect the previous question will be something like

    Free Trade Agreements take years and years to negotiate as every word in every clause is argued about by those it impacts - further years are then required as every party involved checks and approves the agreement.

    Given that we haven't negotiated a deal in 40 years why do you think we will get any deal let alone a reasonable agreement fully agreed and signed off by every region in every EU country within 15 months.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Mr. Moonshine, the Sarlacc pit does sound like the House of Commons.

    They've been digesting the referendum result for 3 years. Just another 997 to go.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405
    OllyT said:

    Stocky said:

    OllyT said "My money is on leaving with Johnson's deal followed fairly quickly by a GE with a Tory majority."

    Please can you explain where this mythical GE is coming from?

    There will be a GE within the next 6 months, the current situation is unsustainable. Bozo will want to capitalise on his poll leads once Brexit is done and Labour would look ridiculous if they opposed it. There were solid reasons for the opposition parties to oppose a GE before Oct 31st. They are about to disappear
    How? The opposition can't win an election at the moment but the longer Boris suffers the greater their chances. Hence Labour will probably move heaven and earth to avoid an election.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,192
    Both Johnson and the people he has chosen for his cabinet have complained for years about the cost of "EU regulation" to "British business". It's one of the few things that he has been consistent about (though his arguments are totally dishonest). They need the 2020 cliff-edge to get a FTA with no guarantees on workers' rights or environment past parliament, or alternatively to get no-FTA which would allow them to scrap rights and regulations.
    No Labour MP should vote for this, how stupid would they have to be to believe Johnson's promises on these issues?
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,744
    OllyT said:

    Stocky said:

    OllyT said "My money is on leaving with Johnson's deal followed fairly quickly by a GE with a Tory majority."

    Please can you explain where this mythical GE is coming from?

    There will be a GE within the next 6 months, the current situation is unsustainable. Bozo will want to capitalise on his poll leads once Brexit is done and Labour would look ridiculous if they opposed it. There were solid reasons for the opposition parties to oppose a GE before Oct 31st. They are about to disappear
    Johnson's interests are best served by the election coming before Brexit, when he can pose as the champion of 'the people' (or some of the 52% anyway), against 'the politicians'.

    Once Brexit's delivered, the issue drops right down the agenda for the time being and Corbyn will get a hearing on nationalising hairdressers or whatever again.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,504
    eek said:

    FPT

    148grss said:
    There will be hundred of gotchas like this and I suspect a lot of people are going to find ones that they really dislike.
    The solution is – as it has always been – for the UK to leave the EU but remain in the Customs Union and the Single Market.

    This is what should have been agreed three years ago – the whole thing is an utter fiasco. .
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405
    edited October 2019
    kamski said:

    Both Johnson and the people he has chosen for his cabinet have complained for years about the cost of "EU regulation" to "British business". It's one of the few things that he has been consistent about (though his arguments are totally dishonest). They need the 2020 cliff-edge to get a FTA with no guarantees on workers' rights or environment past parliament, or alternatively to get no-FTA which would allow them to scrap rights and regulations.
    No Labour MP should vote for this, how stupid would they have to be to believe Johnson's promises on these issues?

    We have less business administration than almost any other country in the world.

    And the idea that things will be easier when we leave can be seen as false in the £100m advertising campaign and on roughly every other Motorway board in the country.
  • Yorkcity said:

    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
    Yes I do and it is a risk.

    However, that is for a new HOC to deal with and the anger more delay will create on top of the already feverish attitudes is going to make mps lives very difficult and labour mps in leave seats even more so
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,236
    Possibly not - although a number of posters here were saying that was it for extensions.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914

    Nigelb said:


    If those are the election results then there'll be a *lot* of Con gains in the Midlands, North, Wales and less prosperous southern towns. After all, if the Tories underperform in some seats where there's a strong LD or SNP showing, that means they must overperform elsewhere. (Although note that there's a huge, if probably largely notional, Con-LD swing anyway which would always make itself felt in Con-LD marginals).

    i think that is a correct reading of the situation now. We only have to look at which seats Labour MPs are standing down in to see that the current MPs don't think they will hold Wrexham, or Newcastle-under-Lyme, or Ashfield.

    I think the Remainer's plan of continually thwarting Brexit is likely to end up with a harder Brexit in the long run.

    Remainers (like the DUP) would have been better advised to vote for May's deal...
    There are plenty of us who reluctantly agreed with precisely that, and had she played a better hand in Parliament, rather than conducting the process as though she had a strong majority, she might well have got it through.

