politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Moggsy’s TM confidence vote gamble could rebound into a confid

anothernick said:

OllyT said:

CD13 said:

Immediately after the referendum, we had moans from the Remainers that we were paranoid, because we weren't over-joyed by our victory. Cheer up, you've won, they said..

The Leavers' fear was always that the EU and the Euro-fanatics would dissemble, time-waste, prevaricate (add your odd description) and generally hope to wear down the negotiators to maintain the status quo as long as possible, then claim we'd all changed our minds. The weariness has been achieved.

All very predictable. The EU is bureaucratic and never in a hurry, but acutely aware that the UK leaving will destabilise it.

There was no UK ready-made plan because Cameron prevented the CS from having one prepared, even in outline. The EU was never in a hurry to negotiate, and transition periods will always be time-wasting procedures. Mrs May's first priority was to keep the Tory party intact in the short-term. Labour's first priority was to gain power. The so-called will of the people was well down the list, if even on it.

Time now to move on to the final stages. A deal which basically guarantees more delay. Deadlock Parliament (which looks likely) and in desperation, reluctantly decide on another referendum to 'decide' the issue, hoping enough of the 'fed-up' will switch to secure a narrow victory. Celebrate a final decision and vow never to allow another referendum again. Hope the outrage will gradually dissipate.

This is what some of us feared all along. You didn't have to be Nostradamus. At least being cynical to start with means you're never going to be disappointed.

Leave's problem is that the mandate was weak and the leavers could never unite behind a single course of action, either before the vote or after. Everything else pretty much stems from that.

You didn't have to be Nostradamus to predict that putting a disparate coalition of 52% together to win a vote was the easy bit, just blame everything on the EU. The hard bit was always going to be delivering something afterwards.

It's incredible that leavers, and May, appear not to have understood this blindingly obvious fact. THey have made no effort to find a national consensus on an acceptable method of leaving. In 2016 many remainers would have been happy to accept some form of SM/CU soft Brexit but May kowtowed the ERG and ploughed ahead with unachievable red lines and empty rhetoric. In doing so they have come close to destroying the whole project, the coup de grace cannot be long delayed IMO.

You can't build a consensus on Brexit because there's no consensus to be had. As we're seeing with the loony, traitorous Brexiteers in the Conservative Party. Bunch of winnets, the lot of 'em.

edmundintokyo said:

Dura_Ace said:

The lack of a reshuffle to fill the two vacant positions in the cabinet is probably indicative of something or other.

Maybe hard to recruit good people if they're not sure whether you're going to survive the weekend.

'Served in Theresa May's cabinet' is a bit like getting the Iron Cross 2nd class in WWI. It's probably not going to do much for your job prospects either.

This is simulataneously fascinating and horrifying. I have to say I'm very disappointed in the Tories flailing around like nubs. More rapier, less handbags ladies.

Where are we now on public no confidence letter MPs... is it above the teens yet?

RochdalePioneers said:

Ok so Give has come out of hiding. Any sign of Hunt or Javid or Hammond? If the Cabinet are supposedly backing the deal and supporting the PM you'd imagine the big office holders would be seen and heard.

Give is a most inappropriate typo in the case of the self serving, over-ambitious wee shit.

Xenon said:

Mysticrose said:

Benpointer said:

Mysticrose said:

Benpointer said:

Xenon said:

Right having thought about this all more, I don't think there's any chance the government haven't been preparing for no deal. It would be too stupid and negligent if they didn't and while I think they are crap I don't think they're that crap.

I think they need to say they haven't in order to sell this deal as the only possible option.

They are that crap.

I'm afraid they are.

The other point we all know but which bears repeating is that Cameron made NO contingency whatsoever for a Leave vote. None. I remember chatting to someone on his team 6 months before the vote and he couldn't believe it. And then you realise what an arrogant Etonian Cameron was and you can well believe it.

This is why I think we need to get a delay on Withdrawal. We simply are not ready and this is too important to mess with.

I think most Leavers and Remainers will come round to the view that this is a reasonable compromise

No they won't.

It's worse than being in the EU. It's neither Brexit nor Remain. An awful half-way house which leaves us hamstrung.

She's managed the brilliant feat of uniting Remainers, Brexiteers and Unionists in opposition.

Yes it seems to be.

