Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As the big vote gets delayed the betting on 2nd referendum get

12467

Comments

  • HYUFD said:

    Yes I voted for AV and would now back PR. FPTP is an analogue voting system unsuited to the digital age, Grieve and Mogg and Umunna and Corbyn should not be in the same party
    Why not? View the Tories and Labour as like coalitions.

    Under PR they could be in the same government via a coalition but we have no knowledge of that before votes are counted and a coalition is formed.

    At least under FPTP we know that they're in the same coalition before the election.
  • Oort said:

    "We remain committed to the GFA", she says. But the government has to be - it's an international treaty with no equivalent of Lisbon's A50 or the NATO treaty's A13.

    But commitment to the GFA in legal terms is very limited in its scope. So for example there is not one word in it about the nature of the border. It is entirely open to interpretation.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    You were comfortable enough with Leave's own brand of xenophobia.
    Was I, please share these views of mine with us all

    You on the other hand really are ok with xenophobia, real xenophobia in your choice of countries to have second and third homes in.

    so - probably not your most potent line of attack
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    At some point the more thoughtful Leavers (no sniggering at the back) will realise that Brexit is in grave difficulty precisely because they made no headway in reaching out to Remain voters. That was partly because they did not attempt to do so and partly because they were holed beneath the waterline by the way in which they won.

    That doesn't seem to stop them opining on the moral failings of others.
    The time to reach out to remainers is after Brexit is secured I'm afraid - otherwise Remainers will use any compromise to call for an umpteenth "peepils vote".

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,554
    DavidL said:

    Nigel Dodds, Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) Westminster leader:
    "Frankly what the prime minister says today simply isn't credible, is it?

    "The prime minister says she's listening, but she talks about assurances and reassurances. Does she not get it by now that the withdrawal agreement legally binding text is not accepted in this house?

    "Please listen and amend the withdrawal agreement or it will be voted down."

    This is the party that is going to resist a VonC?

    No. They won't. They are just saying that.
  • HYUFD said:

    Yes I voted for AV and would now back PR. FPTP is an analogue voting system unsuited to the digital age, Grieve and Mogg and Umunna and Corbyn should not be in the same party
    But Grieve and Umunna should be in the same party as should Mogg and Corbyn.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,955

    I wonder what the backstop will be re-branded as, the 'wicketkeeper' sounds less threatening to an Englishman.

    Perhaps we could redesignate it as the letter of last resort - tell nobody what's in it and bung it at the bottom of the ocean in a nuclear sub...
  • TheoTheo Posts: 325

    At some point the more thoughtful Leavers (no sniggering at the back) will realise that Brexit is in grave difficulty precisely because they made no headway in reaching out to Remain voters. That was partly because they did not attempt to do so and partly because they were holed beneath the waterline by the way in which they won.

    That doesn't seem to stop them opining on the moral failings of others.
    This is nonsense. May gave you an open border with Northern Ireland, environmental and labour standards maintained, state aid alignment, a financial settlement acceptable to the EU and ongoing security and intelligence cooperation.Remainers in parliaments in exchange have spat in her face and said they will not accept any other deal that didn't meet six impossible tests.
  • TGOHF said:

    The time to reach out to remainers is after Brexit is secured I'm afraid - otherwise Remainers will use any compromise to call for an umpteenth "peepils vote".

    At the moment Brexit looks in great peril. The dimwitted way in which Leavers have sought to grind Remain supporters into the dust has ensured that the country will be riven on the subject for decades, whatever happens now.

    Britain has entered a political tailspin and it doesn't look as though it's going to get out of it at any point in the foreseeable future no matter what happens.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,554
    Floater said:

    One of your finest and fairest posts ever.

    Well said!
    Hardly. He has gotten pretty ad hominem and nasty, generically dismissing people and misrepresenting through over simplification, while acting above it all because others dare to be a bit political..
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    HYUFD said:

    Yes I voted for AV and would now back PR. FPTP is an analogue voting system unsuited to the digital age, Grieve and Mogg and Umunna and Corbyn should not be in the same party
    How would PR make the current situation any more manageable? You cannot know the components of a future parliament and who will be made to work with who. A Grieve party and a Mogg party might in the future be the only viable combination in a future parliament for arguments sake! Equally a Umunna party and a Corbyn might only work in an alternative scenario. In an ideal world Grieve & Umunna would get together and govern but that would only be durable until the usual political cycle of decay for governing parties kicks them into touch as it inevitably will. All PR will achieve is more political deadlock as single issue parties become more entrenched and coalitions of the willing become harder to achieve.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    At the moment Brexit looks in great peril. The dimwitted way in which Leavers have sought to grind Remain supporters into the dust has ensured that the country will be riven on the subject for decades, whatever happens now.

