politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Europe: The Final Countdown. Eight days to go until the Common

SystemSystem Posts: 12,114
edited June 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Europe: The Final Countdown. Eight days to go until the Commons votes on those Brexit amendments

Cancel all plans for June 12 pic.twitter.com/LSHBwCsXId

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Quiet. Too quiet.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Dear Colleague? Why has colleague got a capital C and is there not some sort of electrical gizmo that will stick MPs' names into the letter?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,779
    Evening all :)

    Well, it makes a pleasant change from numpties writing "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" or "Second, like Corbyn, REMAIN and Yes" or whatever inanity someone can come up with.
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 596
    If reversed will the Lords try again?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,779
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Dear Colleague? Why has colleague got a capital C and is there not some sort of electrical gizmo that will stick MPs' names into the letter?

    It's something used a lot in workplaces. It's interesting the MPs are seen in those terms as a work force and part of a team rather than as supported individuals.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,518
    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,652
    edited June 2018
    I suspect this will be a damp squib, with most of the Tories falling into line and voting every amendment down. The Brexit ultras are just too powerful and threatening to defy. It would be a brave Tory MP to invite their wrath.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,518
    kle4 said:

    MaxPB said:

    I watched Solo yesterday. It's absolutely crap. There is a new jar jar binks level character in it and all the acting is awful.

    I didn't like it much, but I must have missed the Jar Jar level character!
    As @rcs1000 mentioned, the stupid L3 robot. Awful character. Almost irritating enough for me to walk out of the cinema. Even my fairly feminist partner found the robot extremely irritating "reminds me of that friend no one wants to invite to stuff".
  • PurplePurple Posts: 150
    edited June 2018
    Boys and girls are different and saying boys "should be allowed" to wear girls' clothes because discrimination is bad and because transsexuals have rights is insane. And contrary to what the entire British media have said, no it is not possible for a man to get pregnant and give birth.

    Those who believe that law and public policy should where feasible prioritise individual rights over any concept of the public good might as well support the legalisation of incest and incestuous marriage, and why not recognise polygamous marriage too?

    Nor do people have a right to expect mental illness to be recognised as sanity.

    I believe people should have the right to eat turd sandwiches if they wish, but I don't think they should have the right to sit on buses next to the non-turd-eating majority ostentatiously eating turd sandwiches or to stick up posters on school noticeboards saying come to our big turd-sandwich eating festival on Saturday where we'll be advocating that eating turds should be officially recognised as being as "normal" as eating food that doesn't contain faeces.

    It's so liberal infantile to want to base everything on everyone doing whatever they want in a culture where all actions are considered equally valid.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,188
    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,111
    Stark_Dawning said:

    I suspect this will be a damp squib, with most of the Tories falling into line and voting every amendment down. The Brexit ultras are just too powerful and threatening to defy. It would be a brave Tory MP to invite their wrath.

    I think it will be a clean slate for the Govt.

    Every Lords amendment has so far been overturned.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,188
    I think I might do a thread on the People's Budget.

    Still cracks me up that the Liberals' two terrible twins were David Lloyd George and Winston Churchill.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    Mortimer said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    I suspect this will be a damp squib, with most of the Tories falling into line and voting every amendment down. The Brexit ultras are just too powerful and threatening to defy. It would be a brave Tory MP to invite their wrath.

    I think it will be a clean slate for the Govt.

    Every Lords amendment has so far been overturned.
    Not true. Remember the meaningful vote?

    You can dismiss it as procedural, but it was still a loss. You might say the same with the customs union vote, but it will be highly damaging to May if it passes.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Purple said:

    Boys and girls are different and saying boys "should be allowed" to wear girls' clothes because discrimination is bad and because transsexuals have rights is insane. And contrary to what the entire British media have said, no it is not possible for a man to get pregnant and give birth.

    Those who believe that law and public policy should where feasible prioritise individual rights over any concept of the public good might as well support the legalisation of incest and incestuous marriage, and why not recognise polygamous marriage too?

    Nor do people have a right to expect mental illness to be recognised as sanity.

    I believe people should have the right to eat turd sandwiches if they wish, but I don't think they should have the right to sit on buses next to the non-turd-eating majority ostentatiously eating turd sandwiches or to stick up posters on school noticeboards saying come to our big turd-sandwich eating festival on Saturday where we'll be advocating that eating turds should be officially recognised as being as "normal" as eating food that doesn't contain faeces.

    It's so liberal infantile to want to base everything on everyone doing whatever they want in a culture where all actions are considered equally valid.

    Symbolic of a struggle against reality :)

    https://youtu.be/sFBOQzSk14c
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,652
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
    Quite right. In fact it would be would shameful for the government to embarrass Her Majesty by dragging her into an act of wanton constitutional vandalism.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Well, it makes a pleasant change from numpties writing "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" or "Second, like Corbyn, REMAIN and Yes" or whatever inanity someone can come up with.

    Those first/second posts do my head in. Utterly banal!

    (And often, as you say, repetitive – I must have read that "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" 50-odd times).
  • PurplePurple Posts: 150
    edited June 2018
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Dear Colleague? Why has colleague got a capital C and is there not some sort of electrical gizmo that will stick MPs' names into the letter?