    The idea that the DUP would ever have backed May's deal, is a fantasy which contributed to her failed strategy.

    Remainers like the DUP... LOL.
    My point is that the DUP are faced with a number of unpalatable options.

    They may come to regret saying No to May.

    Ditto Remainers. They may come to regret saying No to May.

    We won't know till the end, but I think the endless thwarting of Brexit means we will leave with a Harder Brexit in the long run.

    To use the hackneyed phrase, Dom has war-gamed this -- and it seems to me at the moment that he has war-gamed it correctly.
    He's not the Messiah ......
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215
    If a 2nd reading on a bill goes through but the program motion is then defeated what normally happens ?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,236

    eek said:

    FPT

    148grss said:
    There will be hundred of gotchas like this and I suspect a lot of people are going to find ones that they really dislike.
    The solution is – as it has always been – for the UK to leave the EU but remain in the Customs Union and the Single Market.

    This is what should have been agreed three years ago – the whole thing is an utter fiasco. .
    Of course.
    We could then have spent the next five years arguing about our future relations with Europe (as we will anyway), without damage to business, trade, the economy, scientific cooperation, the union, or peace in NI.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405

    Yorkcity said:

    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
    Yes I do and it is a risk.

    However, that is for a new HOC to deal with and the anger more delay will create on top of the already feverish attitudes is going to make mps lives very difficult and labour mps in leave seats even more so
    Why should we have a new HoC - we elected this one post the referendum as our representatives to decide how best to leave - and that is what they are doing.

    The fact that Parliament is as divided as the general population is surely a feature of this Parliament rather than a weakness.

    Or do you believe MPs should be delegates for their loudest (and angriest) constituents.
  • eek said:

    OllyT said:

    Stocky said:

    OllyT said "My money is on leaving with Johnson's deal followed fairly quickly by a GE with a Tory majority."

    Please can you explain where this mythical GE is coming from?

    There will be a GE within the next 6 months, the current situation is unsustainable. Bozo will want to capitalise on his poll leads once Brexit is done and Labour would look ridiculous if they opposed it. There were solid reasons for the opposition parties to oppose a GE before Oct 31st. They are about to disappear
    How? The opposition can't win an election at the moment but the longer Boris suffers the greater their chances. Hence Labour will probably move heaven and earth to avoid an election.
    The longer this has dragged on since Boris took over the better the Tories ratings, especially relative to Labour. Boris is polling better now than he was when he called for the election and Corbyn ran scared.

    It takes a lot of hubris to assume making the public suffer more of this nonsense will endear them to the ones dragging this on.
  • Scott_P said:
    There's a shock.

    Would be more relevant if Scottish legislature's consent was needed, wanted or asked for.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,192

    Yorkcity said:

    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
    Yes I do and it is a risk.

    However, that is for a new HOC to deal with and the anger more delay will create on top of the already feverish attitudes is going to make mps lives very difficult and labour mps in leave seats even more so
    so MPs should do the wrong thing because otherwise some people will be angry?

    and who is creating the feverish attitudes? don't they get at least some of the blame?
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    eek said: "Why should we have a new HoC - we elected this one post the referendum as our representatives to decide how best to leave - and that is what they are doing."

    Yes - but.

    It seems to me that you cannot go from rep democracy to direct democracy and then back to rep democracy again. Brexit`s woes started with Gina Miller meaningful vote ruling.
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,275
    edited October 2019
    eek said:

    OllyT said:

    Stocky said:

    OllyT said "My money is on leaving with Johnson's deal followed fairly quickly by a GE with a Tory majority."

    Please can you explain where this mythical GE is coming from?

    There will be a GE within the next 6 months, the current situation is unsustainable. Bozo will want to capitalise on his poll leads once Brexit is done and Labour would look ridiculous if they opposed it. There were solid reasons for the opposition parties to oppose a GE before Oct 31st. They are about to disappear
    How? The opposition can't win an election at the moment but the longer Boris suffers the greater their chances. Hence Labour will probably move heaven and earth to avoid an election.
    Yes, Labour could preserve the present parliament until 2022 - in theory. But in practice, promoting a situation where the government cannot get its business, cannot pass a Queen's speech or a budget, and where parliament cannot construct an alternative majority, is surely beyond the pale. And Labour have said they want an election asap. If they back out the scorn and ridicule would become unbearable for them.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    Anabobazina said: "The solution is – as it has always been – for the UK to leave the EU but remain in the Customs Union and the Single Market."

