politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The gilded cage. How the DUP are using the new rules of the ga
Comments
-
I think you mean 2 further referendums. No way one remain win would settle it.Benpointer said:
You may be right - I hope you are.grabcocque said:
Labour really doesn't want to have to have its internal contradictions exposed any more than the Tories do. Labour's looking for a way to backpedal from their confused mess of a Brexit policy as much as the Tories.Benpointer said:
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
By making the votes all be free votes, it's hoped that no one party will get the blame for the (almost certain) remain result this process will produce.
I struggle to see how we could Remain without a further referendum though.0 -
And as you know Richard many Remainers, including me, would take May's Deal as the 'best of a bad job' and a way to ensure avoiding the chaos of No Deal.Richard_Tyndall said:
Spot on. No one can dictate what form Leave MUST take. For me and many other Leavers May's deal. although far from perfect is certainly Leave which is why it should be supported - if only for fear of allowing Remain back in.Anazina said:
No, a very narrow majority of those who actually voted, voted to leave the EU. That was all.
However, the grown-ups in the HoC know better it seems.0 -
The famous component that was used as the example of millions of parts that cross the channel multiple times in the case of Mini production was the crankshaft by Faisal Islam on Sky and he specifically stated that the crankshaft went France, UK, Munich, UK. So intelligent people put their brains into gear and had a think. Mini crankshafts are cast in France. The Mini engine factories are petrol, Hams Hall UK and Austria for diesel. So why was the crankshaft going to Munich, there is no Mini Engine factory in Munich?Big_G_NorthWales said:
But as a Brexiteer you know the answer.ralphmalph said:
What Mini component(s) cross the channel multiple times?Andy_Cooke said:AmpfieldAndy said:
Articulate why you have such fears in a comprehensible manner rather than simply regurgitate Hammonds reincarnation of Project Fear.
6 - The Irish border. Unless we accept a sort of de facto backstop where Northern Ireland accepts everything from the Republic whatever the standards and regulations that applies to it (and there will certainly be chancers around for this), there's a hard border and shit happens there.
That's just off the top of my head.
How many Mini components cross the channel multiple times?
What percentage of components cross the channel multiple times?
Pretty basic info.
You simply must to have any creditabilty on JIT manufacturing and the impact on the no deal you want
The answer is the BMW performance engines are made in Munich "M" power. The Mini engine made in Munich is the special edition John Cooper Works Edition.
So the answer is a tiny percentage of mini crankshafts cross the channel multiple times. The sad thing is that because of new EU emissions rules the JCW Edition is no longer made so now no cranks shafts at all cross the channel multiple times.
Of course as I have said before if the remain campaign had given us a breakdown of all these parts crossing the channel multiple times as a proof point that could not be argued about because it was factual, us brexiteers would not think it is propaganda as opposed to fact.0 -
I agree with TM 're a 2nd Referendum.
As in all likelihood does Jezza but the New Labour Ultras won't let it lie.
At this rate Labour gets the blame for derailing BREXIT for which they will pay a huge Electoral price which of course the aforesaid MP s are Ok with.0 -
There are reasonable people on all sides. Unfortunately there are also, on both sides, utter fools who would see this country ruined rather than compromise.Benpointer said:
And as you know Richard many Remainers, including me, would take May's Deal as the 'best of a bad job' and a way to ensure avoiding the chaos of No Deal.Richard_Tyndall said:
Spot on. No one can dictate what form Leave MUST take. For me and many other Leavers May's deal. although far from perfect is certainly Leave which is why it should be supported - if only for fear of allowing Remain back in.Anazina said:
No, a very narrow majority of those who actually voted, voted to leave the EU. That was all.
However, the grown-ups in the HoC know better it seems.
0 -
Some variant of "make em vote till they drop" has been going around for a few months now. There's a sense to it when nobody can agree on anything.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?
The question is whether a referendum is one of the voting options, because that probably just encourages parliament to pass the buck.