    "Colleague" has a capital letter because that is the correct form in a salutation. Treat even a common noun as if it were a name or office, e.g. "Dear Friend", etc.

    I wish I could think of a joke that might be made about working beyond the "moment of interruption".
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Purple said:

    Boys and girls are different and saying boys "should be allowed" to wear girls' clothes because discrimination is bad and because transsexuals have rights is insane. And contrary to what the entire British media have said, no it is not possible for a man to get pregnant and give birth.

    Those who believe that law and public policy should where feasible prioritise individual rights over any concept of the public good might as well support the legalisation of incest and incestuous marriage, and why not recognise polygamous marriage too?

    Nor do people have a right to expect mental illness to be recognised as sanity.

    I believe people should have the right to eat turd sandwiches if they wish, but I don't think they should have the right to sit on buses next to the non-turd-eating majority ostentatiously eating turd sandwiches or to stick up posters on school noticeboards saying come to our big turd-sandwich eating festival on Saturday where we'll be advocating that eating turds should be officially recognised as being as "normal" as eating food that doesn't contain faeces.

    It's so liberal infantile to want to base everything on everyone doing whatever they want in a culture where all actions are considered equally valid.

    You have jumped from school uniforms to public turd-sandwich eating and legalised incest?

    Wow.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,139
    Anazina said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Well, it makes a pleasant change from numpties writing "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" or "Second, like Corbyn, REMAIN and Yes" or whatever inanity someone can come up with.

    Those first/second posts do my head in. Utterly banal!

    (And often, as you say, repetitive – I must have read that "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" 50-odd times).
    Eighteenth!
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Mortimer said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    I suspect this will be a damp squib, with most of the Tories falling into line and voting every amendment down. The Brexit ultras are just too powerful and threatening to defy. It would be a brave Tory MP to invite their wrath.

    I think it will be a clean slate for the Govt.

    Every Lords amendment has so far been overturned.

    They haven't won every vote – that's factually incorrect.

    However, I do agree that this will be a non-event and the simpering Tory wets will buckle in the face of Jacob Rees and his oh-so-scary brethren.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,576
    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    I suspect this will be a damp squib, with most of the Tories falling into line and voting every amendment down. The Brexit ultras are just too powerful and threatening to defy. It would be a brave Tory MP to invite their wrath.

    I think it will be a clean slate for the Govt.

    Every Lords amendment has so far been overturned.

    They haven't won every vote – that's factually incorrect.

    However, I do agree that this will be a non-event and the simpering Tory wets will buckle in the face of Jacob Rees and his oh-so-scary brethren.
    My gut says one or two may get through, for all the Brexit ultras have been very powerful so far.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,576
    Anazina said:

    Purple said:

    Boys and girls are different and saying boys "should be allowed" to wear girls' clothes because discrimination is bad and because transsexuals have rights is insane. And contrary to what the entire British media have said, no it is not possible for a man to get pregnant and give birth.

    Those who believe that law and public policy should where feasible prioritise individual rights over any concept of the public good might as well support the legalisation of incest and incestuous marriage, and why not recognise polygamous marriage too?

    Nor do people have a right to expect mental illness to be recognised as sanity.

    I believe people should have the right to eat turd sandwiches if they wish, but I don't think they should have the right to sit on buses next to the non-turd-eating majority ostentatiously eating turd sandwiches or to stick up posters on school noticeboards saying come to our big turd-sandwich eating festival on Saturday where we'll be advocating that eating turds should be officially recognised as being as "normal" as eating food that doesn't contain faeces.

    It's so liberal infantile to want to base everything on everyone doing whatever they want in a culture where all actions are considered equally valid.

    You have jumped from school uniforms to public turd-sandwich eating and legalised incest?

    Wow.
    A classic of the slippery slope arguments if ever I have seen one.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,111
    Anazina said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Well, it makes a pleasant change from numpties writing "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" or "Second, like Corbyn, REMAIN and Yes" or whatever inanity someone can come up with.

    Those first/second posts do my head in. Utterly banal!

    (And often, as you say, repetitive – I must have read that "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" 50-odd times).
    Not as bad as posts moaning about other posts...
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    JosiasJessop said:

    Anazina said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Well, it makes a pleasant change from numpties writing "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" or "Second, like Corbyn, REMAIN and Yes" or whatever inanity someone can come up with.

    Those first/second posts do my head in. Utterly banal!

    (And often, as you say, repetitive – I must have read that "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" 50-odd times).
    Eighteenth!
    Slightly more inventive :D
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited June 2018
    Is there something wrong with the commenting system? Before I logged in just now only the first comment was visible; as soon as I logged in a lot more appeared. That isn't usual on here.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,576
    MaxPB said:

    kle4 said:

    MaxPB said:

    I watched Solo yesterday. It's absolutely crap. There is a new jar jar binks level character in it and all the acting is awful.