    But this is not Brexit. It does not satisfy those that won the referendum so isn`t Brexit. This would be accepting the referendum result by denying the victors the spoils of their victory. (I`m no a leaver by the way.)
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405
    Stocky said:

    eek said: "Why should we have a new HoC - we elected this one post the referendum as our representatives to decide how best to leave - and that is what they are doing."

    Yes - but.

    It seems to me that you cannot go from rep democracy to direct democracy and then back to rep democracy again. Brexit`s woes started with Gina Miller meaningful vote ruling.

    And when was this Parliament elected - after Gina Miller's court case.

    So I could accept you point if this was the Parliament of the 2015 election but it is not. Once again this Parliament was elected as representatives of their constituencies, to decide on Brexit fully aware of the circumstances and requirements placed upon them by that court case.

  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,192
    Stocky said:

    Anabobazina said: "The solution is – as it has always been – for the UK to leave the EU but remain in the Customs Union and the Single Market."

    But this is not Brexit. It does not satisfy those that won the referendum so isn`t Brexit. This would be accepting the referendum result by denying the victors the spoils of their victory. (I`m no a leaver by the way.)

    if only there were some way of finding out how many people that solution would satisfy...
  • Scott_P said:
    There's a shock.

    Would be more relevant if Scottish legislature's consent was needed, wanted or asked for.
    I am not Scottish, but it is clearly a constitutional outrage that it is not needed wanted or asked for. Only arrogant English nationalists with no concern for the union (shall we call them traitors to the union?) would think otherwise.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,236
    Stocky said:

    Anabobazina said: "The solution is – as it has always been – for the UK to leave the EU but remain in the Customs Union and the Single Market."

    But this is not Brexit. It does not satisfy those that won the referendum so isn`t Brexit. This would be accepting the referendum result by denying the victors the spoils of their victory. (I`m no a leaver by the way.)

    What spoils ?
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    @MikeSmithson said "One thing that struck me were the expressions of surprise from Brexit supporting politicians and the media about the DUP being ready to compromise the effort to leave the EU. Their lack of understanding of Irish politics over two centuries was extraordinary."

    Are you seriously contending that professional politicians who are in close proximity to the DUP (HoC every week) did not grasp the basic tenet of Unionism and especially the intolerant variety supported by the DUP?

    That is incredible. And it says a lot about the Tory hierarchy, none of it good.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    Kamski said: "if only there were some way of finding out how many people that solution would satisfy..."


    yeah - nice one - I agree that there should be a confirmatory referendum too - prinarily because of the union implications.

    Paradoxically, the case for a referendum in 2016 was weak whereas the case for a referendum now is strong.
  • Nigelb said:

    eek said:

    FPT

    148grss said:
    There will be hundred of gotchas like this and I suspect a lot of people are going to find ones that they really dislike.
    The solution is – as it has always been – for the UK to leave the EU but remain in the Customs Union and the Single Market.

    This is what should have been agreed three years ago – the whole thing is an utter fiasco. .
    Of course.
    We could then have spent the next five years arguing about our future relations with Europe (as we will anyway), without damage to business, trade, the economy, scientific cooperation, the union, or peace in NI.
    Indeed. Headbangers have insisted that only their interpretation of the result is the true "will-o-the-people", when in reality is just the "will-o-themselves".
  • eek said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
    Yes I do and it is a risk.

    However, that is for a new HOC to deal with and the anger more delay will create on top of the already feverish attitudes is going to make mps lives very difficult and labour mps in leave seats even more so
    Why should we have a new HoC - we elected this one post the referendum as our representatives to decide how best to leave - and that is what they are doing.

    The fact that Parliament is as divided as the general population is surely a feature of this Parliament rather than a weakness.

    Or do you believe MPs should be delegates for their loudest (and angriest) constituents.
    By general consent this HOC is not fit for purpose and needs to be disbanded for the sake of democracy. There are far too many mps who should have had by elections but who carrry on without a democratic mandate from their constituents

    I can understand why many are scared of an election but the SNP are most certainly not and the Lib Dems should be very content to face the electorate

    I therefore cannot see labour being able to withstand the tidal wave for an election much longer
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,236
    edited October 2019
    That is a very good thread.
    No doubt one of the matters @Casino_Royale considered during his speed reading last night.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,006
    eek said:

    OllyT said:

    Stocky said:

    OllyT said "My money is on leaving with Johnson's deal followed fairly quickly by a GE with a Tory majority."