0 -
It would settle it for the time being.Brom said:
I think you mean 2 further referendums. No way one remain win would settle it.Benpointer said:
You may be right - I hope you are.grabcocque said:
Labour really doesn't want to have to have its internal contradictions exposed any more than the Tories do. Labour's looking for a way to backpedal from their confused mess of a Brexit policy as much as the Tories.Benpointer said:
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
By making the votes all be free votes, it's hoped that no one party will get the blame for the (almost certain) remain result this process will produce.
I struggle to see how we could Remain without a further referendum though.
Nothing to stop Leavers campaigning for a further leave ref of course - although I suspect they might want to avoid the "easiest deal in the world", "they need us more than we need them" and "£350m a week for the NHS" arguments next time.0 -
History will come to see the deal as the missed opportunity for leavers. It has taken decades to integrate our economies and institutions with our EU partners. If the process is to be unwound, it needs to be done carefully and slowly, over years: Brexit is a journey, not a destination. The deal is a sensible first step.Richard_Tyndall said:
Spot on. No one can dictate what form Leave MUST take. For me and many other Leavers May's deal. although far from perfect is certainly Leave which is why it should be supported - if only for fear of allowing Remain back in.Anazina said:
No, a very narrow majority of those who actually voted, voted to leave the EU. That was all.
Edit; since I notice I have answered two points from you in succession, Evening by the way
Unfortunately its advocates don't have confidence that their project would withstand the scrutiny and battering it would get meanwhile, and insist on Cold Turkey Brexit or nothing, in defiance of all logic or common sense.0 -
-
Indeed. Let's hope commonsense prevails in the end.Richard_Tyndall said:
There are reasonable people on all sides. Unfortunately there are also, on both sides, utter fools who would see this country ruined rather than compromise.Benpointer said:
And as you know Richard many Remainers, including me, would take May's Deal as the 'best of a bad job' and a way to ensure avoiding the chaos of No Deal.Richard_Tyndall said:
Spot on. No one can dictate what form Leave MUST take. For me and many other Leavers May's deal. although far from perfect is certainly Leave which is why it should be supported - if only for fear of allowing Remain back in.Anazina said:
No, a very narrow majority of those who actually voted, voted to leave the EU. That was all.
However, the grown-ups in the HoC know better it seems.0 -
If true that seems pretty conclusive that the reports on Barwell and Liddington were porkies. A 2nd ref on May's watch seems incredibly far fetched, ironically if she had been deposed I suspect parliament might have felt the circumstances for one would be considerably more favourable.williamglenn said:0 -
And so make it more likely it will either never happen or be a disaster.IanB2 said:
History will come to see the deal as the missed opportunity for leavers. It has taken decades to integrate our economies and institutions with our EU partners. If the process is to be unwound, it needs to be done carefully and slowly, over years: Brexit is a journey, not a destination. The deal is a sensible first step.Richard_Tyndall said:
Spot on. No one can dictate what form Leave MUST take. For me and many other Leavers May's deal. although far from perfect is certainly Leave which is why it should be supported - if only for fear of allowing Remain back in.Anazina said:
No, a very narrow majority of those who actually voted, voted to leave the EU. That was all.
Edit; since I notice I have answered two points from you in succession, Evening by the way
Unfortunately its advocates don't have confidence that their project would withstand the scrutiny and battering it would get meanwhile, and insist on Cold Turkey Brexit or nothing, in defiance of all logic or common sense.
I say that as someone who is sceptical of some of the claims of catastrophe but thinks that, since there is a deal on the table, it is dumb to tempt fate.0 -
This is interesting. Especially if they realise that there really are only three options: the deal, leaving with no deal and remaining. The deal may actually be the Condorcet winner in the Commons.grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.0 -
If we get off this chaotic nightmare political ride, there isn't going to be much appetite to get back on for quite some time. One vote would settle it, provided it isn't on a knife edge.Brom said:
I think you mean 2 further referendums. No way one remain win would settle it.Benpointer said:
You may be right - I hope you are.grabcocque said:
Labour really doesn't want to have to have its internal contradictions exposed any more than the Tories do. Labour's looking for a way to backpedal from their confused mess of a Brexit policy as much as the Tories.Benpointer said:
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
By making the votes all be free votes, it's hoped that no one party will get the blame for the (almost certain) remain result this process will produce.