    Britain has entered a political tailspin and it doesn't look as though it's going to get out of it at any point in the foreseeable future no matter what happens.
    I disagree - the issue needs the oxygen of a "chance" of overturning the referendum result. Once that has gone when we are out the circus will move on.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,543

    I wonder what the backstop will be re-branded as, the 'wicketkeeper' sounds less threatening to an Englishman.

    A silly point?
  • TheoTheo Posts: 325
    HYUFD said:

    No in 1975 everyone knew we confirmed we joined the Common Market or stayed as we were before.

    Leave in 2016 had single market, trade deal or no deal types all voting for it
    But what we got after Maastricht was clearly completely different and we didn't get another vote.
  • Theo said:

    She didn't stab them in the back. She maintained the UK and NI in the same Customs Area. There is still a gap in terms of goods regulations covered by the GFA, but she closed most of it.
    Except if we go into the Backstop at which point, the non- NI part of the Uk would be regarded as a third party country as regards trade with NI.
  • Theo said:

    This is nonsense. May gave you an open border with Northern Ireland, environmental and labour standards maintained, state aid alignment, a financial settlement acceptable to the EU and ongoing security and intelligence cooperation.Remainers in parliaments in exchange have spat in her face and said they will not accept any other deal that didn't meet six impossible tests.
    You are desperately trying to push a meme that this deal is being defeated by Remain supporters. It's rubbish. Just 11 backbench MPs who voted for Leave in 2016 have stated that they are supporting this deal.

    The great majority of the support for the deal in Parliament, such as it gets, comes from quiet remain-voting Conservative MPs. (I am not a Conservative nor an MP but if given a vote I would have voted for this deal, as it happens.) The failure is among Leave MPs to recognise half a loaf.
  • This just sounds ridiculous to me:
    https://twitter.com/nick_gutteridge/status/1072186894384029696

    We negotiated this thing. It'll never happen. They promise.

    It's in a legally binding agreement...
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,473
    kle4 said:


    Hardly. He has gotten pretty ad hominem and nasty, generically dismissing people and misrepresenting through over simplification, while acting above it all because others dare to be a bit political..

    Very kind of you to say so. Please enlighten me as to how I have offended you through my postings so I can continue doing it.

  • TGOHF said:

    I disagree - the issue needs the oxygen of a "chance" of overturning the referendum result. Once that has gone when we are out the circus will move on.
    Two years ago there was a lot of talk among Leavers about how it would all calm down soon enough. Your prediction looks about as accurate as that one.
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634

    Agreed, just dust off the Jenkins report. More Tories apart from Hannan supporting PR could improve its prospects.

    By the way, Wikipedia says that the 1975 referendum was binding on that parliament and was 'expected to be politically binding on all future parliaments'. Why was it so easily overturned?
    Because it was about the EEC (the Common Market), not the EU.
  • TheoTheo Posts: 325

    Except if we go into the Backstop at which point, the non- NI part of the Uk would be regarded as a third party country as regards trade with NI.
    No. The backstop legal advice explicitly said GB and NI would be in the same territory under the backstop.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,543
    I do wonder - what is now stopping the letters going in to Brady? May has admitted that her deal is seen by the Commons as a shit sandwich. And yet she wants to be the one to scrape some of the shit from the bread, before presenting it again.

    If we really are renegotiating with the EU in any meaningful way, it needs to be undertaken by somebody who can fully appreciate just how disgusting that first deal tasted. Otherwise, May will come back and say "Well, they caved on some punctuation. NOW pass it...."

    By pulling the vote, May has given her critics more than enough reason to pull her premiership.
  • TheoTheo Posts: 325

    You are desperately trying to push a meme that this deal is being defeated by Remain supporters. It's rubbish. Just 11 backbench MPs who voted for Leave in 2016 have stated that they are supporting this deal.

    The great majority of the support for the deal in Parliament, such as it gets, comes from quiet remain-voting Conservative MPs. (I am not a Conservative nor an MP but if given a vote I would have voted for this deal, as it happens.) The failure is among Leave MPs to recognise half a loaf.
    If a battle is lost to an army that is 75% Germans and 25% Italians, does it make sense to focus on the German contribution or the Italian one?
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,917
    Meanwhile, in the HoC, they're still asking May the same questions they were two hours ago.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,473
    HYUFD said:


    Yes I voted for AV and would now back PR. FPTP is an analogue voting system unsuited to the digital age, Grieve and Mogg and Umunna and Corbyn should not be in the same party

    That's an interesting and enlightening viewpoint. Would you, for example, support the introduction of PR in English local elections as a first step? After all, we already have forms of PR for Scottish contests and in London as well.
  • Crossrail....

