If I was May, no more balance. Just put in Dealers or Remainers into the Cabinet.
+1 I agree the time for balance is over.
Yeah she's already sold Brexiteers (that's like 70% of her members and voters but we won't worry about that) down the river...
Why bother keeping up the pretense now?
I voted Tory in 2017 and I don't feel she has sold me out or any of the other Tory voters I know.
A negotiation means a compromise.
I would rather Remain and if MPs with your views don't stop messing about I hope you get something you really don't like which is Remain or another referendum. If it means people like you leave the Tory party I will be glad as I cannot understand this obsession with Europe and wanting no deal otherwise known as economic suicide!
I'm on the other side of the EU argument to you. I dislike Theresa May's nanny statism and think she has a political tin ear, but I don't consider that she's sold me out on the EU.
Agreed. Trade deals, money, immigration and judges. She had delivered on all four.
At the moment, they are looking at 2 years of red-line posturing resulting in a package that a mortally wounded PM cannot pass through the House. A crash-out Brexit is all they have to show for their "Non!".
Fucking A1 job, boys.
Luckily the EU economies are looking so strong they can take a loss of GDP in their stride.
Oh.
And a UK that is going to HAVE to come after them with a package of investment breaks and ultra-low corporate taxes that will make their eyes bleed.
Yep. A1 job. Prats.
You seem fanatically keen to try to shift blame onto the EU for this, with post after post stating "it's not me, guv!".
You were an arch-leaver, perhaps even a Brexiteer. This is your mess.
Our absurd voting system with so many MPs effectively sheltered from electoral pressure in their safe seats is a significant contributory factor to the current fiasco.
Certainly is... a lesson to learn here is very clear: Major reform of our politics is severely overdue. To be honest, if May gets her deal and calls another election she might end up being defeated as Churchill was, because the voters now loathe the Tories so much. On the other hand... um... Corbyn.
If a second referendum, then the Tories would be forced out regardless.
*) They block the current deal in parliament. *) They re-write it to make it more Brexity. *) They pass this to the EU. *) The EU say 'Non!" - as they've said they would, and they are far less likely to agree a more Brexity deal. *) Since the current deal has already been rejected in parliament, we crash out. Hard Brexit.
I cannot see any realistic way this chain will be broken: it will require the EU to massively capitulate, and there's no reason for them to do so.
Hence anyone arguing for a rewritten deal is really wanting a no-deal Brexit. And that probably includes Corbyn.
They should just be honest about it and stop all these pathetic 'we can get a better deal!' vainglorious lies.
You've left out the remainery types voting against, it isn't just the ERG and Corbyn. You may not think it realistic, but, staggeringly, the thinking appears to be 'somehow we will prevent no deal, and then it will all work out with a brand new deal or remain'.
The ERG get huge amounts of stick for have no or very unrealistic and risky plans. But that lot are no less unrealistic. Simply asserting 'no deal won't be allowed, I am sure of it, then one of the contradictory plans we have for remain or a better deal will happen' is not a plan a competent legislator should be backing. People assert things cannot happen all the time, then they do.
At least the ERG are clear, for the most part, that they accept the risk of voting this down, or don't believe there are negatives to no deal.
It shouldn't be beyond the wit of MPs to decide whether they want
a. No Deal - and I would assume that most wouldn't b. May's deal - looking dodgy, but maybe c. Remain - better than the other two, but might make us look a bit silly. d. Put b. and c. to the people to give the outcome legitimacy.
We don't have to settle for a bad deal.
It seems beyond them at present.
You'll never get a b and c only referendum through parliament, as the ERG-style nutters will screech and scream that no deal isn't on the ballot, and that it's all an establishment stitch-up.
At the moment, they are looking at 2 years of red-line posturing resulting in a package that a mortally wounded PM cannot pass through the House. A crash-out Brexit is all they have to show for their "Non!".
Fucking A1 job, boys.
Luckily the EU economies are looking so strong they can take a loss of GDP in their stride.
Oh.
And a UK that is going to HAVE to come after them with a package of investment breaks and ultra-low corporate taxes that will make their eyes bleed.
Yep. A1 job. Prats.
You seem fanatically keen to try to shift blame onto the EU for this, with post after post stating "it's not me, guv!".
You were an arch-leaver, perhaps even a Brexiteer. This is your mess.
Our absurd voting system with so many MPs effectively sheltered from electoral pressure in their safe seats is a significant contributory factor to the current fiasco.