I'd rather stay in the EU than this dog's dinner of a deal. At least we might be able to leave in the future!

Me too and I voted Leave.

Unless that was her cunning plan as a Remainer? Produce a deal so awful and a Y2K style Armageddon of No Deal so that we all decide to Remain after all.

Sadly she's not that clever.

OblitusSumMe said:

Xenon said:

Benpointer said:

Xenon said:

Right having thought about this all more, I don't think there's any chance the government haven't been preparing for no deal. It would be too stupid and negligent if they didn't and while I think they are crap I don't think they're that crap.

I think they need to say they haven't in order to sell this deal as the only possible option.

They are that crap.

If that really is the case, can anyone explain to me their thinking behind not bothering to prepare?

I don't understand it, not only could it cause massive chaos, but it meant the EU could offer us any old rubbish entirely on their terms and we'd have to accept.

It must have been deliberate.

rcs1000 made a good post about that on the previous thread, arguing that May had promised business there would be a deal in order to stop an exodus of jobs and investment. Any extensive no-deal planning would scare business away.

Any CEO worth his salt understands contingency planning. By obviously planning for something you make it a) less likely to happen, as you are less likely to accidentally arrive there b) are prepared if you do arrive there.

Sounds like the Sir Humphreys had been pouring poison in her ear again.

More interesting is who isn't on this list...

https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1063380077227008000

RobinWiggs said:

Apologies if posted before, but this analysis from the Times yesterday sets out the possible parliamentary arithmetic. It's better than the simple Beeb version.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/factions-that-hold-the-key-to-acceptance-9h2sq6bkn?

Thanks. It seems somewhat optimistic on the number of Tory Brexiteers who might swing behind this, but perhaps their definition of who is an ultra differs from mine. It does note they need pretty much everyone who could be considered a swinger to get it through, which sounds tough.

David_Evershed said:

Is it in the national interest for May to step down now and let another Conservative take over to try and improve the deal with the EU?

Rather than for her to limp on as a lame duck?

It is certainly not in the Conservatives' interests to have in place a PM who has just survived a confidence vote and cannot be removed despite having lost her working majority in the House of Commons and as such opened up the possibility of losing a vote of no confidence in her government. May is so stubborn that if she lost such a vote, she would not step down and having secured 12 months grace she could not be forced to do so by her party, so there would be no prospect of another Conservative leader regaining the DUP's support in the 14 days available to form a replacement government. May would rather take her chances of winning a general election conducted in the most unfavourable of circumstances.

As to whether that scenario would be in the national interest, it depends on your party political allegiances and your view of Brexit.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Jonathan said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mark Stone just confirmed from the EU no further negotiations on the WDA. This is the best they can do.

It is the end of the WDA process

That is NOT what Barnier said this week. I can see the temptation for May supporters to spin this as a take it scenario. But that really isn't true and if it were that would essentially be tantamount to blackmail.

This is today and is not spin.

It is reporting exactly what Mark Stone said on Sky reporting from Brussels

I cannot help it if you do not like it

It contradicts a direct statement of the guy leading negotiations. It also does not make sense.

What it is, is leaders trying to be helpful to May today. It really isn't helpful. If you try to box the British into a corner, you might not get the response you expect.

Xenon said:

JosiasJessop said:

Xenon said:

Benpointer said:

Xenon said:

Right having thought about this all more, I don't think there's any chance the government haven't been preparing for no deal. It would be too stupid and negligent if they didn't and while I think they are crap I don't think they're that crap.

I think they need to say they haven't in order to sell this deal as the only possible option.

They are that crap.

If that really is the case, can anyone explain to me their thinking behind not bothering to prepare?

I don't understand it, not only could it cause massive chaos, but it meant the EU could offer us any old rubbish entirely on their terms and we'd have to accept.

It must have been deliberate.

Look no further than industry and investment. Everyone knows a no-deal would be a hard hit to the economy, in the short term at least, and angling for a no-deal whilst hoping for a deal would cause unnecessary harm to the economy by causing companies to reduce investment.

Not that hardcore Brexiteers care about unnecessary harm to the economy ...

So they were prepared to give up our sovereignty forever because big business were worried about a short term hit to the economy.

Sums up the lot of them.