    Please can you explain where this mythical GE is coming from?

    There will be a GE within the next 6 months, the current situation is unsustainable. Bozo will want to capitalise on his poll leads once Brexit is done and Labour would look ridiculous if they opposed it. There were solid reasons for the opposition parties to oppose a GE before Oct 31st. They are about to disappear
    How? The opposition can't win an election at the moment but the longer Boris suffers the greater their chances. Hence Labour will probably move heaven and earth to avoid an election.
    If the bill passes the only credible reason for the opposition to continue blocking a GE would be to ensure that we do not get a default No Deal in 15 months time. The current parliament could stop that, a new parliament may not be able to. Labour may continue to hold out on those grounds but I think they will back a GE before too long.
  • kamski said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
    Yes I do and it is a risk.

    However, that is for a new HOC to deal with and the anger more delay will create on top of the already feverish attitudes is going to make mps lives very difficult and labour mps in leave seats even more so
    so MPs should do the wrong thing because otherwise some people will be angry?

    and who is creating the feverish attitudes? don't they get at least some of the blame?
    To be fair to many it is not the wrong thing
  • Stocky said:

    eek said: "Why should we have a new HoC - we elected this one post the referendum as our representatives to decide how best to leave - and that is what they are doing."

    Yes - but.

    It seems to me that you cannot go from rep democracy to direct democracy and then back to rep democracy again. Brexit`s woes started with Gina Miller meaningful vote ruling.

    Representative democracy has always had primacy in that regard, and quite rightly so. Those that say otherwise simply don't understand how our system works.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215
    I think the program motion should be voted against today actually. 3 days is clearly too short for such an important bill to be scrutinised fully.

    But just as in the previous thread we have the issue of mistrust with Johnson it'll simply be seen as another attempt to block Brexit by leave voters.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    PeterC said:

    eek said:

    OllyT said:

    Stocky said:

    OllyT said "My money is on leaving with Johnson's deal followed fairly quickly by a GE with a Tory majority."

    Please can you explain where this mythical GE is coming from?

    There will be a GE within the next 6 months, the current situation is unsustainable. Bozo will want to capitalise on his poll leads once Brexit is done and Labour would look ridiculous if they opposed it. There were solid reasons for the opposition parties to oppose a GE before Oct 31st. They are about to disappear
    How? The opposition can't win an election at the moment but the longer Boris suffers the greater their chances. Hence Labour will probably move heaven and earth to avoid an election.
    Yes, Labour could preserve the present parliament until 2022 - in theory. But in practice, promoting a situation where the government cannot get its business, cannot pass a Queen's speech or a budget, and where parliament cannot construct an alternative majority, is surely beyond the pale. And Labour have said they want an election asap. If they back out the scorn and ridicule would become unbearable for them.
    Hardly , they could have a leadership election to fill the time.
    Let the Tories own Brexit outright.
  • I do not buy the No Deal scenario next July/December. Having resolved the Irish border question, it is now unequivoically the case that GB will be massively more harmed by a crash-out than anyone else. There is literally no leverage in keeping it on the table. It can only do GB harm as it maintains uncertainty and signals to all businesses with significant interests in the single market that they are best off preparing to leave. I cannot allow myself to believe that even the former Conservative and Unionist party would be that stupid. Am I being hopelessly naive?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293
    Scott_P said:
    I'm sure the government fully expects to lose the programme motion and to pull the deal this evening.

    We'll then go off and running into a general election IMO.
  • Nigelb said:

    Stocky said:

    Anabobazina said: "The solution is – as it has always been – for the UK to leave the EU but remain in the Customs Union and the Single Market."

    But this is not Brexit. It does not satisfy those that won the referendum so isn`t Brexit. This would be accepting the referendum result by denying the victors the spoils of their victory. (I`m no a leaver by the way.)

    What spoils ?
    There probably are some if you are a hedge fund owner, or closely allied to Vladimir Putin
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    Nigelb said:

    Possibly not - although a number of posters here were saying that was it for extensions.
    Where they all Tories? Quelle surprise. :D:D

    What I find incredible is the ability of the diehard party loyalist to spout whatever CCHQ says is policy even if it is the direct opposite of yesterday's policy.

    It seems to be a party member, you have to have no beliefs or integrity of your own.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405
    edited October 2019

    eek said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
    Yes I do and it is a risk.