I struggle to see how we could Remain without a further referendum though.0 -
Ouch, that's a rough commute.Big_G_NorthWales said:I will go for your upgrade. My daughter regularly travels from Abergele/Rhyl to Bridgend and Llanelli for meetings and not only does she have to stay in a hotel overnight, she has chaotic delays and cancellations all via the new Wales government franchise
https://www.thetrainline.com/train-times/rhyl-to-llanelli0 -
Useless fact for most people probably: just found out that Lloyds Bank no longer requires you to inform them when you're going abroad and intending to use their cards.0
-
Not sure the HoC rules allow for a secret ballot.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.0 -
Which is why "managed" no deal will have a shelf life of weeks, at most. You can have cream* if you sign the Withdrawal Agreement. Do you think they won't sign? People don't know what a backstop is, but they certainly can recognise shortages.anothernick said:<
I was at an event held by the dairy industry the other week. There was general consternation at the lack of information about what will happen after 29 March. Most milk used in the UK is home produced but large quantities of butter and cream are imported, cream from Holland and butter from Ireland. Producers are stockpiling butter, which can be frozen, but there is limited capacity for storage. Cream cannot be stockpiled and supplies would dry up in a few days if there delays at cross channel ports. The general expectation was that a no deal Brexit would mean shortages of some items and big price increases for those that were available.
* Substitute 1000 other products and services here0 -
It's a handy issue of principle on which a principled woman can reasonably resign, with her honour intact - a lot better than being turfed out by her colleagues or by a VNOC after her life's work is comprehensively rejected. I suspect this is Theresa planning her own exit.Brom said:
If true that seems pretty conclusive that the reports on Barwell and Liddington were porkies. A 2nd ref on May's watch seems incredibly far fetched, ironically if she had been deposed I suspect parliament might have felt the circumstances for one would be considerably more favourable.williamglenn said:0 -
Unless its a bigger margin on a bigger turnout then a remain win will ensure Leave are relentless in persuing the best of 3 and let's be honest does anyone think another leave win will shut up the People's Vote campaign? Another referendum makes this go on twice as long and makes it twice as nasty.IanB2 said:
If we get off this chaotic nightmare political ride, there isn't going to be much appetite to get back on for quite some time. One vote would settle it, provided it isn't on a knife edge.Brom said:
I think you mean 2 further referendums. No way one remain win would settle it.Benpointer said:
You may be right - I hope you are.grabcocque said:
Labour really doesn't want to have to have its internal contradictions exposed any more than the Tories do. Labour's looking for a way to backpedal from their confused mess of a Brexit policy as much as the Tories.Benpointer said:
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
By making the votes all be free votes, it's hoped that no one party will get the blame for the (almost certain) remain result this process will produce.
I struggle to see how we could Remain without a further referendum though.0 -
Well, at a time of threats to MPs, especially female ones, and intimations of mob rule, I won't be surprised if some Labour MPs for rough northern seats change their vote from 'rescind A50' to 'accept the deal'.RobD said:
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
If VONCs in the PM can take place by secret ballot, it's disappointing that an exception can't be made for this vote.0 -
Theuniondivvie said:
Something that those three countries have in common that I just can't quite put my finger on..Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).