Frankly, this is nonsense. Nothing is forever. There will never be a 'last word' on our relations with European countries (note: not just 'The EU'). Time doesn't just bear all its sons away. If Brexit: Take One fails, it'll be because people lack patience.

Say the loons are correct and we're to be something between a vassal state or an EU colony. How long do you think that would last if we really put our minds to it? We're the UK, fifthish largest economy in the world, nuclear power, cricket, bulldogs etc. It's not a rerun of the Delian league.

Graham Brady is going to have a brilliant book to write when he retires about the true story of what letters he received and when.

kle4 said:

RobinWiggs said:

Apologies if posted before, but this analysis from the Times yesterday sets out the possible parliamentary arithmetic. It's better than the simple Beeb version.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/factions-that-hold-the-key-to-acceptance-9h2sq6bkn?

Thanks. It seems somewhat optimistic on the number of Tory Brexiteers who might swing behind this, but perhaps their definition of who is an ultra differs from mine. It does note they need pretty much everyone who could be considered a swinger to get it through, which sounds tough.

Better than the Grauniad that forgot SF exist

O/T

"Japan's cyber-security minister has 'never used a computer'"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-46222026

I think if the vote were tomorrow TM would lose. But in a month or so - 50/50

Jonathan said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mark Stone just confirmed from the EU no further negotiations on the WDA. This is the best they can do.

It is the end of the WDA process

That is NOT what Barnier said this week. I can see the temptation for May supporters to spin this as a take it scenario. But that really isn't true and if it were that would essentially be tantamount to blackmail.

Which points do you think the EU would be amenable to giving ground on?

John_M said:

tlg86 said:

More interesting is who isn't on this list...

https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1063380077227008000

Thank fuck. Liam will save the day. May God have mercy on our souls.

Fox has been quite steady throughout all this compared to some of his Brexit buddies. And as the elder statesman in the cabinet...

AndyJS said:

O/T

"Japan's cyber-security minister has 'never used a computer'"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-46222026

Commendable threat awareness, that.

Pulpstar said:

Graham Brady is going to have a brilliant book to write when he retires about the true story of what letters he received and when.

Depends how Brexit pans out. If it transpires he could have got shot of May earlier and avoided a No Deal Brexit, he might put that book on hold.....

Mysticrose said:

Jonathan said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mark Stone just confirmed from the EU no further negotiations on the WDA. This is the best they can do.

It is the end of the WDA process

That is NOT what Barnier said this week. I can see the temptation for May supporters to spin this as a take it scenario. But that really isn't true and if it were that would essentially be tantamount to blackmail.

Quite right.

It's pure May spin. Sickening shite.

As is this nonsense that it's 'this deal or no deal.' Garbage. Utter bilge.

How is it TM spin when it is a European journalist reporting from Brussels

AndyJS said:

O/T

"Japan's cyber-security minister has 'never used a computer'"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-46222026

I wish all my customers had been that careful. Good man.

MarqueeMark said:

kle4 said:

Jonathan said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mark Stone just confirmed from the EU no further negotiations on the WDA. This is the best they can do.

It is the end of the WDA process

That is NOT what Barnier said this week. I can see the temptation for May supporters to spin this as a take it scenario. But that really isn't true and if it were that would essentially be tantamount to blackmail.

However, people suggesting it would be easy to reopen negotiations and obtain things would be tantamount to being misleading, recklessly so. It was so when the leave campaign made things sound easy, and it is so now.

I have 25 years of international commercial negotaiting under my belt, with people on the other side who would eat Barnier for breakfast (literally, in one case - if the rumour was to be believed).

You are wrong. Deals are nearly always re-opened until the signing pen has been used.

And what experience do you have of negotiating treaties between sovereign states ?

Benpointer said:

Mysticrose said:

Benpointer said:

Xenon said:

Right having thought about this all more, I don't think there's any chance the government haven't been preparing for no deal. It would be too stupid and negligent if they didn't and while I think they are crap I don't think they're that crap.

I think they need to say they haven't in order to sell this deal as the only possible option.

They are that crap.

I'm afraid they are.

The other point we all know but which bears repeating is that Cameron made NO contingency whatsoever for a Leave vote. None. I remember chatting to someone on his team 6 months before the vote and he couldn't believe it. And then you realise what an arrogant Etonian Cameron was and you can well believe it.