    Must have Crossrail...
  • XenonXenon Posts: 471

    This just sounds ridiculous to me:
    https://twitter.com/nick_gutteridge/status/1072186894384029696

    We negotiated this thing. It'll never happen. They promise.

    It's in a legally binding agreement...

    They really need to get rid of May....this is just ridiculous now.
  • HYUFD said:

    Yes I voted for AV and would now back PR.
    AV is NOT proportional....
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787

    Crossrail....

    Must have Crossrail...

    I wonder if Crossrail will get so delayed and discredited that the Queen will ask to have her name taken off it.
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634

    You are desperately trying to push a meme that this deal is being defeated by Remain supporters. It's rubbish. Just 11 backbench MPs who voted for Leave in 2016 have stated that they are supporting this deal.

    The great majority of the support for the deal in Parliament, such as it gets, comes from quiet remain-voting Conservative MPs. (I am not a Conservative nor an MP but if given a vote I would have voted for this deal, as it happens.) The failure is among Leave MPs to recognise half a loaf.
    It's more like the apple with half a worm.
  • Xenon said:

    They really need to get rid of May....this is just ridiculous now.
    We will never use an agreed mechanism that’s in a legally binding agreement..

    What’s the point of having it then?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,543
    Xenon said:

    They really need to get rid of May....this is just ridiculous now.
    Yep. We have one meaningful chance to revise this deal. No way should the same architects be allowed to keep making buildings that fall over.

    FFS, Tory Party, take the car keys off her.
  • Theo said:

    If a battle is lost to an army that is 75% Germans and 25% Italians, does it make sense to focus on the German contribution or the Italian one?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gazala
  • Meanwhile, in the HoC, they're still asking May the same questions they were two hours ago.

    That's fair. May is still making the same points she was making two months ago.
  • I do wonder - what is now stopping the letters going in to Brady? May has admitted that her deal is seen by the Commons as a shit sandwich. And yet she wants to be the one to scrape some of the shit from the bread, before presenting it again.

    If we really are renegotiating with the EU in any meaningful way, it needs to be undertaken by somebody who can fully appreciate just how disgusting that first deal tasted. Otherwise, May will come back and say "Well, they caved on some punctuation. NOW pass it...."

    By pulling the vote, May has given her critics more than enough reason to pull her premiership.

    I asked this earlier and I think Big G is right. The 12 month rule.

    If it weren't for the 12 month immunity to subsequent votes the letters would be in now if not already.
  • Theo said:

    If a battle is lost to an army that is 75% Germans and 25% Italians, does it make sense to focus on the German contribution or the Italian one?
    If someone is mendaciously claiming Italian support when they were opposed by 70-80% of Italians and when their own army was 80% German, of course it does.
  • I asked this earlier and I think Big G is right. The 12 month rule.

    If it weren't for the 12 month immunity to subsequent votes the letters would be in now if not already.
    To quote a former prime minister, if she won a vote they should put up or shut up if they lose. There should be a vote now though. They need to clear the air.
  • TheoTheo Posts: 325

    If someone is mendaciously claiming Italian support when they were opposed by 70-80% of Italians and when their own army was 80% German, of course it does.
    Your 70-80% of Italians entirely ignored the substantial number of new recruits to the Italian Army. People like Jeremy Hunt and many Conservative MPs like him are committed Leavers now.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,177
    kle4 said:

    No. They won't. They are just saying that.
    As Lord Hope said in the Supreme Court, in response to a particularly asinine submission by the Lord Advocate: “but Lord Advocate, words is all we have.”
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,443
    Andrea Jenkins isn't the smartest tool in the box is she
  • Theo said:

    Your 70-80% of Italians entirely ignored the substantial number of new recruits to the Italian Army. People like Jeremy Hunt and many Conservative MPs like him are committed Leavers now.
    Jeremy Hunt is only committed to Jeremy Hunt
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,104
    She has a low opinion of her colleagues if she thinks they'll be able to explain why the current deal is appalling but the deal with a couple of explanatory letters from the EU is suddenly worth voting for.