Certainly is... a lesson to learn here is very clear: Major reform of our politics is severely overdue
Is there any system in the world (Even PR-STV) that doesn't create safe MPs ? If you're recommended as #1 vote for Sinn Fein's list in West Belfast then you are highly, highly likely to win whatever else happens.
Rory The Tory is still looking at his phone with a tear in his eye....all that leg work over the past few days and some total unknown gets a big gig...again.
*) They block the current deal in parliament. *) They re-write it to make it more Brexity. *) They pass this to the EU. *) The EU say 'Non!" - as they've said they would, and they are far less likely to agree a more Brexity deal. *) Since the current deal has already been rejected in parliament, we crash out. Hard Brexit.
I cannot see any realistic way this chain will be broken: it will require the EU to massively capitulate, and there's no reason for them to do so.
Hence anyone arguing for a rewritten deal is really wanting a no-deal Brexit. And that probably includes Corbyn.
They should just be honest about it and stop all these pathetic 'we can get a better deal!' vainglorious lies.
You've left out the remainery types voting against, it isn't just the ERG and Corbyn. You may not think it realistic, but, staggeringly, the thinking appears to be 'somehow we will prevent no deal, and then it will all work out with a brand new deal or remain'.
The ERG get huge amounts of stick for have no or very unrealistic and risky plans. But that lot are no less unrealistic. Simply asserting 'no deal won't be allowed, I am sure of it, then one of the contradictory plans we have for remain or a better deal will happen' is not a plan a competent legislator should be backing. People assert things cannot happen all the time, then they do.
At least the ERG are clear, for the most part, that they accept the risk of voting this down, or don't believe there are negatives to no deal.
It shouldn't be beyond the wit of MPs to decide whether they want
a. No Deal - and I would assume that most wouldn't b. May's deal - looking dodgy, but maybe c. Remain - better than the other two, but might make us look a bit silly. d. Put b. and c. to the people to give the outcome legitimacy.
We don't have to settle for a bad deal.
It seems beyond them at present.
You'll never get a b and c only referendum through parliament, as the ERG-style nutters will screech and scream that no deal isn't on the ballot, and that it's all an establishment stitch-up.
And they might have a point.
If it goes to a Referendum, I think the fairest course is simply the Deal, Yes or No. Then it's up to Parliament to decide what to do if the answer is No.
Rory The Tory is still looking at his phone with a tear in his eye....all that leg work over the past few days and some total unknown gets a big gig...again.
The two positions on offer are both crap though. One is certain failure over UC mess and the other is over by March ()
Our absurd voting system with so many MPs effectively sheltered from electoral pressure in their safe seats is a significant contributory factor to the current fiasco.
Certainly is... a lesson to learn here is very clear: Major reform of our politics is severely overdue
Is there any system in the world (Even PR-STV) that doesn't create safe MPs ? If you're recommended as #1 vote for Sinn Fein's list in West Belfast then you are highly, highly likely to win whatever else happens.
Yes, the patented PB Single Stochastical Vote system.
Our absurd voting system with so many MPs effectively sheltered from electoral pressure in their safe seats is a significant contributory factor to the current fiasco.
Certainly is... a lesson to learn here is very clear: Major reform of our politics is severely overdue
Start by limiting the power of the overbearing parties.
Maximum annual spending for parties
Change manifestos from covering every dingbat and widget to only cover the National priorities, Finance, Foreign, Military, and whatever else has to be don on a National scale. The rest should be a personal manifesto so that the candidate can represent the concerns and views of the constituents that elected them and his views.
Look on internal party strife and argument as positive. If you can't hold different views you can't discuss, develop and improve.
*) They block the current deal in parliament. *) They re-write it to make it more Brexity. *) They pass this to the EU. *) The EU say 'Non!" - as they've said they would, and they are far less likely to agree a more Brexity deal. *) Since the current deal has already been rejected in parliament, we crash out. Hard Brexit.
I cannot see any realistic way this chain will be broken: it will require the EU to massively capitulate, and there's no reason for them to do so.
Hence anyone arguing for a rewritten deal is really wanting a no-deal Brexit. And that probably includes Corbyn.
They should just be honest about it and stop all these pathetic 'we can get a better deal!' vainglorious lies.
You've left out the remainery types voting against, it isn't just the ERG and Corbyn. You may not think it realistic, but, staggeringly, the thinking appears to be 'somehow we will prevent no deal, and then it will all work out with a brand new deal or remain'.