They are our kith and kin and should come first?0 -
-
For lamb and beef production it was the opposite - they sell into the EU and the British meat is seen as a premium product and priced accordingly. If they lose easy access to those markets through red tape (the third country inspection regime is quite onerous) and tariffs, they would have to dump onto the British market and drop prices considerably to shift the volumes in competition with non-EU imports. So good news for the consumer, at least in the short run, but a lot of farmers would be in financial difficulty.FF43 said:
Which is why "managed" no deal will have a shelf life of weeks, at most. You can have cream* if you sign the Withdrawal Agreement. Do you think they won't sign? People don't know what a backstop is, but they certainly can recognise shortages.anothernick said:<
I was at an event held by the dairy industry the other week. There was general consternation at the lack of information about what will happen after 29 March. Most milk used in the UK is home produced but large quantities of butter and cream are imported, cream from Holland and butter from Ireland. Producers are stockpiling butter, which can be frozen, but there is limited capacity for storage. Cream cannot be stockpiled and supplies would dry up in a few days if there delays at cross channel ports. The general expectation was that a no deal Brexit would mean shortages of some items and big price increases for those that were available.
* Substitute 1000 other products and services here
0 -
s
It would settle it for the time being.Benpointer said:
I think you mean 2 further referendums. No way one remain win would settle it.Brom said:="Quote" rel="Benpointer">
You may be right - I hope you are.grabcocque said:
Labour really doesn't want to have to have its internal contradictions exposed any more than the Tories do. Labour's looking for a way to backpedal from their confused mess of a Brexit policy as much as the Tories.Benpointer said:
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
By making the votes all be free votes, it's hoped that no one party will get the blame for the (almost certain) remain result this process will produce.
I struggle to see how we could Remain without a further referendum though.
Nothing to stop Leavers campaigning for a further leave ref of course - although I suspect they might want to avoid the "easiest deal in the world", "they need us more than we need them" and "£350m a week for the NHS" arguments next time.
If we don’t leave the EU now we will be sucked into an ever centralising EU superstate that only wants ever closer union and will not stop until the nation state is fully destroyed. With one president , one army, one currency. We will eventually lose all right to self determination and self rule and consequently our hard won freedoms will be forever lost. Leaving the EU is a once in a lifetime chance to save our nation from being sucked into the coming EU superstate which is engulfing mainland Europe. It would be the end of true democracy ultimately being replaced by a pseudo democracy in name only, run by foreign powers who do not always have our best interest at heart. For me it is make or break now, if brexit fails to be enacted then the UK is forever finished, if we leave there will be birth pains and no doubt some disruption in the short term but in the long term we will have regained our nation and freedom
0 -
10-11 Dec is quite 'old' given how fast things have been moving.Foxy said:0 -
It was VONC of party leader, who just happened to be PM. Having secret ballots in the commons would make the disconnect between public and MPs even bigger.rural_voter said:
Well, at a time of threats to MPs, especially female ones, and intimations of mob rule, I won't be surprised if some Labour MPs for rough northern seats change their vote from 'rescind A50' to 'accept the deal'.RobD said:
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
If VONCs in the PM can take place by secret ballot, it's disappointing that an exception can't be made for this vote.0 -
No, I think it's important we know how our representatives vote in the HoC.rural_voter said:
Well, at a time of threats to MPs, especially female ones, and intimations of mob rule, I won't be surprised if some Labour MPs for rough northern seats change their vote from 'rescind A50' to 'accept the deal'.RobD said:
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
If VONCs in the PM can take place by secret ballot, it's disappointing that an exception can't be made for this vote.0 -
Bless. And you typed all that yourself.kjohnw said:If we don’t leave the EU now we will be s
If we don’t leave the EU now we will be sucked into an ever centralising EU superstate that only wants ever closer union and will not stop until the nation state is fully destroyed. With one president , one army, one currency. We will eventually lose all right to self determination and self rule and consequently our hard won freedoms will be forever lost. Leaving the EU is a once in a lifetime chance to save our nation from being sucked into the coming EU superstate which is engulfing mainland Europe. It would be the end of true democracy ultimately being replaced by a pseudo democracy in name only, run by foreign powers who do not always have our best interest at heart. For me it is make or break now, if brexit fails to be enacted then the UK is forever finished, if we leave there will be birth pains and no doubt some disruption in the short term but in the long term we will have regained our nation and freedomBenpointer said:
It would settle it for the time being.Brom said:
I think you mean 2 further referendums. No way one remain win would settle it.Benpointer said:
You may be right - I hope you are.grabcocque said:
Labour really doesn't want to have to have its internal contradictions exposed any more than the Tories do. Labour's looking for a way to backpedal from their confused mess of a Brexit policy as much as the Tories.Benpointer said:
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
By making the votes all be free votes, it's hoped that no one party will get the blame for the (almost certain) remain result this process will produce.