This is why I think we need to get a delay on Withdrawal. We simply are not ready and this is too important to mess with.

Just go with May's deal. It delivers an exit from the EU without trashing the economy.

I think most Leavers and Remainers will come round to the view that this is a reasonable compromise given: the (narrow) vote to Leave, the lack of a significant shift in opinion since, that any further vote is likely to be narrowly won, and that No Deal would seriously damage the economy and deepen the divisions in the country.

May's deal is the only option which will allow the country to put this whole sorry episode behind us.

I think all of this has been building for 25 if not 60 years because things have been done without consent being asked for, and that’s why it’s so bitter now. The divisions didn’t magically appear in Spring 2016 they’d been there all along beneath the surface and it is a gross failure of our politics in general that that was not recognised. A plague on them all.

However, if the headbangers from ERG to Continuity Remainers get their way it will persist and fester and God knows where we end up. Now May’s deal is not where I want to go and probably not where you want to end up, but it’s a fair reflection to me of a split country. It’s gets us out of the crap I hate, but preserves vast chunks of the economic connections that you are probably ok with. It doesn’t preclude the country taking a breather for a few years and going back or further out from there. If you and I can ageee it’s a reasonable stab at a resolution for now I’d have hoped it spanned a large bloc across the country. We shall see as people get to know it more, though I’m not that hopeful sadly.

John_M said:

Frankly, this is nonsense. Nothing is forever. There will never be a 'last word' on our relations with European countries (note: not just 'The EU'). Time doesn't just bear all its sons away. If Brexit: Take One fails, it'll be because people lack patience.

Say the loons are correct and we're to be something between a vassal state or an EU colony. How long do you think that would last if we really put our minds to it? We're the UK, fifthish largest economy in the world, nuclear power, cricket, bulldogs etc. It's not a rerun of the Delian league.

You raise an interesting point. I do understand the concerns of the more strident leavers here, that if we don't get it right from the start we will be in a very bad place, but it just reminds of of Daniel Hannan's book, where 90% talks about how great this country is and all it has faced and achieved...then essentially concludes we have no chance of overcoming the obstacles before us in the EU.

Now, while I did vote leave because I did not like the direction of the EU, I do get surprised by this attitude of how blooming great we are, and yet simultaneously thinking that we have no chance of overcoming things in our path like, for instance, a sub-optimal deal. Sure they must be worried, not unreasonably, that once it is done a lot of people will not want to reopen it for quite some time, and why indeed should they face the prospect of decades more struggle. But nothing is forever, as you say. It won't be easy to change things if this deal is adopted, it might even take a long time, but to act like we will never have the chance is simply very defeatist.

And yes, this argument could be flipped, as I have myself suggested to those who think the EU's greatness is self evident, and our need to be in it just as much, that clearly we will get back in not that long from now, even if we take a compromise on a deal to leave now, rather than fight tooth and nail and risk all to remain.

Richard_Nabavi said:

MarqueeMark said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Xenon said:

Benpointer said:

Xenon said:

Right having thought about this all more, I don't think there's any chance the government haven't been preparing for no deal. It would be too stupid and negligent if they didn't and while I think they are crap I don't think they're that crap.

I think they need to say they haven't in order to sell this deal as the only possible option.

They are that crap.

If that really is the case, can anyone explain to me their thinking behind not bothering to prepare?

I don't understand it, not only could it cause massive chaos, but it meant the EU could offer us any old rubbish entirely on their terms and we'd have to accept.

It must have been deliberate.

rcs1000 made a good post about that on the previous thread, arguing that May had promised business there would be a deal in order to stop an exodus of jobs and investment. Any extensive no-deal planning would scare business away.

Any CEO worth his salt understands contingency planning. By obviously planning for something you make it a) less likely to happen, as you are less likely to accidentally arrive there b) are prepared if you do arrive there.

Sounds like the Sir Humphreys had been pouring poison in her ear again.

The main contingency planning for a no-deal Brexit is to move operations out of the UK to an EU27 country.

A couple of days back, one of the supermarket chief executives was interviewed on R4, and said that they had done little or no planning for no deal, as they regarded it as futile...

Jonathan said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Jonathan said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mark Stone just confirmed from the EU no further negotiations on the WDA. This is the best they can do.