    I didn't like it much, but I must have missed the Jar Jar level character!
    As @rcs1000 mentioned, the stupid L3 robot. Awful character. Almost irritating enough for me to walk out of the cinema. Even my fairly feminist partner found the robot extremely irritating "reminds me of that friend no one wants to invite to stuff".
    Many fans have joked about how droids are treated in Star Wars, but that character was one note and not played well, nor was there any payoff. The droid in Rogue One was far funnier and had actual impact to it.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,111
    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    I suspect this will be a damp squib, with most of the Tories falling into line and voting every amendment down. The Brexit ultras are just too powerful and threatening to defy. It would be a brave Tory MP to invite their wrath.

    I think it will be a clean slate for the Govt.

    Every Lords amendment has so far been overturned.

    They haven't won every vote – that's factually incorrect.

    However, I do agree that this will be a non-event and the simpering Tory wets will buckle in the face of Jacob Rees and his oh-so-scary brethren.
    I didn’t say they’ve won every vote. But every Lords amendment that the Govt opposed has been successfully overturned. I’d be surprised if this time is an exception.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956
    Anazina said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    Anazina said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Well, it makes a pleasant change from numpties writing "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" or "Second, like Corbyn, REMAIN and Yes" or whatever inanity someone can come up with.

    Those first/second posts do my head in. Utterly banal!

    (And often, as you say, repetitive – I must have read that "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" 50-odd times).
    Eighteenth!
    Slightly more inventive :D
    Twenty-seventh like William Howard Taft.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,576
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Dear Colleague? Why has colleague got a capital C and is there not some sort of electrical gizmo that will stick MPs' names into the letter?

    I'm sure there is, but maybe they are overly cautious of mail merging after events like the below, even with just a list of MP names.

    https://order-order.com/2018/04/11/donate-tories-must-fing-joking/
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,972
    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Well, it makes a pleasant change from numpties writing "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" or "Second, like Corbyn, REMAIN and Yes" or whatever inanity someone can come up with.

    Those first/second posts do my head in. Utterly banal!

    (And often, as you say, repetitive – I must have read that "First, like LEAVE, Mrs May and No" 50-odd times).
    Not as bad as posts moaning about other posts...
    Meta moan from you!
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    AndyJS said:

    Is there something wrong with the commenting system? Before I logged in just now only the first comment was visible; as soon as I logged in a lot more appeared. That isn't usual on here.

    The quality of debate was better in the early phase of this thread.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,139
    AndyJS said:

    Is there something wrong with the commenting system? Before I logged in just now only the first comment was visible; as soon as I logged in a lot more appeared. That isn't usual on here.

    I've had loads of trouble, seemingly unrelated to being logged in or not. for a day or two it even prevented me from posting, which might be more of a feature than a bug ... :)
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,939
    Purple said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Dear Colleague? Why has colleague got a capital C and is there not some sort of electrical gizmo that will stick MPs' names into the letter?

    "Colleague" has a capital letter because that is the correct form in a salutation. Treat even a common noun as if it were a name or office, e.g. "Dear Friend", etc.

    I wish I could think of a joke that might be made about working beyond the "moment of interruption".
    I'm disappointed that my elected representative didn't use 'Comrades'.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,661
    JosiasJessop said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is there something wrong with the commenting system? Before I logged in just now only the first comment was visible; as soon as I logged in a lot more appeared. That isn't usual on here.

    I've had loads of trouble, seemingly unrelated to being logged in or not. for a day or two it even prevented me from posting, which might be more of a feature than a bug ... :)
    I've had trouble too. The incredibly wise thoughts I post seem somehow to be transformed in to the not quite so wise after a little while.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,139
    Anazina said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is there something wrong with the commenting system? Before I logged in just now only the first comment was visible; as soon as I logged in a lot more appeared. That isn't usual on here.

    The quality of debate was better in the early phase of this thread.
    I don't know. The first post was definitely missing a 'first'.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    Sadly, EEA with restrictions is effectively impossible, as I understand it. Otherwise, it would be worthy of further investigation as a solution to this sorry mess.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    JosiasJessop said:

    Anazina said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is there something wrong with the commenting system? Before I logged in just now only the first comment was visible; as soon as I logged in a lot more appeared. That isn't usual on here.

    The quality of debate was better in the early phase of this thread.
    I don't know. The first post was definitely missing a 'first'.
    I have bunged a 'last' on the previous thread as a friendly compromise.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,661
    Nicholas Parsons is taking a couple of days off it seems. 94 and still going strong though. When I was at school (and perhaps still now) there was a prominent graffiti written on our school wall - 'Nicholas Parsons is the neo-opiate of the people'. I can't really imagine who wrote such a thing - it's pretty damn sophisticated as graffiti goes. I think though it's rather swayed me against him - that, and a certain smugness and grandeur on 'sale of the century'. However as I reflect I realise he's an enormously nice chap. I wish him all the best.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,139
    Anazina said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    Anazina said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is there something wrong with the commenting system? Before I logged in just now only the first comment was visible; as soon as I logged in a lot more appeared. That isn't usual on here.

    The quality of debate was better in the early phase of this thread.
    I don't know. The first post was definitely missing a 'first'.
    I have bunged a 'last' on the previous thread as a friendly compromise.
    Are you sure?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    I’m disappointed in you @TheScreamingEagles

    Only one Eighties pun?