The ERG get huge amounts of stick for have no or very unrealistic and risky plans. But that lot are no less unrealistic. Simply asserting 'no deal won't be allowed, I am sure of it, then one of the contradictory plans we have for remain or a better deal will happen' is not a plan a competent legislator should be backing. People assert things cannot happen all the time, then they do.
At least the ERG are clear, for the most part, that they accept the risk of voting this down, or don't believe there are negatives to no deal.
Yes, although I was sort-of including Corbyn in that, as that's one of the several contradictory positions he's simultaneously holding whilst secretly wanting a hard exit.
I agree the arch-remainers are also being silly, but not to the extent that the ERG nutters are at the moment. If I was an arch-remainer, I'd be looking at playing the long game.
Oh, and also try to sell the EU to the public. Sadly, many of them couldn't be arsed to counteract the leave message before, or even during, the campaign. We're getting lots of howls from remainers, but precious few positive messages about the EU. I'd actually argue that's their insanity: calling for a second referendum without selling the EU to the electorate.
*) They block the current deal in parliament. *) They re-write it to make it more Brexity. *) They pass this to the EU. *) The EU say 'Non!" - as they've said they would, and they are far less likely to agree a more Brexity deal. *) Since the current deal has already been rejected in parliament, we crash out. Hard Brexit.
I cannot see any realistic way this chain will be broken: it will require the EU to massively capitulate, and there's no reason for them to do so.
Hence anyone arguing for a rewritten deal is really wanting a no-deal Brexit. And that probably includes Corbyn.
They should just be honest about it and stop all these pathetic 'we can get a better deal!' vainglorious lies.
You've left out the remainery types voting against, it isn't just the ERG and Corbyn. You may not think it realistic, but, staggeringly, the thinking appears to be 'somehow we will prevent no deal, and then it will all work out with a brand new deal or remain'.
The ERG get huge amounts of stick for have no or very unrealistic and risky plans. But that lot are no less unrealistic. Simply asserting 'no deal won't be allowed, I am sure of it, then one of the contradictory plans we have for remain or a better deal will happen' is not a plan a competent legislator should be backing. People assert things cannot happen all the time, then they do.
At least the ERG are clear, for the most part, that they accept the risk of voting this down, or don't believe there are negatives to no deal.
It shouldn't be beyond the wit of MPs to decide whether they want
a. No Deal - and I would assume that most wouldn't b. May's deal - looking dodgy, but maybe c. Remain - better than the other two, but might make us look a bit silly. d. Put b. and c. to the people to give the outcome legitimacy.
We don't have to settle for a bad deal.
It seems beyond them at present.
You'll never get a b and c only referendum through parliament, as the ERG-style nutters will screech and scream that no deal isn't on the ballot, and that it's all an establishment stitch-up.
And they might have a point.
If it goes to a Referendum, I think the fairest course is simply the Deal, Yes or No. Then it's up to Parliament to decide what to do if the answer is No.
Rory The Tory is still looking at his phone with a tear in his eye....all that leg work over the past few days and some total unknown gets a big gig...again.
The two positions on offer are both crap though. One is certain failure over UC mess and the other is over by March ()
Actually the Brexit job becomes big again after March, unless that's supposed to be Liam's gig.
*) They block the current deal in parliament. *) They re-write it to make it more Brexity. *) They pass this to the EU. *) The EU say 'Non!" - as they've said they would, and they are far less likely to agree a more Brexity deal. *) Since the current deal has already been rejected in parliament, we crash out. Hard Brexit.
I cannot see any realistic way this chain will be broken: it will require the EU to massively capitulate, and there's no reason for them to do so.
Hence anyone arguing for a rewritten deal is really wanting a no-deal Brexit. And that probably includes Corbyn.
They should just be honest about it and stop all these pathetic 'we can get a better deal!' vainglorious lies.
You've left out the remainery types voting against, it isn't just the ERG and Corbyn. You may not think it realistic, but, staggeringly, the thinking appears to be 'somehow we will prevent no deal, and then it will all work out with a brand new deal or remain'.
The ERG get huge amounts of stick for have no or very unrealistic and risky plans. But that lot are no less unrealistic. Simply asserting 'no deal won't be allowed, I am sure of it, then one of the contradictory plans we have for remain or a better deal will happen' is not a plan a competent legislator should be backing. People assert things cannot happen all the time, then they do.