    However, that is for a new HOC to deal with and the anger more delay will create on top of the already feverish attitudes is going to make mps lives very difficult and labour mps in leave seats even more so
    Why should we have a new HoC - we elected this one post the referendum as our representatives to decide how best to leave - and that is what they are doing.

    The fact that Parliament is as divided as the general population is surely a feature of this Parliament rather than a weakness.

    Or do you believe MPs should be delegates for their loudest (and angriest) constituents.
    By general consent this HOC is not fit for purpose and needs to be disbanded for the sake of democracy. There are far too many mps who should have had by elections but who carrry on without a democratic mandate from their constituents

    I can understand why many are scared of an election but the SNP are most certainly not and the Lib Dems should be very content to face the electorate

    I therefore cannot see labour being able to withstand the tidal wave for an election much longer
    Um why should they hold by-elections. We vote for a representative to represent us - or do you believe we vote for delegates based on the colour of their rosette.

    Just because a person changes the colour of the rosette they wear that doesn't change the person you voted for at the election for they are the elected representative for that Parliament.

    Perhaps the party should have picked a more loyal candidate but that's an issue for the party not the constituency.

    Being blunt, if you believe there should be by-elections when people leave a party you seem to believe MPs are merely delegates of their party leadership - and that isn't the case.

    And given how much the views of your party leadership have moved to the right over the past 6 months I would repeat a suggestion I made back in September.

    If Boris is so desperate for an election he could instruct what's left of the Tory party to take the Chiltern Hundreds and hold byelections.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,006

    OllyT said:

    Stocky said:

    OllyT said "My money is on leaving with Johnson's deal followed fairly quickly by a GE with a Tory majority."

    Please can you explain where this mythical GE is coming from?

    There will be a GE within the next 6 months, the current situation is unsustainable. Bozo will want to capitalise on his poll leads once Brexit is done and Labour would look ridiculous if they opposed it. There were solid reasons for the opposition parties to oppose a GE before Oct 31st. They are about to disappear
    Johnson's interests are best served by the election coming before Brexit, when he can pose as the champion of 'the people' (or some of the 52% anyway), against 'the politicians'.

    Once Brexit's delivered, the issue drops right down the agenda for the time being and Corbyn will get a hearing on nationalising hairdressers or whatever again.

    Agreed but surely Johnson wants a GE with Corbyn in place. He can't guarantee that will be the case even a year from now. If the current poll leads hold up I think he will go sooner rather than later. Unless he can cobble together some sort of working majority in this parliament his position is unsustainable.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,720

    I do not buy the No Deal scenario next July/December. Having resolved the Irish border question, it is now unequivoically the case that GB will be massively more harmed by a crash-out than anyone else. There is literally no leverage in keeping it on the table. It can only do GB harm as it maintains uncertainty and signals to all businesses with significant interests in the single market that they are best off preparing to leave. I cannot allow myself to believe that even the former Conservative and Unionist party would be that stupid. Am I being hopelessly naive?

    Yes and no. You’re naive to think that large numbers of people won’t think No Deal is a source of leverage and demand that we threaten it, but probably not to think that the government would never go through with it.
  • Rees-Mogg is a pompous tosser of the first order. Poking him and his ilk in the eye would not be "any excuse", it would be a fine and honourable one.
  • blueblueblueblue Posts: 875

    Scott_P said:

    Labour are in danger of turning brexit into their poll tax

    This is exactly backwards

    Brexit is BoZo's poll tax.

    He owns it, 100%. If it happens (I think it will), he will own the subsequent fall out.

    Brexit will be at least as despised as the Poll tax, and the Tories will suffer for it.
    It may and it may not. We cannot know how this pans out but we must leave and this is the deal that stops no deal
    Apart from Clause 30.

    You are not over the detail on this blinded by your Tory love.

    To me that Clause if not amended makes a Tory No Deal almost certain at the end of 2020.

    Surely you're not saying that Labour will be too cowardly to hold an election and / or too shit to win one by the end of 2020?!

    Oh, you are saying that... :lol:
  • eek said:

    eek said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
    Yes I do and it is a risk.

    However, that is for a new HOC to deal with and the anger more delay will create on top of the already feverish attitudes is going to make mps lives very difficult and labour mps in leave seats even more so
    Why should we have a new HoC - we elected this one post the referendum as our representatives to decide how best to leave - and that is what they are doing.