    The only card she has is to forget no deal, which everyone knows cannot happen, and play the no Brexit/second vote as the serious alternative if the deal is rejected. Some of her rhetoric - for example that MPs now need to decide whether to honour the referendum - played in this direction, but without the card face up on the table it isn't going to work.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,307
    Andrea Leadsom has buggered Bercow. (Only a mum can do that)
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    edited December 2018
    I often wonder when TMay is facing these Commons marathons what she does if she's desperate for a pee. A former colleague who had worked for Harold Wilson at Number 10 told me that that not being able to cope with things like this was the reason for his shock resignation in he 74-79 parliament
  • kle4 said:

    I think so but it seems unclear. Court case to come?
    It doesn't need primary legislation as far as the European Copurt is concerned but it does as far as UK law is concerned.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,177

    At the moment Brexit looks in great peril. The dimwitted way in which Leavers have sought to grind Remain supporters into the dust has ensured that the country will be riven on the subject for decades, whatever happens now.

    Britain has entered a political tailspin and it doesn't look as though it's going to get out of it at any point in the foreseeable future no matter what happens.
    I personally think that May’s deal, or something incredibly similar to it, remains the best way forward. As someone who voted Leave it doesn’t give me what I wanted but it delivers on the essentials. Many remainers think it is certainly the least worst option available, if we are to leave. But it now looks the most unlikely outcome of all: friendless and unsupported. Like NI (ironically) we are being driven from the centre ground to the extremes.
  • Roger said:

    Andrea Jenkins isn't the smartest tool in the box is she

    TSE is partly to blame. He helped her win her seat
  • The insoluble problem is that the EU will never be satisfied on the NI border. It’s their weapon to either separate NI from the U.K. or keep the U.K. in the EU. The impetus for a hard border in Ireland is therefore the EU refusal to consider all alternatives. Difficult to see how Brexit can therefore become a reality without a hard Brexit. That means May has to go.

    Tinkering with May’s deal will achieve nothing and a second referendum just betrays the first.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,177
    JohnO said:

    Andrea Leadsom has buggered Bercow. (Only a mum can do that)

    I am tempted to say only a man could do that but I am scared of showing my nativity.
  • I do wonder - what is now stopping the letters going in to Brady? May has admitted that her deal is seen by the Commons as a shit sandwich. And yet she wants to be the one to scrape some of the shit from the bread, before presenting it again.

    If we really are renegotiating with the EU in any meaningful way, it needs to be undertaken by somebody who can fully appreciate just how disgusting that first deal tasted. Otherwise, May will come back and say "Well, they caved on some punctuation. NOW pass it...."

    By pulling the vote, May has given her critics more than enough reason to pull her premiership.

    Political cowardice
  • DavidL said:

    I am tempted to say only a man could do that but I am scared of showing my nativity.
    Strap ons.

    That’s all I’m saying.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,104
    Tomorrow, instead of the historic vote on Brexit, MPs will instead debate Lords amendments to the ivory bill. After that, there will be a general debate on fuel poverty.

    This is surely going to spoil the Channel Four News two-hour live special tomorrow evening?
  • TSE is partly to blame. He helped her win her seat
    Worst thing I’ve ever done.

    David Herdson is also to blame.
  • It doesn't need primary legislation as far as the European Copurt is concerned but it does as far as UK law is concerned.
    Don't we have Gina Miller to thank for that?

    Isn't it an irony that if it wasn't for Miller's court case then invocation would have happened without legislation and therefore revocation wouldn't have needed legislation either?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,554

    I do wonder - what is now stopping the letters going in to Brady? May has admitted that her deal is seen by the Commons as a shit sandwich. And yet she wants to be the one to scrape some of the shit from the bread, before presenting it again.

    If we really are renegotiating with the EU in any meaningful way, it needs to be undertaken by somebody who can fully appreciate just how disgusting that first deal tasted. Otherwise, May will come back and say "Well, they caved on some punctuation. NOW pass it...."

    By pulling the vote, May has given her critics more than enough reason to pull her premiership.

    I cannot quite understand it. She can tell the EU that the deal was to be rejected by the Commons, anyone can do that, but how could the EU, even if they are willingly to reopen things, be confident that what they agree with May would pass the Commons either? She has no ability to judge what might be acceptable to the Commons, that much is clear. There are people who would be worse PMs, but on this particularly point, there are plenty who could do this job better than May can, given she has been saying no change was possible for weeks. What is wrong with Tory MPs?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,104
    HYUFD said:

    Yes I voted for AV and would now back PR.
    A very sensible second choice.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,104
    kle4 said:

    What is wrong with Tory MPs?
    If we knew the answer to that, we would hardly be here.
  • Theo said:

    Because any replacement would be doing the same thing - going back to the EU to try to renegotiate the backstop. And the EU will have more time for her than an ERGer who they will hate.
    The EU are more comfortable and familiar with her and its getting her nowhere.