    What happened to [Orchestral] Manouveres in the Dark and Two Tribes Go to War?

    Or even Enola May?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,356
    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    The real issue is what the EU27 find acceptable.

    If its not on the menu, then no point in ordering it, like asking for the Peking Duck at McDonalds.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Purple said:

    Boys and girls are different and saying boys "should be allowed" to wear girls' clothes because discrimination is bad and because transsexuals have rights is insane. And contrary to what the entire British media have said, no it is not possible for a man to get pregnant and give birth.

    Those who believe that law and public policy should where feasible prioritise individual rights over any concept of the public good might as well support the legalisation of incest and incestuous marriage, and why not recognise polygamous marriage too?

    Nor do people have a right to expect mental illness to be recognised as sanity.

    I believe people should have the right to eat turd sandwiches if they wish, but I don't think they should have the right to sit on buses next to the non-turd-eating majority ostentatiously eating turd sandwiches or to stick up posters on school noticeboards saying come to our big turd-sandwich eating festival on Saturday where we'll be advocating that eating turds should be officially recognised as being as "normal" as eating food that doesn't contain faeces.

    It's so liberal infantile to want to base everything on everyone doing whatever they want in a culture where all actions are considered equally valid.

    Why do you think that a border in Ireland will reignite the Troubles? (FPT)

  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    JosiasJessop said:

    Anazina said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    Anazina said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is there something wrong with the commenting system? Before I logged in just now only the first comment was visible; as soon as I logged in a lot more appeared. That isn't usual on here.

    The quality of debate was better in the early phase of this thread.
    I don't know. The first post was definitely missing a 'first'.
    I have bunged a 'last' on the previous thread as a friendly compromise.
    Are you sure?
    Its accuracy was fleeting.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,320
    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    Am wary of these kind of polls though. The difference between EEA and CETA and WTO is an esoteric topic for your average voter. Not sure I would be confident of explaining the difference even after years of reading PB!
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,939
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    The real issue is what the EU27 find acceptable.

    If its not on the menu, then no point in ordering it, like asking for the Peking Duck at McDonalds.
    Sadly the 27 member states won't have a say. It will be their overlords in Brussels who will decide what is and isn't acceptable. And if that is to the detriment of all 28 of us, they won't give a damn. Just as long as it dissuades everyone else from making a break for freedom.

    Night all.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,068
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
    The Liberals lost their majority in 1910. But King George V accepted that the Commons could not be defied by the Lords.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,188
    Charles said:

    I’m disappointed in you @TheScreamingEagles

    Only one Eighties pun?

    What happened to [Orchestral] Manouveres in the Dark and Two Tribes Go to War?

    Or even Enola May?

    I've had a very long day.

    Plus I've got half an hour to write the morning thread.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,320
    edited June 2018
    Sean_F said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
    The Liberals lost their majority in 1910. But King George V accepted that the Commons could not be defied by the Lords.
    Not exactly the same however, as the King insisted on new elections before he agreed to new Peers.
    Edit...he says confidently...heads off to check...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,188
    Sean_F said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
    The Liberals lost their majority in 1910. But King George V accepted that the Commons could not be defied by the Lords.
    But that was then, this is now.

    Does the Salisbuy-Addison convention apply to minority governments?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,972
    Anazina said:

    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    Sadly, EEA with restrictions is effectively impossible, as I understand it. Otherwise, it would be worthy of further investigation as a solution to this sorry mess.
    Most probably, unless we get something akin to the transition controls Blair lost us
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,972
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    The real issue is what the EU27 find acceptable.

    If its not on the menu, then no point in ordering it, like asking for the Peking Duck at McDonalds.
    More what France and Germany would find acceptable, I expect Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Greece, Denmark etc would be more amenable to giving us 'EEA with restrictions'
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    You cannot have temporary peers. Tony Benn wanted a 1000 peers to abolish the Lords.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,972
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    Am wary of these kind of polls though. The difference between EEA and CETA and WTO is an esoteric topic for your average voter. Not sure I would be confident of explaining the difference even after years of reading PB!
    See p14 and 15 for the explanations given to those polled


    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,320
    dixiedean said:

    Sean_F said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
    The Liberals lost their majority in 1910. But King George V accepted that the Commons could not be defied by the Lords.
    Not exactly the same however, as the King insisted on new elections before he agreed to new Peers.
    Edit...he says confidently...heads off to check...
    In fact the Lords caved in after 2 General Elections. They balked when made aware the King was reluctantly willing to do so. However, this option was never carried out, so it is not really a precedent.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,320
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    Am wary of these kind of polls though. The difference between EEA and CETA and WTO is an esoteric topic for your average voter. Not sure I would be confident of explaining the difference even after years of reading PB!
    See p14 and 15 for the explanations given to those polled


    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf
    Still remain wary. It is rather like choosing a car from looking at it rather than test driving it.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,356
    edited June 2018
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    The real issue is what the EU27 find acceptable.