At least the ERG are clear, for the most part, that they accept the risk of voting this down, or don't believe there are negatives to no deal.
Yes, although I was sort-of including Corbyn in that, as that's one of the several contradictory positions he's simultaneously holding whilst secretly wanting a hard exit.
I agree the arch-remainers are also being silly, but not to the extent that the ERG nutters are at the moment. If I was an arch-remainer, I'd be looking at playing the long game.
Oh, and also try to sell the EU to the public. Sadly, many of them couldn't be arsed to counteract the leave message before, or even during, the campaign. We're getting lots of howls from remainers, but precious few positive messages about the EU. I'd actually argue that's their insanity: calling for a second referendum without selling the EU to the electorate.
The argument that one hears a lot from Remainers is that by remaining in the EU, we can reduce their potential to do harmful things to us - and it's a reasonable argument - but not one that wins support for the EU.
If it goes to a Referendum, I think the fairest course is simply the Deal, Yes or No. Then it's up to Parliament to decide what to do if the answer is No.
But a No gets us nowhere, and whatever Parliament decides will still be seen as a betrayal by one side or the other.
This mess is a result of the leave campaigns' central contradiction and lie, and that would just repeat the mistake.
At the moment, they are looking at 2 years of red-line posturing resulting in a package that a mortally wounded PM cannot pass through the House. A crash-out Brexit is all they have to show for their "Non!".
Fucking A1 job, boys.
Luckily the EU economies are looking so strong they can take a loss of GDP in their stride.
Oh.
And a UK that is going to HAVE to come after them with a package of investment breaks and ultra-low corporate taxes that will make their eyes bleed.
Yep. A1 job. Prats.
You seem fanatically keen to try to shift blame onto the EU for this, with post after post stating "it's not me, guv!".
You were an arch-leaver, perhaps even a Brexiteer. This is your mess.
Accept the responsibility.
The people signing us up to be in this organisation against the wishes of the majority have to take their share of the blame too.
If it goes to a Referendum, I think the fairest course is simply the Deal, Yes or No. Then it's up to Parliament to decide what to do if the answer is No.
But a No gets us nowhere, and whatever Parliament decides will still be seen as a betrayal by one side or the other.
This mess is a result of the leave campaigns' central contradiction and lie, and that would just repeat the mistake.
I think that whether it were Deal v Remain, Deal v No Deal, or Remain v No Deal, or a multiple choice, the losers would see it as a betrayal.
If it goes to a Referendum, I think the fairest course is simply the Deal, Yes or No. Then it's up to Parliament to decide what to do if the answer is No.
But a No gets us nowhere, and whatever Parliament decides will still be seen as a betrayal by one side or the other.
This mess is a result of the leave campaigns' central contradiction and lie, and that would just repeat the mistake.
I think that whether it were Deal v Remain, Deal v No Deal, or Remain v No Deal, or a multiple choice, the losers would see it as a betrayal.
And a 3 way choice can simply put, never be fair (Arrow's theorem)
At the moment, they are looking at 2 years of red-line posturing resulting in a package that a mortally wounded PM cannot pass through the House. A crash-out Brexit is all they have to show for their "Non!".
Fucking A1 job, boys.
Luckily the EU economies are looking so strong they can take a loss of GDP in their stride.
Oh.
And a UK that is going to HAVE to come after them with a package of investment breaks and ultra-low corporate taxes that will make their eyes bleed.
Yep. A1 job. Prats.
You seem fanatically keen to try to shift blame onto the EU for this, with post after post stating "it's not me, guv!".
You were an arch-leaver, perhaps even a Brexiteer. This is your mess.
Accept the responsibility.
The people signing us up to be in this organisation against the wishes of the majority have to take their share of the blame too.
If I was May, no more balance. Just put in Dealers or Remainers into the Cabinet.
+1 I agree the time for balance is over.
Yeah she's already sold Brexiteers (that's like 70% of her members and voters but we won't worry about that) down the river...
Why bother keeping up the pretense now?
I voted Tory in 2017 and I don't feel she has sold me out or any of the other Tory voters I know.
A negotiation means a compromise.
I would rather Remain and if MPs with your views don't stop messing about I hope you get something you really don't like which is Remain or another referendum. If it means people like you leave the Tory party I will be glad as I cannot understand this obsession with Europe and wanting no deal otherwise known as economic suicide!