It is the end of the WDA process

That is NOT what Barnier said this week. I can see the temptation for May supporters to spin this as a take it scenario. But that really isn't true and if it were that would essentially be tantamount to blackmail.

Which points do you think the EU would be amenable to giving ground on?

My preferred solution would be to replace the hated bespoke backstop with re-entry into the EU.

I think the EU would give ground on that and that might pass the HoC, given the relative upsides for Remainers and Leavers alike.

Creative, but I can't see that one getting past the Commons, even if the EU were willing (which I doubt, because it would take away their sovereignty in deciding whether and on what terms we could become members again).

Nigelb said:

El_Capitano said:

Public list up to 20:

https://twitter.com/dansabbagh/status/1063377499831365632?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

What a shower.
Difficult to know which of them ought to be more embarrassed to be on the list with the others.

After the err "work" me and Eagles did for Rowley as well. Shocking !

Francois "Something I thought I'd never do" ffsake - it's so transparently shameless.

Foakes wallops a six - and play is immediately suspended for bad light.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Nigelb said:

A couple of days back, one of the supermarket chief executives was interviewed on R4, and said that they had done little or no planning for no deal, as they regarded it as futile...

Yes, in that business there isn't anything much they can do.

What can most UK based businesses do in reality ?

Francois on Sky saying he hopes that over the weekend other letters will go in and they will see on monday as to what happens. I do not use the word often but 'bellend' comes to mind

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Francois on Sky saying he hopes that over the weekend other letters will go in and they will see on monday as to what happens. I do not use the word often but 'bellend' comes to mind

He's the one who (ALLEGEDLY) used the nasty language about May... he's a chopsy little fucker.

https://twitter.com/NewtonEmerson/status/1063054611441967110

Xenon said:

JosiasJessop said:

Xenon said:

Benpointer said:

Xenon said:

Right having thought about this all more, I don't think there's any chance the government haven't been preparing for no deal. It would be too stupid and negligent if they didn't and while I think they are crap I don't think they're that crap.

I think they need to say they haven't in order to sell this deal as the only possible option.

They are that crap.

If that really is the case, can anyone explain to me their thinking behind not bothering to prepare?

I don't understand it, not only could it cause massive chaos, but it meant the EU could offer us any old rubbish entirely on their terms and we'd have to accept.

It must have been deliberate.

Look no further than industry and investment. Everyone knows a no-deal would be a hard hit to the economy, in the short term at least, and angling for a no-deal whilst hoping for a deal would cause unnecessary harm to the economy by causing companies to reduce investment.

Not that hardcore Brexiteers care about unnecessary harm to the economy ...

So they were prepared to give up our sovereignty forever because big business were worried about a short term hit to the economy.

Sums up the lot of them.

That 'hit to the economy' might be my wife's job. Or friends' jobs. It may cost people their livelihoods and homes.

It hurts real people.

And that's why it matters.

tlg86 said:

More interesting is who isn't on this list...

https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1063380077227008000

So the fate of the nation now hinges on the disgraced Liam Fox...

AndyJS said:

"Ben Bradley tells Sky News he has submitted one to Sir Graham Brady"

https://news.sky.com/story/live-michael-gove-could-quit-as-theresa-may-refuses-to-ditch-brexit-draft-11555447

https://twitter.com/BBCNormanS/status/1063380063113134080

Pulpstar said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Nigelb said:

A couple of days back, one of the supermarket chief executives was interviewed on R4, and said that they had done little or no planning for no deal, as they regarded it as futile...

Yes, in that business there isn't anything much they can do.

What can most UK based businesses do in reality ?

Depend a lot on the nature of the business, obviously. Financial institutions can get set up subsidiaries in an EU27 country, or beef up existing ones. Same for airlines. Some manufacturers might be able to reduce risk to the supply chain by stockpiling critical components. Some businesses can simply halt investment in the UK and prioritise investment elsewhere. Some manufacturing businesses might be able to plan for moving production elsewhere. Etc etc, each company will be different, but the overriding way of reducing risk is to get out of the UK in some form or another, where possible.

AndyJS said:

"Ben Bradley tells Sky News he has submitted one to Sir Graham Brady"

https://news.sky.com/story/live-michael-gove-could-quit-as-theresa-may-refuses-to-ditch-brexit-draft-11555447

I do not think that is new.