    If its not on the menu, then no point in ordering it, like asking for the Peking Duck at McDonalds.
    More what France and Germany would find acceptable, I expect Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Greece, Denmark etc would be more amenable to giving us 'EEA with restrictions'
    Any deal has to be signed off by all, and the EU27 have managed a solidarity that even our own Cabinet can not manage. The only deal that we can definitely choose is No Deal. The rest require the opposition to co-operate.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,068
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sean_F said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
    The Liberals lost their majority in 1910. But King George V accepted that the Commons could not be defied by the Lords.
    But that was then, this is now.

    Does the Salisbuy-Addison convention apply to minority governments?
    We'll find out, when and if the Queen rules on the point.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,972
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    Am wary of these kind of polls though. The difference between EEA and CETA and WTO is an esoteric topic for your average voter. Not sure I would be confident of explaining the difference even after years of reading PB!
    See p14 and 15 for the explanations given to those polled


    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf
    Still remain wary. It is rather like choosing a car from looking at it rather than test driving it.
    That will be the same whatever Brexit deal done
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,591
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    Am wary of these kind of polls though. The difference between EEA and CETA and WTO is an esoteric topic for your average voter. Not sure I would be confident of explaining the difference even after years of reading PB!
    Not much point in offering people scenarios that cannot be delivered in the real world. Just because the leave campaign did it in the referendum is no reason for respectable polling organisations to follow suit.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Charles said:

    I’m disappointed in you @TheScreamingEagles

    Only one Eighties pun?

    What happened to [Orchestral] Manouveres in the Dark and Two Tribes Go to War?

    Or even Enola May?

    I've had a very long day.

    Plus I've got half an hour to write the morning thread.
    HMG turning its back on PFI nonsense because government borrowing is cheaper (which is what Ken Livingstone fell out with Gordon Brown over).
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44363366
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,972
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    The real issue is what the EU27 find acceptable.

    If its not on the menu, then no point in ordering it, like asking for the Peking Duck at McDonalds.
    More what France and Germany would find acceptable, I expect Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Greece, Denmark etc would be more amenable to giving us 'EEA with restrictions'
    Any deal has to be signed off by all, and the EU27 have managed a solidarity that even our own Cabinet can manage. The only deal that we can definitely choose is No Deal. The rest require the opposition to co-operate.
    The EU has managed that so far, with the Freedom Party now partly in government in Austria and Five Star and Lega Nord forming the government in Italy and Orban and the Poles flexing their muscles we will see how long that absolute unanimity lasts. However as we both agree if the EU heart of the French and Germans and Luxembourg and Belgium don't approve a deal it won't happen because of the unanimity requirement
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,518
    Ramos, what a legend/c*** (delete as appropriate). Not only did he get Salah off the pitch, he gave Karius a concussion which was why he looked so dodgy for the match.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,356
    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    I suspect this will be a damp squib, with most of the Tories falling into line and voting every amendment down. The Brexit ultras are just too powerful and threatening to defy. It would be a brave Tory MP to invite their wrath.

    I think it will be a clean slate for the Govt.

    Every Lords amendment has so far been overturned.

    They haven't won every vote – that's factually incorrect.

    However, I do agree that this will be a non-event and the simpering Tory wets will buckle in the face of Jacob Rees and his oh-so-scary brethren.
    I reckon so too.

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,654
    SandyRentool said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Opinium finds that Labour voters preferred Brexit outcome is to stay in the EEA while Conservative voters preferred outcome is CETA, the Canada trade deal with the EU but also including services.

    37% of Labour voters say leaving on WTO terms would be completely unacceptable, 23% say a Canada style trade deal excluding services would be completely unacceptable and 21% say a Canada style deal with services would be completely unacceptable.

    30% of Conservative voters say full EEA membership would be completely unacceptable.

    However 57% of Conservative voters say EEA membership with immigration restrictions would be acceptable with 41% unacceptable. 66% of Labour voters find this acceptable and 20% unacceptable and 72% of LD voters find this acceptable with 24% unacceptable. The only voters opposed to EEA with restrictions are UKIP voters with 67% finding this unacceptable and 28% acceptable.

    http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Which-way-to-the-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

    The real issue is what the EU27 find acceptable.

    If its not on the menu, then no point in ordering it, like asking for the Peking Duck at McDonalds.
    Sadly the 27 member states won't have a say. It will be their overlords in Brussels who will decide what is and isn't acceptable. And if that is to the detriment of all 28 of us, they won't give a damn. Just as long as it dissuades everyone else from making a break for freedom.

    Night all.
    You're just making things up
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Charles said:

    I’m disappointed in you @TheScreamingEagles

    Only one Eighties pun?

    What happened to [Orchestral] Manouveres in the Dark and Two Tribes Go to War?

    Or even Enola May?

    I've had a very long day.

    Plus I've got half an hour to write the morning thread.
    It was also Killing Moon not Manouveres in the Dark I was thinking of....
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sean_F said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
    The Liberals lost their majority in 1910. But King George V accepted that the Commons could not be defied by the Lords.
    But that was then, this is now.

    Does the Salisbuy-Addison convention apply to minority governments?
    I believe it does. The government is merely that group of office holders that supports the individual who commands a majority of the house.