I'm on the other side of the EU argument to you. I dislike Theresa May's nanny statism and think she has a political tin ear, but I don't consider that she's sold me out on the EU.
What do you think of this one?
"Notwithstanding Article 126, the Joint Committee may, before 1 July 2020, adopt a single decision extending the transition period up to [31 December 20XX].”
do we know which "large city firm" Barclay trained at?
Barclays Yes really .
well yes, funny coincidnece
but before that:
Stephen qualified as a solicitor in 1998. He worked as an insurance company lawyer for Axa Insurance, as a regulator for the Financial Services Authority, and as Director of Regulatory Affairs and then Head of Anti-Money Laundering and Sanctions at Barclays Retail Bank.
At the moment, they are looking at 2 years of red-line posturing resulting in a package that a mortally wounded PM cannot pass through the House. A crash-out Brexit is all they have to show for their "Non!".
Fucking A1 job, boys.
Luckily the EU economies are looking so strong they can take a loss of GDP in their stride.
Oh.
And a UK that is going to HAVE to come after them with a package of investment breaks and ultra-low corporate taxes that will make their eyes bleed.
Yep. A1 job. Prats.
You seem fanatically keen to try to shift blame onto the EU for this, with post after post stating "it's not me, guv!".
You were an arch-leaver, perhaps even a Brexiteer. This is your mess.
Accept the responsibility.
The people signing us up to be in this organisation against the wishes of the majority have to take their share of the blame too.
When did that happen?
In a fantasy world of bulldogs, village greens, and friendly vicars.
If I was May, no more balance. Just put in Dealers or Remainers into the Cabinet.
+1 I agree the time for balance is over.
Yeah she's already sold Brexiteers (that's like 70% of her members and voters but we won't worry about that) down the river...
Why bother keeping up the pretense now?
I voted Tory in 2017 and I don't feel she has sold me out or any of the other Tory voters I know.
A negotiation means a compromise.
I would rather Remain and if MPs with your views don't stop messing about I hope you get something you really don't like which is Remain or another referendum. If it means people like you leave the Tory party I will be glad as I cannot understand this obsession with Europe and wanting no deal otherwise known as economic suicide!
I'm on the other side of the EU argument to you. I dislike Theresa May's nanny statism and think she has a political tin ear, but I don't consider that she's sold me out on the EU.
What do you think of this one?
"Notwithstanding Article 126, the Joint Committee may, before 1 July 2020, adopt a single decision extending the transition period up to [31 December 20XX].”
If I was May, no more balance. Just put in Dealers or Remainers into the Cabinet.
+1 I agree the time for balance is over.
Yeah she's already sold Brexiteers (that's like 70% of her members and voters but we won't worry about that) down the river...
Why bother keeping up the pretense now?
I voted Tory in 2017 and I don't feel she has sold me out or any of the other Tory voters I know.
A negotiation means a compromise.
I would rather Remain and if MPs with your views don't stop messing about I hope you get something you really don't like which is Remain or another referendum. If it means people like you leave the Tory party I will be glad as I cannot understand this obsession with Europe and wanting no deal otherwise known as economic suicide!
I'm on the other side of the EU argument to you. I dislike Theresa May's nanny statism and think she has a political tin ear, but I don't consider that she's sold me out on the EU.
What do you think of this one?
"Notwithstanding Article 126, the Joint Committee may, before 1 July 2020, adopt a single decision extending the transition period up to [31 December 20XX].”
At the moment, they are looking at 2 years of red-line posturing resulting in a package that a mortally wounded PM cannot pass through the House. A crash-out Brexit is all they have to show for their "Non!".
Fucking A1 job, boys.
Luckily the EU economies are looking so strong they can take a loss of GDP in their stride.
Oh.
And a UK that is going to HAVE to come after them with a package of investment breaks and ultra-low corporate taxes that will make their eyes bleed.
Yep. A1 job. Prats.
You seem fanatically keen to try to shift blame onto the EU for this, with post after post stating "it's not me, guv!".
You were an arch-leaver, perhaps even a Brexiteer. This is your mess.
Accept the responsibility.
The people signing us up to be in this organisation against the wishes of the majority have to take their share of the blame too.
When did that happen?
The Treaty of Lisbon is the clearest example, when the government reneged on its promise of a referendum.
If I was May, no more balance. Just put in Dealers or Remainers into the Cabinet.
+1 I agree the time for balance is over.