    Having someone you hate but need to work with can work sometimes and is probably what is needed to get an acceptable deal. Just as Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness were able to reach an agreement and it only has to be reached and acceptable to all extremes once.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,104
    JohnO said:

    Andrea Leadsom has buggered Bercow. (Only a mum can do that)

    Aren't there procedural type motions that MPs can (and have) moved in the past at the end of such sessions to at least indicate and measure their discontent?
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,052
    kle4 said:

    I cannot quite understand it. She can tell the EU that the deal was to be rejected by the Commons, anyone can do that, but how could the EU, even if they are willingly to reopen things, be confident that what they agree with May would pass the Commons either? She has no ability to judge what might be acceptable to the Commons, that much is clear. There are people who would be worse PMs, but on this particularly point, there are plenty who could do this job better than May can, given she has been saying no change was possible for weeks. What is wrong with Tory MPs?
    Indeed. The EU is watching the deal being trashed. It would've lost a vote by 400-240. A tweaked deal would lose by what? 360-280?
  • Theo said:

    No. The backstop legal advice explicitly said GB and NI would be in the same territory under the backstop.
    See the Guardian reporting on the legal advice:

    "It has often been a complex debate, but Cox cuts through. Northern Ireland will remain in the EU’s single market for goods while Great Britain does not, meaning that “GB is essentially treated as a third country by NI for goods passing from GB to NI”."

    Source: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/05/clear-cut-brexit-legal-advice-reinforces-backstop-concerns
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited December 2018

    I asked this earlier and I think Big G is right. The 12 month rule.

    If it weren't for the 12 month immunity to subsequent votes the letters would be in now if not already.

    If the rules were the same as they were in Thatcher's Day she'd have been thrown out immediately after the GE2017 debacle. As it, MPs who might otherwise consider getting rid of her are worried that their deeply divided and confused colleagues (a great many of whom will be thinking 'Oh God, we'll end up with a Hard Brexiteer' or 'Oh God, we'll end up with a raving Europhile') will end up sticking to nurse for fear of something even worse.

    As it is, if she won't budge then they may have a huge amount of difficulty getting rid of her.

    Now, the other arguments in favour of Theresa May's possible survival:

    1. Parliamentary paralysis: most MPs want to stay in the EU, but most of them are distributed between the two main parties and have so far proven incapable of stitching up a deal between them. The opposing forces of party loyalty, the fear that they may split their own parties apart, and the subsequent risk of being thrown out of a job at a General Election, all act against such a thing.
    2. The DUP. Yes, the DUP. If Theresa May can't do anything (because MPs hate her Deal, she won't propose any alternative, she won;t step down and if there's any chance of the Deal actually passing they can pull the plug on her anyway,) then why not just leave her sitting like a complete lemon in Downing Street for another three-and-a-half months whilst the clock just runs down? If May won't budge and she can't come up with anything to avert a Hard Brexit, then that outcome will happen by default at the end of March. Which I'm sure would suit them down to the ground.
    3. Jeremy Corbyn. Corbyn doesn't like the EU and would be perfectly happy for us to leave. Indeed, he'd rather like it if May's paralysed premiership ran through the aftermath of a Hard Brexit, with her making a spectacular hash of it, in the hope that he would then have a much-improved chance of winning the next General Election.
    4. The potential leadership contenders. Allow Brexit to happen, let May take the blame for anything that goes wrong, then make a unified attempt to throw her out. One important thing that a clean break would do is bury Brexit as an internal Tory argument. It would be over and done with. The successor could then reunite the party to take on Labour.

    If May won't move and she can't achieve anything, yet nobody is willing or able to get rid of her, then why shouldn't she just keep on going? For now, anyway...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,554
    Dadge said:

    It would've lost a vote by 400-240. A tweaked deal would lose by what? 360-280?
    I call that progress!

  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    kle4 said:

    I cannot quite understand it. She can tell the EU that the deal was to be rejected by the Commons, anyone can do that, but how could the EU, even if they are willingly to reopen things, be confident that what they agree with May would pass the Commons either? She has no ability to judge what might be acceptable to the Commons, that much is clear. There are people who would be worse PMs, but on this particularly point, there are plenty who could do this job better than May can, given she has been saying no change was possible for weeks. What is wrong with Tory MPs?
    If this doesn't turn non-ERG Tory MPs against her I don't know what will. Perhaps this evening there will be frantic sounding out to see if they actually have the numbers to bring her down
  • See the Guardian reporting on the legal advice:

    "It has often been a complex debate, but Cox cuts through. Northern Ireland will remain in the EU’s single market for goods while Great Britain does not, meaning that “GB is essentially treated as a third country by NI for goods passing from GB to NI”."