    People also argue that the manifesto doesn’t count as it didn’t win a majority - but the DUP has agreed to support the government (at least of s&c+b). Those who seek to disapply the convention are playing fast and loose with a system that works
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Charles said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sean_F said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
    The Liberals lost their majority in 1910. But King George V accepted that the Commons could not be defied by the Lords.
    But that was then, this is now.

    Does the Salisbuy-Addison convention apply to minority governments?
    I believe it does. The government is merely that group of office holders that supports the individual who commands a majority of the house.

    People also argue that the manifesto doesn’t count as it didn’t win a majority - but the DUP has agreed to support the government (at least of s&c+b). Those who seek to disapply the convention are playing fast and loose with a system that works
    That would be a weak argument at the best of times but in support of a government that is ignoring the Sewel convention for its own convenience, it looks pitiful.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,119
    It's all jolly exciting isn't it? :D
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Article on the history of Grenfell Tower.

    https://www.ribaj.com/intelligence/grenfell-tower-history-lancaster-west-estate-london
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    AlastairMeeks said:

    Charles said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sean_F said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
    The Liberals lost their majority in 1910. But King George V accepted that the Commons could not be defied by the Lords.
    But that was then, this is now.

    Does the Salisbuy-Addison convention apply to minority governments?
    I believe it does. The government is merely that group of office holders that supports the individual who commands a majority of the house.

    People also argue that the manifesto doesn’t count as it didn’t win a majority - but the DUP has agreed to support the government (at least of s&c+b). Those who seek to disapply the convention are playing fast and loose with a system that works
    That would be a weak argument at the best of times but in support of a government that is ignoring the Sewel convention for its own convenience, it looks pitiful.
    The Sewel convention is nonsense. Why should Westminster give an implicit veto to subordinate legislatures that are elected with lower turnouts?

    The Salisbury convention says the unelected don’t have a right to veto the manifesto of the elected. What would you do instead?
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Charles said:

    I’m disappointed in you @TheScreamingEagles

    Only one Eighties pun?

    What happened to [Orchestral] Manouveres in the Dark and Two Tribes Go to War?

    Or even Enola May?

    I've had a very long day.

    Plus I've got half an hour to write the morning thread.
    You've had a blue monday by the sounds of things presumably about the state of the nation. Don't give in to temptation and start walking round the park when it gets late at night.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,188
    https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1003743559193890816
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,188
    Scrapheap_as_was said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Charles said:

    I’m disappointed in you @TheScreamingEagles

    Only one Eighties pun?

    What happened to [Orchestral] Manouveres in the Dark and Two Tribes Go to War?

    Or even Enola May?

    I've had a very long day.

    Plus I've got half an hour to write the morning thread.
    You've had a blue monday by the sounds of things presumably about the state of the nation. Don't give in to temptation and start walking round the park when it gets late at night.
    Last year Theresa May scheduled the general election on my girlfriend's birthday.

    I wonder what she's got planned to overshadow the big day.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,179
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1003743559193890816

    I really don't get why people think losing the customs vote would endanger May's premiership. She's not going to be putsched by a Remainer at this point, and there'd be no point in a Brexiteer takeover if the Commons numbers aren't there for a different approach.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    RoyalBlue said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    Charles said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sean_F said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
    The Liberals lost their majority in 1910. But King George V accepted that the Commons could not be defied by the Lords.
    But that was then, this is now.

    Does the Salisbuy-Addison convention apply to minority governments?
    I believe it does. The government is merely that group of office holders that supports the individual who commands a majority of the house.

    People also argue that the manifesto doesn’t count as it didn’t win a majority - but the DUP has agreed to support the government (at least of s&c+b). Those who seek to disapply the convention are playing fast and loose with a system that works
    That would be a weak argument at the best of times but in support of a government that is ignoring the Sewel convention for its own convenience, it looks pitiful.
    The Sewel convention is nonsense. Why should Westminster give an implicit veto to subordinate legislatures that are elected with lower turnouts?

    The Salisbury convention says the unelected don’t have a right to veto the manifesto of the elected. What would you do instead?
    Have you really reached the point of saying that conventions you don’t like are therefore to be discarded? I mean, I know Brexit has addled the brain of many Leavers but that’s a new low.

    As for the Salisbury convention, which dates from the 1940s not 1911, that convention arose when Labour had a majority of three figures in the Commons. The Conservatives now have no majority and nothing like the moral authority. The “manifesto of the elected” argument suffers from the considerable defect that the current government is brokered, not in position by sheer strength of mandate. Their lordships are entitled to look at claims of “the will of the people” with a jaundiced eye.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1003743559193890816

    Have the DUP confirmed which way they’re voting yet? The logic of their recent statements would imply that they’re voting against.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    AlastairMeeks said:

    Charles said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sean_F said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
    The Liberals lost their majority in 1910. But King George V accepted that the Commons could not be defied by the Lords.
    But that was then, this is now.

    Does the Salisbuy-Addison convention apply to minority governments?
    I believe it does. The government is merely that group of office holders that supports the individual who commands a majority of the house.