The intellect of ERG may include the same names repeating they have submitted letters to confuse the counting

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Tim Montgomerie, former adviser to IDS, and very much ConHome fully endorses TM deal

Nicky Morgan does the same in the Guardian

As does Fraser Nelson in the Daily Telegraph

It's not a "good" deal but given the Carney-inspired wasteland that many people seem to believe will be the product of "No Deal", I can understand why the gullible and the terrified are flocking to endorse it.

No doubt the May apologists will spin this as a triumph for the Prime Minister - really? It's a measure of the ineptitude of the May Government that a deal which would have been ridiculed in 2016 is now seen as our best hope for survival (and by "our" I mean the Conservative Party for the most part).

Nothing of course changes on 30/3/19 - we go into a period of Transition in which, to all intents and purposes, we will be full members of the EU with all the obligations (including the Divorce Bill) and no rights in the decision-making process.

That also includes Freedom of Movement which won't end on 30/3/19 either.

Some things remain constant... who was the MP I wonder?

https://twitter.com/lucianaberger/status/1063354323323764736

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

kle4 said:

Jonathan said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mark Stone just confirmed from the EU no further negotiations on the WDA. This is the best they can do.

It is the end of the WDA process

That is NOT what Barnier said this week. I can see the temptation for May supporters to spin this as a take it scenario. But that really isn't true and if it were that would essentially be tantamount to blackmail.

However, people suggesting it would be easy to reopen negotiations and obtain things would be tantamount to being misleading, recklessly so. It was so when the leave campaign made things sound easy, and it is so now.

You are wrong. Deals are nearly always re-opened until the signing pen has been used.

I'm not wrong, because I did not say that the deal could not be reopened or renegotiated. I said it would not be easy to reopen and obtain things from it. More specifically, and I did not say this in that particular post, to obtain substantive things from it.

You may disagree about how easy it would be, but if you are going to stun me with your vast experience of negotiation you might first want to check that I said you what you think I said.

See?

kle4 said:

However, people suggesting it would be easy to reopen negotiations and obtain things would be tantamount to being misleading, recklessly so. It was so when the leave campaign made things sound easy, and it is so now.

Doesn't say it cannot be reopened.

Damn, my ego is acting up.

Keep calm lads

malcolmg said:

Nigelb said:

MarqueeMark said:

kle4 said:

Jonathan said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mark Stone just confirmed from the EU no further negotiations on the WDA. This is the best they can do.

It is the end of the WDA process

That is NOT what Barnier said this week. I can see the temptation for May supporters to spin this as a take it scenario. But that really isn't true and if it were that would essentially be tantamount to blackmail.

However, people suggesting it would be easy to reopen negotiations and obtain things would be tantamount to being misleading, recklessly so. It was so when the leave campaign made things sound easy, and it is so now.

I have 25 years of international commercial negotaiting under my belt, with people on the other side who would eat Barnier for breakfast (literally, in one case - if the rumour was to be believed).

You are wrong. Deals are nearly always re-opened until the signing pen has been used.

And what experience do you have of negotiating treaties between sovereign states ?

He is unlikely to have dealt with self important dumplings who have sh** for brains and know the value of nothing. More likely means he dealt with real business people who had a brain and knew the value of at least some things.

And were focussed on their particular business, rather than the diverse interests of millions of people, and thousands of industries.
The idea that the two are comparable is absurd, but illustrative of the simplistic beliefs of the ultras.

malcolmg said:

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

kle4 said:

Jonathan said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mark Stone just confirmed from the EU no further negotiations on the WDA. This is the best they can do.

It is the end of the WDA process

That is NOT what Barnier said this week. I can see the temptation for May supporters to spin this as a take it scenario. But that really isn't true and if it were that would essentially be tantamount to blackmail.

However, people suggesting it would be easy to reopen negotiations and obtain things would be tantamount to being misleading, recklessly so. It was so when the leave campaign made things sound easy, and it is so now.

You are wrong. Deals are nearly always re-opened until the signing pen has been used.

I'm not wrong, because I did not say that the deal could not be reopened or renegotiated. I said it would not be easy to reopen and obtain things from it. More specifically, and I did not say this in that particular post, to obtain substantive things from it.

You may disagree about how easy it would be, but if you are going to stun me with your vast experience of negotiation you might first want to check that I said you what you think I said.