Yeah she's already sold Brexiteers (that's like 70% of her members and voters but we won't worry about that) down the river...
Why bother keeping up the pretense now?
I voted Tory in 2017 and I don't feel she has sold me out or any of the other Tory voters I know.
A negotiation means a compromise.
I would rather Remain and if MPs with your views don't stop messing about I hope you get something you really don't like which is Remain or another referendum. If it means people like you leave the Tory party I will be glad as I cannot understand this obsession with Europe and wanting no deal otherwise known as economic suicide!
I'm on the other side of the EU argument to you. I dislike Theresa May's nanny statism and think she has a political tin ear, but I don't consider that she's sold me out on the EU.
What do you think of this one?
"Notwithstanding Article 126, the Joint Committee may, before 1 July 2020, adopt a single decision extending the transition period up to [31 December 20XX].”
Okay with it.
Is it consistent with Leaving?
Yes, provided that we're negotiating an FTA with the EU.
If I was May, no more balance. Just put in Dealers or Remainers into the Cabinet.
+1 I agree the time for balance is over.
Yeah she's already sold Brexiteers (that's like 70% of her members and voters but we won't worry about that) down the river...
Why bother keeping up the pretense now?
I voted Tory in 2017 and I don't feel she has sold me out or any of the other Tory voters I know.
A negotiation means a compromise.
I would rather Remain and if MPs with your views don't stop messing about I hope you get something you really don't like which is Remain or another referendum. If it means people like you leave the Tory party I will be glad as I cannot understand this obsession with Europe and wanting no deal otherwise known as economic suicide!
I'm on the other side of the EU argument to you. I dislike Theresa May's nanny statism and think she has a political tin ear, but I don't consider that she's sold me out on the EU.
What do you think of this one?
"Notwithstanding Article 126, the Joint Committee may, before 1 July 2020, adopt a single decision extending the transition period up to [31 December 20XX].”
Okay with it.
Is it consistent with Leaving?
Yes, provided that we're negotiating an FTA with the EU.
And why wouldn't we after we've left. I know leavers don't like it but the EU really isn't keen on countries being in the customs Union and outside the single market, which is more or less what we get with the backstop. The ERG must be really thick if they don't get this point !
Did Stephen Barclay get to be director of Barclays Bank on the Major Major principle?
(In the novel Catch 22 a computer inadvertently promotes someone with the surname Major. In the process it completely destroys him because he can't cope with the responsibility)
At the moment, they are looking at 2 years of red-line posturing resulting in a package that a mortally wounded PM cannot pass through the House. A crash-out Brexit is all they have to show for their "Non!".
Fucking A1 job, boys.
Luckily the EU economies are looking so strong they can take a loss of GDP in their stride.
Oh.
And a UK that is going to HAVE to come after them with a package of investment breaks and ultra-low corporate taxes that will make their eyes bleed.
Yep. A1 job. Prats.
You seem fanatically keen to try to shift blame onto the EU for this, with post after post stating "it's not me, guv!".
You were an arch-leaver, perhaps even a Brexiteer. This is your mess.
Accept the responsibility.
The people signing us up to be in this organisation against the wishes of the majority have to take their share of the blame too.
If it goes to a Referendum, I think the fairest course is simply the Deal, Yes or No. Then it's up to Parliament to decide what to do if the answer is No.
But a No gets us nowhere, and whatever Parliament decides will still be seen as a betrayal by one side or the other.
This mess is a result of the leave campaigns' central contradiction and lie, and that would just repeat the mistake.
I think that whether it were Deal v Remain, Deal v No Deal, or Remain v No Deal, or a multiple choice, the losers would see it as a betrayal.
Some people always will. However we'd be giving them good reason to say that if this was to happen, and that makes their arguments almost impossible to defeat.
*) They block the current deal in parliament. *) They re-write it to make it more Brexity. *) They pass this to the EU. *) The EU say 'Non!" - as they've said they would, and they are far less likely to agree a more Brexity deal. *) Since the current deal has already been rejected in parliament, we crash out. Hard Brexit.
I cannot see any realistic way this chain will be broken: it will require the EU to massively capitulate, and there's no reason for them to do so.
Hence anyone arguing for a rewritten deal is really wanting a no-deal Brexit. And that probably includes Corbyn.
They should just be honest about it and stop all these pathetic 'we can get a better deal!' vainglorious lies.