    The fact that Parliament is as divided as the general population is surely a feature of this Parliament rather than a weakness.

    Or do you believe MPs should be delegates for their loudest (and angriest) constituents.
    By general consent this HOC is not fit for purpose and needs to be disbanded for the sake of democracy. There are far too many mps who should have had by elections but who carrry on without a democratic mandate from their constituents

    I can understand why many are scared of an election but the SNP are most certainly not and the Lib Dems should be very content to face the electorate

    I therefore cannot see labour being able to withstand the tidal wave for an election much longer
    Um why should they hold by-elections. We vote for a representative to represent us - or do you believe we vote for delegates based on the colour of their rosette.

    The mps who have defected were elected on their manifesto and not someone elses.

    They lose democratic legitimacy with their electorate and I hope in the next Parliament the mps will pass an act to see any mp who changes party has to submit to a by election within 28 days
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478
    eek said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
    Yes I do and it is a risk.

    However, that is for a new HOC to deal with and the anger more delay will create on top of the already feverish attitudes is going to make mps lives very difficult and labour mps in leave seats even more so
    Why should we have a new HoC - we elected this one post the referendum as our representatives to decide how best to leave - and that is what they are doing.

    The fact that Parliament is as divided as the general population is surely a feature of this Parliament rather than a weakness.

    Or do you believe MPs should be delegates for their loudest (and angriest) constituents.
    Excellent thought, Mr E.

    Further, on the matter of relations with Tusk, Varadkar et al. Boris seems to be one of a type one sees, sadly, too often. Loud-mouthed bully at home, courteous and pleasant outside. It's only when the tormented wife finally snaps and hits him over the head with the rolling pin that anyone outside notices.

    Thirdly, although when it actually happens, the Reunion of Ulster with the Rest of Ireland will be publicly welcome, the people back in the Irish Treasury will be digging deep into their pockets. Fortunately they have friends in the EU, where they have the experience of Germany to draw upon.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 4,155

    eek said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
    Yes I do and it is a risk.

    However, that is for a new HOC to deal with and the anger more delay will create on top of the already feverish attitudes is going to make mps lives very difficult and labour mps in leave seats even more so
    Why should we have a new HoC - we elected this one post the referendum as our representatives to decide how best to leave - and that is what they are doing.

    The fact that Parliament is as divided as the general population is surely a feature of this Parliament rather than a weakness.

    Or do you believe MPs should be delegates for their loudest (and angriest) constituents.
    By general consent this HOC is not fit for purpose and needs to be disbanded for the sake of democracy. There are far too many mps who should have had by elections but who carrry on without a democratic mandate from their constituents

    I can understand why many are scared of an election but the SNP are most certainly not and the Lib Dems should be very content to face the electorate

    I therefore cannot see labour being able to withstand the tidal wave for an election much longer
    Whose "General Consent"? "The People"? How did you ask "The People" and gather that they no longer like the parliament? This was a duly elected parliament, and such talk is little more than an attempt to nullify the last election.

    This is ridiculous. Many countries are forced to function with parliaments that are non majoritarian and adversarial; that's where you have to compromise.

    Johnson and May before him refused to compromise to get a majority support for their deals in parliament. That is their fault.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:
    I'm sure the government fully expects to lose the programme motion and to pull the deal this evening.

    We'll then go off and running into a general election IMO.
    Are they really going to pull the deal? The potential GNU majority just gets bigger and bigger...
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 4,155

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
    Yes I do and it is a risk.

    However, that is for a new HOC to deal with and the anger more delay will create on top of the already feverish attitudes is going to make mps lives very difficult and labour mps in leave seats even more so
    Why should we have a new HoC - we elected this one post the referendum as our representatives to decide how best to leave - and that is what they are doing.

    The fact that Parliament is as divided as the general population is surely a feature of this Parliament rather than a weakness.

    Or do you believe MPs should be delegates for their loudest (and angriest) constituents.
    By general consent this HOC is not fit for purpose and needs to be disbanded for the sake of democracy. There are far too many mps who should have had by elections but who carrry on without a democratic mandate from their constituents

    I can understand why many are scared of an election but the SNP are most certainly not and the Lib Dems should be very content to face the electorate

    I therefore cannot see labour being able to withstand the tidal wave for an election much longer
    Um why should they hold by-elections. We vote for a representative to represent us - or do you believe we vote for delegates based on the colour of their rosette.