See?

kle4 said:

However, people suggesting it would be easy to reopen negotiations and obtain things would be tantamount to being misleading, recklessly so. It was so when the leave campaign made things sound easy, and it is so now.

Doesn't say it cannot be reopened.

Damn, my ego is acting up.

Keep calm lads

It's this Brexityness - never give up on anything!

On that note, before I go, I haven't heard much reported about the SNP's comment on all this. I assume that's because of course they are all opposed to the deal, but I would be surprised if they did not have some cutting remarks about what is going on.

OneArmedBadger said:

AndyJS said:

O/T

"Japan's cyber-security minister has 'never used a computer'"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-46222026

Commendable threat awareness, that.

"Computers? Don't trust 'em."

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

kle4 said:

Jonathan said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mark Stone just confirmed from the EU no further negotiations on the WDA. This is the best they can do.

It is the end of the WDA process

That is NOT what Barnier said this week. I can see the temptation for May supporters to spin this as a take it scenario. But that really isn't true and if it were that would essentially be tantamount to blackmail.

However, people suggesting it would be easy to reopen negotiations and obtain things would be tantamount to being misleading, recklessly so. It was so when the leave campaign made things sound easy, and it is so now.

You are wrong. Deals are nearly always re-opened until the signing pen has been used.

I'm not wrong, because I did not say that the deal could not be reopened or renegotiated. I said it would not be easy to reopen and obtain things from it. More specifically, and I did not say this in that particular post, to obtain substantive things from it.

You may disagree about how easy it would be, but if you are going to stun me with your vast experience of negotiation you might first want to check that I said you what you think I said.

See?

kle4 said:

However, people suggesting it would be easy to reopen negotiations and obtain things would be tantamount to being misleading, recklessly so. It was so when the leave campaign made things sound easy, and it is so now.

Doesn't say it cannot be reopened.

Damn, my ego is acting up.

Tell them you aren't signing. See what happens.

It's interesting you don't want to listen to people with expertise on matters in hand.

welshowl said:

Benpointer said:

Mysticrose said:

Benpointer said:

Xenon said:

Right having thought about this all more, I don't think there's any chance the government haven't been preparing for no deal. It would be too stupid and negligent if they didn't and while I think they are crap I don't think they're that crap.

I think they need to say they haven't in order to sell this deal as the only possible option.

They are that crap.

I'm afraid they are.

The other point we all know but which bears repeating is that Cameron made NO contingency whatsoever for a Leave vote. None. I remember chatting to someone on his team 6 months before the vote and he couldn't believe it. And then you realise what an arrogant Etonian Cameron was and you can well believe it.

This is why I think we need to get a delay on Withdrawal. We simply are not ready and this is too important to mess with.

Just go with May's deal. It delivers an exit from the EU without trashing the economy.

I think most Leavers and Remainers will come round to the view that this is a reasonable compromise given: the (narrow) vote to Leave, the lack of a significant shift in opinion since, that any further vote is likely to be narrowly won, and that No Deal would seriously damage the economy and deepen the divisions in the country.

May's deal is the only option which will allow the country to put this whole sorry episode behind us.

I think all of this has been building for 25 if not 60 years because things have been done without consent being asked for, and that’s why it’s so bitter now. The divisions didn’t magically appear in Spring 2016 they’d been there all along beneath the surface and it is a gross failure of our politics in general that that was not recognised. A plague on them all.

However, if the headbangers from ERG to Continuity Remainers get their way it will persist and fester and God knows where we end up. Now May’s deal is not where I want to go and probably not where you want to end up, but it’s a fair reflection to me of a split country. It’s gets us out of the crap I hate, but preserves vast chunks of the economic connections that you are probably ok with. It doesn’t preclude the country taking a breather for a few years and going back or further out from there. If you and I can ageee it’s a reasonable stab at a resolution for now I’d have hoped it spanned a large bloc across the country. We shall see as people get to know it more, though I’m not that hopeful sadly.

Most people will get the crap they read in papers or see in media, ie a biased lot of propaganda so unlikely it will go well.

Following the failure of the Cabinet rebels to exert any leaverage and Gove, Leadsom etc not resigning, Conservative Leavers will be forced to resort to trying to change the Conservative leader and send in their letters.