    Source: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/05/clear-cut-brexit-legal-advice-reinforces-backstop-concerns
    See also Channel Four Fact Check which states:

    "The legal advice sets out in fairly stark terms that Northern Ireland would be treated differently to the rest of the UK if the backstop protocol kicked in.

    Unlike the rest of the UK, Northern Ireland would remain in the EU’s single market and customs union.

    Goods passing from Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) to Northern Ireland would be subject to a declaration process overseen by EU institutions.

    Mr Cox puts it like this: “For regulatory purposes GB is essentially treated as a third country by NI.”

    “Third country” is Brussels-speak for a country outside the EU. The way it’s used here could suggest that the backstop arrangement will see Northern Ireland act like an EU member state, treating Britain as a separate entity."

    Source: https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-the-legal-advice-the-government-didnt-want-you-to-see
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,052

    The insoluble problem is that the EU will never be satisfied on the NI border. It’s their weapon to either separate NI from the U.K. or keep the U.K. in the EU.

    This is conspiracy theory nonsense.
  • YellowSubmarineYellowSubmarine Posts: 2,740
    edited December 2018
    This has figures on how much public and Conservative Party cash May is spending advertising her deal on Facebook.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/10/almost-100k-of-public-money-spent-on-brexit-deal-facebook-ads
  • Dadge said:

    This is conspiracy theory nonsense.
    Go on then - what other solutions has the EU contemplated or suggested.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,554

    If the rules were the same as they were in Thatcher's Day she'd have been thrown out immediately after the GE2017 debacle. As it, MPs who might otherwise consider getting rid of her are worried that their deeply divided and confused colleagues (a great many of whom will be thinking 'Oh God, we'll end up with a Hard Brexiteer' or 'Oh God, we'll end up with a raving Europhile') will end up sticking to nurse for fear of something even worse.

    As it is, if she won't budge then they may have a huge amount of difficulty getting rid of her.

    Now, the other arguments in favour of Theresa May's possible survival:

    1. Parliamentary paralysis: most MPs want to stay in the EU, but most of them are distributed between the two main parties and have so far proven incapable of stitching up a deal between them. The opposing forces of party loyalty, the fear that they may split their own parties apart, and the subsequent risk of being thrown out of a job at a General Election, all act against such a thing.
    2. The DUP. Yes, the
    3. Jeremy Corbyn. Corbyn doesn't like the EU and would be perfectly happy for us to leave. Indeed, he'd rather like it if May's paralysed premiership ran through the aftermath of a Hard Brexit, with her making a spectacular has of it, in the hope that he would then have a much-improved chance of winning the next General Election.
    4. The potential leadership contenders. Allow Brexit to happen, let May take the blame for anything that goes wrong, then make a unified attempt to throw her out. One important thing that a clean break would do is bury Brexit as an internal Tory argument. It would be over and done with. The successor could then reunite the party to take on Labour.

    If May won't move and she can't achieve anything, yet nobody is willing or able to get rid of her, then why shouldn't she just keep on going? For now, anyway...
    Her sense of duty or self preservation is, at this point, misplaced and unhelpful, but on a technical level if no one will remove her she is not being inherently unreasonable in keeping going. She should recognise it is not helping, but the whole point of those procedures is to be able to remove someone who does not recognise it.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 51,211

    This has figures on how much public and Conservative Party cash May is spending advertising her deal on Facebook.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/10/almost-100k-of-public-money-spent-on-brexit-deal-facebook-ads

    Its almost as if she expects people to have a vote on it...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,554

    If this doesn't turn non-ERG Tory MPs against her I don't know what will. Perhaps this evening there will be frantic sounding out to see if they actually have the numbers to bring her down
    It was reported that some MPs were waiting for her deal to fail before they sent in letters, making it bizarre that, the deal being an admitted failure, they would not now do so.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,561

    Strap ons.

    That’s all I’m saying.
    And you a good Muslim boy. Fancy you knowing about things like that!
  • How many Tory MPs does it take to reach 50%+1 to eject her? Must be pretty close if a vote was called.