    People also argue that the manifesto doesn’t count as it didn’t win a majority - but the DUP has agreed to support the government (at least of s&c+b). Those who seek to disapply the convention are playing fast and loose with a system that works
    That would be a weak argument at the best of times but in support of a government that is ignoring the Sewel convention for its own convenience, it looks pitiful.
    The SNP is trying to abuse the Sewel convention

    The U.K. government has committed to transfer the relevant powers to Scotland as soon as they are repatriated to the U.K.

    Sewel never intended that the Scottish Parliament would have an effective veto over the U.K. parliament’s decisions
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,676
    edited June 2018
    FPT @Charles I’m surprised about Shaun Bailey in Kensington. We worked closely with him in Hammersmith in 2010 and he was exceptional.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,188
    AlastairMeeks said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1003743559193890816

    Have the DUP confirmed which way they’re voting yet? The logic of their recent statements would imply that they’re voting against.
    I've been texting a seasoned Westminster watcher, he says the DUP are absolutely fuming and are in no mood to help the government.

    https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1003746139294793729
    https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1003702001321070592

    The fact that one of those is Karen Bradley...
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,068
    AlastairMeeks said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    Charles said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sean_F said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    MaxPB said:

    dodrade said:

    If reversed will the Lords try again?

    I expect some will try but I doubt there would be a majority to send it back. The government would be well within its rights to then send 500 new temporary peers to the upper house and ram through all legislation.
    Except the Government lost its majority last year with this manifesto so I'd expect Her Majesty to refuse any appointment of peers.
    The Liberals lost their majority in 1910. But King George V accepted that the Commons could not be defied by the Lords.
    But that was then, this is now.

    Does the Salisbuy-Addison convention apply to minority governments?
    I believe it does. The government is merely that group of office holders that supports the individual who commands a majority of the house.

    People also argue that the manifesto doesn’t count as it didn’t win a majority - but the DUP has agreed to support the government (at least of s&c+b). Those who seek to disapply the convention are playing fast and loose with a system that works
    That would be a weak argument at the best of times but in support of a government that is ignoring the Sewel convention for its own convenience, it looks pitiful.
    The Sewel convention is nonsense. Why should Westminster give an implicit veto to subordinate legislatures that are elected with lower turnouts?

    The Salisbury convention says the unelected don’t have a right to veto the manifesto of the elected. What would you do instead?
    Have you really reached the point of saying that conventions you don’t like are therefore to be discarded? I mean, I know Brexit has addled the brain of many Leavers but that’s a new low.

    As for the Salisbury convention, which dates from the 1940s not 1911, that convention arose when Labour had a majority of three figures in the Commons. The Conservatives now have no majority and nothing like the moral authority. The “manifesto of the elected” argument suffers from the considerable defect that the current government is brokered, not in position by sheer strength of mandate. Their lordships are entitled to look at claims of “the will of the people” with a jaundiced eye.
    The current government has a pretty strong mandate. If the Commons reverses the Lords' Amendments, and the Lords fight to the bitter end, the Lords will lose.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,239
    Coordinated call across the north's regional papers for Grayling to go.

    Links to follow.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Scrapheap_as_was said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Charles said:

    I’m disappointed in you @TheScreamingEagles

    Only one Eighties pun?

    What happened to [Orchestral] Manouveres in the Dark and Two Tribes Go to War?

    Or even Enola May?

    I've had a very long day.

    Plus I've got half an hour to write the morning thread.
    You've had a blue monday by the sounds of things presumably about the state of the nation. Don't give in to temptation and start walking round the park when it gets late at night.
    Last year Theresa May scheduled the general election on my girlfriend's birthday.

    I wonder what she's got planned to overshadow the big day.
    Or maybe Klopp to real Madrid that day?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1003743559193890816

    Have the DUP confirmed which way they’re voting yet? The logic of their recent statements would imply that they’re voting against.
    I've been texting a seasoned Westminster watcher, he says the DUP are absolutely fuming and are in no mood to help the government.

    https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1003746139294793729
    https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1003702001321070592

    The fact that one of those is Karen Bradley...
    I saw that the other way around. The government has decided that the DUP won’t support them on the customs union vote and they’re not going to bother trying a charm offensive.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,188
    AlastairMeeks said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1003743559193890816

    Have the DUP confirmed which way they’re voting yet? The logic of their recent statements would imply that they’re voting against.
    I've been texting a seasoned Westminster watcher, he says the DUP are absolutely fuming and are in no mood to help the government.

    https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1003746139294793729
    https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1003702001321070592

    The fact that one of those is Karen Bradley...
    I saw that the other way around. The government has decided that the DUP won’t support them on the customs union vote and they’re not going to bother trying a charm offensive.
    I like your theory.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,179
    AlastairMeeks said:

    I saw that the other way around. The government has decided that the DUP won’t support them on the customs union vote and they’re not going to bother trying a charm offensive.

    The DUP wouldn't go soft on Brexit if they felt it left them exposed to being cast adrift by Brexiteers who'd be content with a GB-only hard Brexit, so if their calculation has changed, they must feel the Tory Brexiteers are a busted flush.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,188
    Scrapheap_as_was said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Scrapheap_as_was said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Charles said:

    I’m disappointed in you @TheScreamingEagles

    Only one Eighties pun?