    The mps who have defected were elected on their manifesto and not someone elses.

    They lose democratic legitimacy with their electorate and I hope in the next Parliament the mps will pass an act to see any mp who changes party has to submit to a by election within 28 days
    That is not how the British system works; see the last 200 years.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,567
    edited October 2019
    OllyT said:

    eek said:

    OllyT said:

    Stocky said:

    OllyT said "My money is on leaving with Johnson's deal followed fairly quickly by a GE with a Tory majority."

    Please can you explain where this mythical GE is coming from?

    There will be a GE within the next 6 months, the current situation is unsustainable. Bozo will want to capitalise on his poll leads once Brexit is done and Labour would look ridiculous if they opposed it. There were solid reasons for the opposition parties to oppose a GE before Oct 31st. They are about to disappear
    How? The opposition can't win an election at the moment but the longer Boris suffers the greater their chances. Hence Labour will probably move heaven and earth to avoid an election.
    If the bill passes the only credible reason for the opposition to continue blocking a GE would be to ensure that we do not get a default No Deal in 15 months time. The current parliament could stop that, a new parliament may not be able to. Labour may continue to hold out on those grounds but I think they will back a GE before too long.
    The lesson of the GE of 2017, which both Labour and Tory cannot help noticing, is that
    (1) there is no point in calling an early election under the FTPA unless you are going to win it
    (2) under the FTPA in most cases (like now) you need Lab and Con support to achieve one;
    (3) elections in the current climate are inherently about as predictable as the Grand National and
    (4) logically there comes no time at which it suits enough MPs to have an election since at all times it appears that either only one party, or no party, will win it.

    Labour have gone very quiet about their assertion that they will support an election as soon as No Deal on 31 October is dispensed with. Perhaps there is a fifth truth
    (5) the fact that a situation is unsustainable by no means implies that it won't be sustained.

  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    blueblue said: "Surely you're not saying that Labour will be too cowardly to hold an election and / or too shit to win one by the end of 2020?!"

    LP is just using the FTPA to it`s own advantages. Act needs repealing. It can`t be right that a minority government is held hostage in this way, with the leader of the opposition having the sole ability to trigger an election when he likes.
  • 148grss said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
    Yes I do and it is a risk.

    However, that is for a new HOC to deal with and the anger more delay will create on top of the already feverish attitudes is going to make mps lives very difficult and labour mps in leave seats even more so
    Why should we have a new HoC - we elected this one post the referendum as our representatives to decide how best to leave - and that is what they are doing.

    The fact that Parliament is as divided as the general population is surely a feature of this Parliament rather than a weakness.

    Or do you believe MPs should be delegates for their loudest (and angriest) constituents.
    By general consent this HOC is not fit for purpose and needs to be disbanded for the sake of democracy. There are far too many mps who should have had by elections but who carrry on without a democratic mandate from their constituents

    I can understand why many are scared of an election but the SNP are most certainly not and the Lib Dems should be very content to face the electorate

    I therefore cannot see labour being able to withstand the tidal wave for an election much longer
    Um why should they hold by-elections. We vote for a representative to represent us - or do you believe we vote for delegates based on the colour of their rosette.

    The mps who have defected were elected on their manifesto and not someone elses.

    They lose democratic legitimacy with their electorate and I hope in the next Parliament the mps will pass an act to see any mp who changes party has to submit to a by election within 28 days
    That is not how the British system works; see the last 200 years.
    And it needs to change
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478

    Nigelb said:

    Stocky said:

    Anabobazina said: "The solution is – as it has always been – for the UK to leave the EU but remain in the Customs Union and the Single Market."

    But this is not Brexit. It does not satisfy those that won the referendum so isn`t Brexit. This would be accepting the referendum result by denying the victors the spoils of their victory. (I`m no a leaver by the way.)

    What spoils ?
    There probably are some if you are a hedge fund owner, or closely allied to Vladimir Putin
    Probably.... this is a betting site, I suppose so no-one believes in certainties...... but really!!!!
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    edited October 2019
    Boles has tabled a 'trapdoor' amendment to make extension to 2022 unless commons votes against. If I were the govt i'd accept it in return for programme motion support from the 21
  • blueblueblueblue Posts: 875
    Yorkcity said:

    PeterC said:

    eek said:

    OllyT said:

    Stocky said:

    OllyT said "My money is on leaving with Johnson's deal followed fairly quickly by a GE with a Tory majority."

    Please can you explain where this mythical GE is coming from?