You've left out the remainery types voting against, it isn't just the ERG and Corbyn. You may not think it realistic, but, staggeringly, the thinking appears to be 'somehow we will prevent no deal, and then it will all work out with a brand new deal or remain'.
The ERG get huge amounts of stick for have no or very unrealistic and risky plans. But that lot are no less unrealistic. Simply asserting 'no deal won't be allowed, I am sure of it, then one of the contradictory plans we have for remain or a better deal will happen' is not a plan a competent legislator should be backing. People assert things cannot happen all the time, then they do.
At least the ERG are clear, for the most part, that they accept the risk of voting this down, or don't believe there are negatives to no deal.
Yes, although I was sort-of including Corbyn in that, as that's one of the several contradictory positions he's simultaneously holding whilst secretly wanting a hard exit.
I agree the arch-remainers are also being silly, but not to the extent that the ERG nutters are at the moment. If I was an arch-remainer, I'd be looking at playing the long game.
Oh, and also try to sell the EU to the public. Sadly, many of them couldn't be arsed to counteract the leave message before, or even during, the campaign. We're getting lots of howls from remainers, but precious few positive messages about the EU. I'd actually argue that's their insanity: calling for a second referendum without selling the EU to the electorate.
The argument that one hears a lot from Remainers is that by remaining in the EU, we can reduce their potential to do harmful things to us - and it's a reasonable argument - but not one that wins support for the EU.
*) They they would, and they are far less likely to agree a more Brexity deal. *) Since the current deal has already been rejected in parliament, we crash out. Hard Brexit.
I cannot see any realistic way this chain will be broken: it will require the EU to massively capitulate, and there's no reason for them to do so.
Hence anyone arguing for a rewritten deal is really wanting a no-deal Brexit. And that probably includes Corbyn.
They should just be honest about it and stop all these pathetic 'we can get a better deal!' vainglorious lies.
You've left out the remainery types voting against, it isn't just the ERG and Corbyn. You may not think it realistic, but, staggeringly, the thinking appears to be 'somehow we will prevent no deal, and then it will all work out with a brand new deal or remain'.
The ERG get huge amounts of stick for have no or very unrealistic and risky plans. But that lot are no less unrealistic. Simply asserting 'no deal won't be allowed, I am sure of it, then one of the contradictory plans we have for remain or a better deal will happen' is not a plan a competent legislator should be backing. People assert things cannot happen all the time, then they do.
At least the ERG are clear, for the most part, that they accept the risk of voting this down, or don't believe there are negatives to no deal.
It shouldn't be beyond the wit of MPs to decide whether they want
a. No Deal - and I would assume that most wouldn't b. May's deal - looking dodgy, but maybe c. Remain - better than the other two, but might make us look a bit silly. d. Put b. and c. to the people to give the outcome legitimacy.
We don't have to settle for a bad deal.
It seems beyond them at present.
You'll never get a b and c only referendum through parliament, as the ERG-style nutters will screech and scream that no deal isn't on the ballot, and that it's all an establishment stitch-up.
And they might have a point.
If it goes to a Referendum, I think the fairest course is simply the Deal, Yes or No. Then it's up to Parliament to decide what to do if the answer is No.
+1
We've already had one vote where politicians were left to make up what they thought people were voting for afterwards. If there is another one, both sides of the question need to lead to specific outcomes.
*) They block the current deal in parliament. *) They re-write it to make it more Brexity. *) They pass this to the EU. *) The EU say 'Non!" - as they've said they would, and they are far less likely to agree a more Brexity deal. *) Since the current deal has already been rejected in parliament, we crash out. Hard Brexit.
I cannot see any realistic way this chain will be broken: it will require the EU to massively capitulate, and there's no reason for them to do so.
Hence anyone arguing for a rewritten deal is really wanting a no-deal Brexit. And that probably includes Corbyn.
They should just be honest about it and stop all these pathetic 'we can get a better deal!' vainglorious lies.
You've left out the remainery types voting against, it isn't just the ERG and Corbyn. You may not think it realistic, but, staggeringly, the thinking appears to be 'somehow we will prevent no deal, and then it will all work out with a brand new deal or remain'.
The ERG get huge amounts of stick for have no or very unrealistic and risky plans. But that lot are no less unrealistic. Simply asserting 'no deal won't be allowed, I am sure of it, then one of the contradictory plans we have for remain or a better deal will happen' is not a plan a competent legislator should be backing. People assert things cannot happen all the time, then they do.