I struggle to see how we could Remain without a further referendum though.
Nothing to stop Leavers campaigning for a further leave ref of course - although I suspect they might want to avoid the "easiest deal in the world", "they need us more than we need them" and "£350m a week for the NHS" arguments next time.0 -
Rubbish. The VONC was an internal party matter for the Conservatives. This is a matter of how our elected representatives vote in on our behalf in the House. It should never be secret.rural_voter said:
Well, at a time of threats to MPs, especially female ones, and intimations of mob rule, I won't be surprised if some Labour MPs for rough northern seats change their vote from 'rescind A50' to 'accept the deal'.RobD said:
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
If VONCs in the PM can take place by secret ballot, it's disappointing that an exception can't be made for this vote.0 -
How condescending. The concern about increased centralisation of the EU is a legitimate one.IanB2 said:
Bless. And you typed all that yourself.kjohnw said:
If we don’t leave the EU now we will be sucked into an ever centralising EU superstate that only wants ever closer union and will not stop until the nation state is fully destroyed. With one president , one army, one currency. We will eventually lose all right to self determination and self rule and consequently our hard won freedoms will be forever lost. Leaving the EU is a once in a lifetime chance to save our nation from being sucked into the coming EU superstate which is engulfing mainland Europe. It would be the end of true democracy ultimately being replaced by a pseudo democracy in name only, run by foreign powers who do not always have our best interest at heart. For me it is make or break now, if brexit fails to be enacted then the UK is forever finished, if we leave there will be birth pains and no doubt some disruption in the short term but in the long term we will have regained our nation and freedom0 -
Well you may just have to get used to the idea that your fellow zealots have fucked-up their chance, pardon my anglo-saxon.kjohnw said:If we don’t leave the EU now we will be s
If we don’t leave the EU now we will be sucked into an ever centralising EU superstate that only wants ever closer union and will not stop until the nation state is fully destroyed. With one president , one army, one currency. We will eventually lose all right to self determination and self rule and consequently our hard won freedoms will be forever lost. Leaving the EU is a once in a lifetime chance to save our nation from being sucked into the coming EU superstate which is engulfing mainland Europe. It would be the end of true democracy ultimately being replaced by a pseudo democracy in name only, run by foreign powers who do not always have our best interest at heart. For me it is make or break now, if brexit fails to be enacted then the UK is forever finished, if we leave there will be birth pains and no doubt some disruption in the short term but in the long term we will have regained our nation and freedomBenpointer said:
It would settle it for the time being.Brom said:
I think you mean 2 further referendums. No way one remain win would settle it.Benpointer said:
You may be right - I hope you are.grabcocque said:
Labour really doesn't want to have to have its internal contradictions exposed any more than the Tories do. Labour's looking for a way to backpedal from their confused mess of a Brexit policy as much as the Tories.Benpointer said:
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
By making the votes all be free votes, it's hoped that no one party will get the blame for the (almost certain) remain result this process will produce.
I struggle to see how we could Remain without a further referendum though.
Nothing to stop Leavers campaigning for a further leave ref of course - although I suspect they might want to avoid the "easiest deal in the world", "they need us more than we need them" and "£350m a week for the NHS" arguments next time.0 -
Nah an MP is accountable to their constituents. Nearly 85% of Constiuencies in England voted leave.rural_voter said:
Well, at a time of threats to MPs, especially female ones, and intimations of mob rule, I won't be surprised if some Labour MPs for rough northern seats change their vote from 'rescind A50' to 'accept the deal'.RobD said:
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
If VONCs in the PM can take place by secret ballot, it's disappointing that an exception can't be made for this vote.