    I believe 111 now have come out against the deal. That's most of the way there. Throw in some cabinet ministers who in the secrecy of a secret ballot feel they could run for the job themselves. But more importantly the number opposed to the deal at heart is likely much greater than 111 since coming out of the closet to be against it requires 'payroll vote' MPs to quit their posts. In a secret ballot VoNC those payroll vote MPs who think the deal [or May] is crap but don't want to throw away their job over it can vote against in a secret ballot.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,443
    Richard Tice thinks our great entrepreneurs favour Brexit, James Dyson Anthony Bamford and Tim Martin!
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    TGOHF said:

    I disagree - the issue needs the oxygen of a "chance" of overturning the referendum result. Once that has gone when we are out the circus will move on.
    Why anyone in their right mind would believe your predictions of calm is beyond me. All have been proved entirely erroneous thus far.
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    Dadge said:

    This is conspiracy theory nonsense.
    I have a lot of acquaintances in the EU bureaucracy. The general consensus is that they are unbelievably fed up with the UK and wish we would just piss off.
  • TheoTheo Posts: 325

    See also Channel Four Fact Check which states:

    "The legal advice sets out in fairly stark terms that Northern Ireland would be treated differently to the rest of the UK if the backstop protocol kicked in.

    Unlike the rest of the UK, Northern Ireland would remain in the EU’s single market and customs union.

    Goods passing from Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) to Northern Ireland would be subject to a declaration process overseen by EU institutions.

    Mr Cox puts it like this: “For regulatory purposes GB is essentially treated as a third country by NI.”

    “Third country” is Brussels-speak for a country outside the EU. The way it’s used here could suggest that the backstop arrangement will see Northern Ireland act like an EU member state, treating Britain as a separate entity."

    Source: https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-the-legal-advice-the-government-didnt-want-you-to-see
    Read the actual legal document. It explicitly says NI and GB will be in the same customs territory. The C4 Factcheck is just wrong as NI would not be in the single market.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,561
    edited December 2018

    Go on then - what other solutions has the EU contemplated or suggested.
    The EU negotiators have conceded, I suspect, rather more than they really, really wanted to because the 27 want to keep Britain close. Not so much because they want disruptive us, but because Britain leaving is going to cause disruption in the rest of Europe.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,554
    Fenman said:

    I have a lot of acquaintances in the EU bureaucracy. The general consensus is that they are unbelievably fed up with the UK and wish we would just piss off.
    And yet others insist the EU hierarchy are keen for us to remain, hence the court ruling.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,784
    Fenman said:

    I have a lot of acquaintances in the EU bureaucracy. The general consensus is that they are unbelievably fed up with the UK and wish we would just piss off.
    are they in for a glum time
  • TheoTheo Posts: 325
    Theo said:

    Read the actual legal document. It explicitly says NI and GB will be in the same customs territory. The C4 Factcheck is just wrong as NI would not be in the single market.
    The credibility of a Factcheck is also critically undermined by its clickbait title.
  • Two years ago there was a lot of talk among Leavers about how it would all calm down soon enough. Your prediction looks about as accurate as that one.
    Can't quite get my head round what the Brexiteers are seeing in their crystal balls; sometimes it's much blood foaming in the Witham, other times it'll all be over by Christmas (not this Christmas obvs).
  • Is the Eurpean Court of Justice a political body then?
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    R

    Mr. Theo, there's to be a customs barrier within British sovereign (apparently) territory, down the Irish Sea.

    Who cares? There is already a gigantic regulatory barrier there, as anyone who is gay and in love, or who has an unwanted pregnancy will attest.
  • The EU negotiators have conceded, I suspect, rather more than they really, really wanted to because the 27 want to keep Britain close. Not so much because they want disruptive us us, but because Britain leaving is going to cause disruption in the rest of Europe.
    Maybe, maybe not - but the point at issue is the NI border and on that the EU have refused to contemplate anything other than a border down the Irish Sea between NI and GB. That’s why we cannot contemplate any agreement with a backstop and why it’s the EU that is the real problem.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    HYUFD said:

    As opposed to the pathetic Labour Party whose leader has a Deal plan virtually identical to May's but refuses to support it by putting party politics ahead of the national interest
    That’s a fair shout.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,561

    Can't quite get my head round what the Brexiteers are seeing in their crystal balls; sometimes it's much blood foaming in the Witham, other times it'll all be over by Christmas (not this Christmas obvs).
    The river in Witham is the Wid. Just saying.