    There will be a GE within the next 6 months, the current situation is unsustainable. Bozo will want to capitalise on his poll leads once Brexit is done and Labour would look ridiculous if they opposed it. There were solid reasons for the opposition parties to oppose a GE before Oct 31st. They are about to disappear
    How? The opposition can't win an election at the moment but the longer Boris suffers the greater their chances. Hence Labour will probably move heaven and earth to avoid an election.
    Yes, Labour could preserve the present parliament until 2022 - in theory. But in practice, promoting a situation where the government cannot get its business, cannot pass a Queen's speech or a budget, and where parliament cannot construct an alternative majority, is surely beyond the pale. And Labour have said they want an election asap. If they back out the scorn and ridicule would become unbearable for them.
    Hardly , they could have a leadership election to fill the time.
    Let the Tories own Brexit outright.
    For Labour to deliberately keep the "evil Tories" and Boris Johnson in power for years would be to give up even the pretence of being the Opposition. Both their supporters and opponents - let alone the public at large - would rightly view them with utter contempt.

    What sounds like a clever wheeze might instead lead to the death of the Labour Party. Here's hoping!
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    If the deal gets pulled and the government request an extension for a GE what are the opposition going to do?

    There isn't a deal to be scrutinized, there aren't the votes for R2 and there certainly isn't the support for revoke.

    Labour can't just sit there terrified of facing the electorate - it would destroy them.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    GIN1138 said "We'll then go off and running into a general election IMO."

    Again this assertion is made and again I ask where this mythical GE is coming from? By which mechanism?
  • I do not buy the No Deal scenario next July/December. Having resolved the Irish border question, it is now unequivoically the case that GB will be massively more harmed by a crash-out than anyone else. There is literally no leverage in keeping it on the table. It can only do GB harm as it maintains uncertainty and signals to all businesses with significant interests in the single market that they are best off preparing to leave. I cannot allow myself to believe that even the former Conservative and Unionist party would be that stupid. Am I being hopelessly naive?

    Yes and no. You’re naive to think that large numbers of people won’t think No Deal is a source of leverage and demand that we threaten it, but probably not to think that the government would never go through with it.

    But if it remains on the table, I guess that is a very good reason not to agree to a general election.

  • eekeek Posts: 28,405
    edited October 2019

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Scott_P said:

    this is the deal that stops no deal

    It isn't, and doesn't.

    Apart from that...
    True big g is losing it, " this is the deal that stops no deal".
    Surely as he watches sky news all day, he understands the position after the transition period.
    Yes I do and it is a risk.

    However, that is for a new HOC to deal with and the anger more delay will create on top of the already feverish attitudes is going to make mps lives very difficult and labour mps in leave seats even more so
    Why should we have a new HoC - we elected this one post the referendum as our representatives to decide how best to leave - and that is what they are doing.

    The fact that Parliament is as divided as the general population is surely a feature of this Parliament rather than a weakness.

    Or do you believe MPs should be delegates for their loudest (and angriest) constituents.
    By general consent this HOC is not fit for purpose and needs to be disbanded for the sake of democracy. There are far too many mps who should have had by elections but who carrry on without a democratic mandate from their constituents

    I can understand why many are scared of an election but the SNP are most certainly not and the Lib Dems should be very content to face the electorate

    I therefore cannot see labour being able to withstand the tidal wave for an election much longer
    Um why should they hold by-elections. We vote for a representative to represent us - or do you believe we vote for delegates based on the colour of their rosette.

    The mps who have defected were elected on their manifesto and not someone elses.

    They lose democratic legitimacy with their electorate and I hope in the next Parliament the mps will pass an act to see any mp who changes party has to submit to a by election within 28 days
    Which would be a valid argument were the Government to be following that manifesto but it isn't - and why should an MP continue to stand for a party if both the leadership changes and the plans of the new leadership differ from the manifesto.

    In my previous comment I suggested that the best thing for Boris and the Tory party to do would be to take the Chiltern Hundreds and call byelections.

    Given how far Boris and the new Party leadership has deviated from the manifesto their were elected upon it seems you agree they should seek re-election.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,133
    edited October 2019

    Boles has tabled a 'trapdoor' amendment to make extension to 2022 unless commons votes against. If I were the govt i'd accept it in return for programme motion support from the 21

    I have no problem with that but the ERG could end up sabotaging their brexit

    Just a caveat, not the extension now
This discussion has been closed.