    What happened to [Orchestral] Manouveres in the Dark and Two Tribes Go to War?

    Or even Enola May?

    I've had a very long day.

    Plus I've got half an hour to write the morning thread.
    You've had a blue monday by the sounds of things presumably about the state of the nation. Don't give in to temptation and start walking round the park when it gets late at night.
    Last year Theresa May scheduled the general election on my girlfriend's birthday.

    I wonder what she's got planned to overshadow the big day.
    Or maybe Klopp to real Madrid that day?
    Real Madrid are worse than Mark Reckless to me.

    https://twitter.com/GFFN/status/1003670403502493701
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,676
    williamglenn said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    I saw that the other way around. The government has decided that the DUP won’t support them on the customs union vote and they’re not going to bother trying a charm offensive.

    The DUP wouldn't go soft on Brexit if they felt it left them exposed to being cast adrift by Brexiteers who'd be content with a GB-only hard Brexit, so if their calculation has changed, they must feel the Tory Brexiteers are a busted flush.
    Just about the only red line I believe will hold out of the lot of them mooted of late is the DUP’s refusal to contemplate a border in the Irish Sea.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    Bercow appears to be aging rapidly.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,239
    edited June 2018
    Pro_Rata said:

    Coordinated call across the north's regional papers for Grayling to go.

    Links to follow.

    MEN link with all participants should suffice:

    https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/great-north-fightback-enough-enough-14743720

    But MEN, Yorkshire Post, Hull Daily News, Huddersfield Examiner & probably other s all running the same headline.

    Liverpool Echo and Sheffield Star, not yet, but on board
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,188
    https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1003753218650800133
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    TOPPING said:

    williamglenn said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    I saw that the other way around. The government has decided that the DUP won’t support them on the customs union vote and they’re not going to bother trying a charm offensive.

    The DUP wouldn't go soft on Brexit if they felt it left them exposed to being cast adrift by Brexiteers who'd be content with a GB-only hard Brexit, so if their calculation has changed, they must feel the Tory Brexiteers are a busted flush.
    Just about the only red line I believe will hold out of the lot of them mooted of late is the DUP’s refusal to contemplate a border in the Irish Sea.
    Unlike the government, the DUP knows what it wants from Brexit and what sacrifices it is prepared to make to get its preferred version.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,139
    Pro_Rata said:

    Coordinated call across the north's regional papers for Grayling to go.

    Links to follow.

    Perhaps Grayling should go for the DfT's failures. However the head of Network Rail should certainly go. Mark Carne is due to leave NR soon anyway, but he should go without any golden handshake and with more than a little cloud over him. They've mucked up too much over recent years - the entire electrification debacle is down to them.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/bpolitics/status/1003758307667070979
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,576
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1003753218650800133

    The only thing that makes me question that conclusion is it is hardly just remainers who are running riot due to her indecisiveness - the hardcore Tory Brexiters have been flapping about at least as much as any hardcore Tory remainers, surely?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,188
    George is always right, no one should ever doubt George, everybody should be more like George.

    https://twitter.com/Tim_Wallace/status/1003670642405896192
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,576
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/bpolitics/status/1003758307667070979

    One thing I sure do not envy the americans with is the constant bloody speculation about people preparing presidential runs.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,676
    AlastairMeeks said:

    TOPPING said:

    williamglenn said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    I saw that the other way around. The government has decided that the DUP won’t support them on the customs union vote and they’re not going to bother trying a charm offensive.

    The DUP wouldn't go soft on Brexit if they felt it left them exposed to being cast adrift by Brexiteers who'd be content with a GB-only hard Brexit, so if their calculation has changed, they must feel the Tory Brexiteers are a busted flush.
    Just about the only red line I believe will hold out of the lot of them mooted of late is the DUP’s refusal to contemplate a border in the Irish Sea.
    Unlike the government, the DUP knows what it wants from Brexit and what sacrifices it is prepared to make to get its preferred version.
    So it will either be the EU tolerating a wholly non-physical border between NI and RoI or CU/SM for the UK.

    I mean it’s hardly control.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Scrapheap_as_was said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Scrapheap_as_was said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Charles said:

    I’m disappointed in you @TheScreamingEagles

    Only one Eighties pun?

    What happened to [Orchestral] Manouveres in the Dark and Two Tribes Go to War?

    Or even Enola May?

    I've had a very long day.

    Plus I've got half an hour to write the morning thread.
    You've had a blue monday by the sounds of things presumably about the state of the nation. Don't give in to temptation and start walking round the park when it gets late at night.
    Last year Theresa May scheduled the general election on my girlfriend's birthday.

    I wonder what she's got planned to overshadow the big day.
    Or maybe Klopp to real Madrid that day?
    Real Madrid are worse than Mark Reckless to me.

    https://twitter.com/GFFN/status/1003670403502493701
    I'm with you there...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,179
    Daniel Hannan is now saying he thought the close Brexit result would have led to us just renegotiating the terms of membership.

    https://twitter.com/EenVandaag/status/1003677539980664832
This discussion has been closed.