    Has Priti Patel said anything today. Before the weekend there was some stofry about one of her friends arranging a pro-Brexit rally locally, but I've see no sign of it.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,104
    Anazina said:

    That’s a fair shout.
    If he did, how many would follow?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,561

    Maybe, maybe not - but the point at issue is the NI border and on that the EU have refused to contemplate anything other than a border down the Irish Sea between NI and GB. That’s why we cannot contemplate any agreement with a backstop and why it’s the EU that is the real problem.
    Perhaps they don't trust either us or the DUP to play by the rules.
  • Anazina said:

    R

    Who cares? There is already a gigantic regulatory barrier there, as anyone who is gay and in love, or who has an unwanted pregnancy will attest.
    A regulatory barrier where they choose to erect one, not where others do.

    That'd be like having a regulatory barrier in Scotland not because Holyrood had erected one but because Saudi Arabia suddenly was writing Scottish laws.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,222
    Will tomorrow ever come ?
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,080
    If only we voted (I did ofc) for Ed Milliband instead of David Cameron back in 2015. Wonder how things would be now in that alternative universe....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,016

    Why not? View the Tories and Labour as like coalitions.

    Under PR they could be in the same government via a coalition but we have no knowledge of that before votes are counted and a coalition is formed.

    At least under FPTP we know that they're in the same coalition before the election.
    No not necessarily as 2010 and 2017 proved nobody knew a Tory and LD or Tory and DUP coalition would result
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    murali_s said:

    If only we voted (I did ofc) for Ed Milliband instead of David Cameron back in 2015. Wonder how things would be now in that alternative universe....

    They'd have been better in every respect.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,473
    Evening all :)

    Whatever my observations about the current state of A50 (and whatever the views of one individual about my response), my real anger today is reserved for the Crossrail Project which has had a disastrous day with news of a £2 billion overspend and a further delay with services not likely to be running before mid 2020.

    Watching the BBC London News take on this, plenty of the usual suspects saying the usual things from Caroline Pidgeon to Sadiq Khan - the problem seemed to be the governance of the project and the lack of accurate information (or perhaps the surplus of misinformation) coming from the project to the Mayor, GLA and others.

    Needless to say, there is no one to be held accountable (except perhaps Boris) for this grotesque overspend with stations and tunnels not finished and signals not fully installed at a time when services were meant to be operating. The trains have been delivered but haven't test run on the tunnel sections yet.

    The impact on London businesses of the delay will be considerable - one of the big selling points for Crossrail has been the potential income for business of people coming from east and west into central London quicker and easier than is currently the case.

    The stupidity is Crossrail is nothing new - in the 1920s and 1930s it was possible to travel from Ealing Broadway to Southend on the same train - all that happened was the electric tube car was detached at Whitechapel and replaced with a steam engine. Indeed, the Metropolitan Line ran a service from Barking to Windsor via Paddington.

    Instead of spending millions on new tracks and tunnels we could have looked art compatible rolling stock, compatible power cars and transfer facilities (as we used to see at Farringdon where third rail trains from south of the Thames switched to overhead for the journey north).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,016

    How would PR make the current situation any more manageable? You cannot know the components of a future parliament and who will be made to work with who. A Grieve party and a Mogg party might in the future be the only viable combination in a future parliament for arguments sake! Equally a Umunna party and a Corbyn might only work in an alternative scenario. In an ideal world Grieve & Umunna would get together and govern but that would only be durable until the usual political cycle of decay for governing parties kicks them into touch as it inevitably will. All PR will achieve is more political deadlock as single issue parties become more entrenched and coalitions of the willing become harder to achieve.
    PR at least means you are more likely to be able to vote for a party you believe in than one that is the least worst option
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,016
    edited December 2018
    stodge said:

    That's an interesting and enlightening viewpoint. Would you, for example, support the introduction of PR in English local elections as a first step? After all, we already have forms of PR for Scottish contests and in London as well.
    Yes I would, it works in Scotland
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    kle4 said:

    And yet others insist the EU hierarchy are keen for us to remain, hence the court ruling.
    Let's remember that the EU Commission were as opposed as the UK government to this interpretation. It's interesting that the Brexiteers have failed to acknowledge the most important point of this judgement. That the UK is a sovereign state which retains its sovereignty
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,689

    A regulatory barrier where they choose to erect one, not where others do.

    That'd be like having a regulatory barrier in Scotland not because Holyrood had erected one but because Saudi Arabia suddenly was writing Scottish laws.
    Saudi Arabia ?
    Pfffffft.

    And yet you favour imposing a no deal Brexit which is rejected by two thirds of the country - and indeed around two thirds of the NI electorate.
This discussion has been closed.