At least the ERG are clear, for the most part, that they accept the risk of voting this down, or don't believe there are negatives to no deal.
It shouldn't be beyond the wit of MPs to decide whether they want
a. No Deal - and I would assume that most wouldn't b. May's deal - looking dodgy, but maybe c. Remain - better than the other two, but might make us look a bit silly. d. Put b. and c. to the people to give the outcome legitimacy.
We don't have to settle for a bad deal.
It seems beyond them at present.
You'll never get a b and c only referendum through parliament, as the ERG-style nutters will screech and scream that no deal isn't on the ballot, and that it's all an establishment stitch-up.
Mind you, no-one can accuse Theresa May of not giving new talent a chance.
No but this really is moving the deckchairs on the well-known ocean liner. Events are no longer in the control of the government, and the iceberg is fast approaching. It will sink either Brexit or the country, or perhaps both, before too long.
At the moment, they are looking at 2 years of red-line posturing resulting in a package that a mortally wounded PM cannot pass through the House. A crash-out Brexit is all they have to show for their "Non!".
Fucking A1 job, boys.
Luckily the EU economies are looking so strong they can take a loss of GDP in their stride.
Oh.
And a UK that is going to HAVE to come after them with a package of investment breaks and ultra-low corporate taxes that will make their eyes bleed.
Yep. A1 job. Prats.
You seem fanatically keen to try to shift blame onto the EU for this, with post after post stating "it's not me, guv!".
You were an arch-leaver, perhaps even a Brexiteer. This is your mess.
Accept the responsibility.
The people signing us up to be in this organisation against the wishes of the majority have to take their share of the blame too.
When did that happen?
The Treaty of Lisbon is the clearest example, when the government reneged on its promise of a referendum.
Did Stephen Barclay get to be director of Barclays Bank on the Major Major principle?
(In the novel Catch 22 a computer inadvertently promotes someone with the surname Major. In the process it completely destroys him because he can't cope with the responsibility)
It's his Dad who does for him really. Calling your son Major Major Major is asking for trouble.
Comments
https://www.ft.com/content/92974b74-e8d9-11e8-885c-e64da4c0f981
* A joke, before some literalist klutz accuses me of scaremongering.
Fine, take the fun away then.
You were an arch-leaver, perhaps even a Brexiteer. This is your mess.
Accept the responsibility.
If a second referendum, then the Tories would be forced out regardless.
In any event, change is a-coming... eventually
And they might have a point.
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1063469688431235073
Maximum annual spending for parties
Change manifestos from covering every dingbat and widget to only cover the National priorities, Finance, Foreign, Military, and whatever else has to be don on a National scale. The rest should be a personal manifesto so that the candidate can represent the concerns and views of the constituents that elected them and his views.
Look on internal party strife and argument as positive. If you can't hold different views you can't discuss, develop and improve.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1063469021541163008
I agree the arch-remainers are also being silly, but not to the extent that the ERG nutters are at the moment. If I was an arch-remainer, I'd be looking at playing the long game.
Oh, and also try to sell the EU to the public. Sadly, many of them couldn't be arsed to counteract the leave message before, or even during, the campaign. We're getting lots of howls from remainers, but precious few positive messages about the EU. I'd actually argue that's their insanity: calling for a second referendum without selling the EU to the electorate.
The 24 Conservative MPs who are still on the backbenches and have never rebelled
#4 Steve Barclay (North East Cambridgeshire, 2010)
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2012/09/the-forty-non-government-payroll-mps-who-havent-rebelled.html
This mess is a result of the leave campaigns' central contradiction and lie, and that would just repeat the mistake.
Different from, goddamit, different from.
"Notwithstanding Article 126, the Joint Committee may, before 1 July 2020, adopt a single decision extending the transition period up to [31 December 20XX].”
but before that:
Stephen qualified as a solicitor in 1998. He worked as an insurance company lawyer for Axa Insurance, as a regulator for the Financial Services Authority, and as Director of Regulatory Affairs and then Head of Anti-Money Laundering and Sanctions at Barclays Retail Bank.
The ERG must be really thick if they don't get this point !
(In the novel Catch 22 a computer inadvertently promotes someone with the surname Major. In the process it completely destroys him because he can't cope with the responsibility)
Please change the record.
Which again, mirrors the 2016 referendum.
Mr Brady will feature in a future Honours List, I'm quite sure.
Brady can check his mailbox at that point.