As the Kaiser Chiefs would say. I predict a riot.0 -
...and we're back to this again. Not everybody has this concept in their head, and those that do may have other kiths and kins in mind. During the Referendum many Asian UK voters voted with the intent to increase immigration from India or Pakistan. And I assume other ethnicities prioritised their patrimonies also.notme said:Theuniondivvie said:
Something that those three countries have in common that I just can't quite put my finger on..Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).
They are our kith and kin and should come first?0 -
Yep - zimmer frames at the barricades!bigjohnowls said:
Nah an MP is accountable to their constituents. Nearly 85% of Constiuencies in England voted leave.rural_voter said:
Well, at a time of threats to MPs, especially female ones, and intimations of mob rule, I won't be surprised if some Labour MPs for rough northern seats change their vote from 'rescind A50' to 'accept the deal'.RobD said:
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
If VONCs in the PM can take place by secret ballot, it's disappointing that an exception can't be made for this vote.
As the Kaiser Chiefs would say. I predict a riot.0 -
You mean descended from Germanic tribes?notme said:
They are our kith and kin and should come first?Theuniondivvie said:
Something that those three countries have in common that I just can't quite put my finger on..Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
It is indeedviewcode said:
Ouch, that's a rough commute.Big_G_NorthWales said:I will go for your upgrade. My daughter regularly travels from Abergele/Rhyl to Bridgend and Llanelli for meetings and not only does she have to stay in a hotel overnight, she has chaotic delays and cancellations all via the new Wales government franchise
https://www.thetrainline.com/train-times/rhyl-to-llanelli0 -
Our blood squatting on other peoples' soil in other words.notme said:Theuniondivvie said:
Something that those three countries have in common that I just can't quite put my finger on..Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).
They are our kith and kin and should come first?0 -
What might this achieve if none of the options receives a majority?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
Option A - yes or no? Answer: no, by 300 votes.
Option B - yes or no? Answer: no, by 200 votes.
Option C - yes or no? Answer: no, by 100 votes.
Eliminate option A.
Same answers again for B or C.
Or are they seriously going to ask "Which do you prefer out of A and B, and bear in mind you must answer?" Then same for A and C, and for B and C.
Surely politicians do not actually wish to look even more like the bunch of shitclowns that most of the population already consider them to be? Is this their idea for a Christmas party?
A free vote, with whips agreeing to be bound by the result? Then a whipped vote after the free vote. So Deal ends up with unanimous support then? What a complete and utter fantasy. There is absolutely no way this will yield a majority for any option.0 -
Oi, some of my ancestors were here when those bloody Angles and Saxons arrived.williamglenn said:
You mean descended from Germanic tribes?notme said:
They are our kith and kin and should come first?Theuniondivvie said:
Something that those three countries have in common that I just can't quite put my finger on..Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).
Now where did I leave my beaker...0 -
Ouch. This really is Britains Ratners moment.Gardenwalker said:0 -
I imagine it's the former, based on what they did for House of Lords reform.Oort said:
What might this achieve if none of the options receives a majority?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
Option A - yes or no? Answer: no, by 300 votes.
Option B - yes or no? Answer: no, by 200 votes.
Option C - yes or no? Answer: no, by 100 votes.
Eliminate option A.
Same answers again for B or C.
Or are they seriously going to ask "Which do you prefer out of A and B, and bear in mind you must answer?" Then same for A and C, and for B and C.
Surely politicians do not actually wish to look even more like the bunch of shitclowns that most of the population already consider them to be? Is this their idea for a Christmas party?
A free vote, with whips agreeing to be bound by the result? So Deal ends up with unanimous support then? What a complete and utter fantasy.0 -
Santa Claus is coming to TownBenpointer said:0 -
There are, in fact, a couple of votes in Parliament that are conducted by secret ballot:
The election of the speaker of the house.
The election of select committee chairs.
These were changed from open to secret ballots because it was felt that the party whips had too much control over these elections and it weakened the impartiality these roles were intended to possess.
0 -
Somewhere under the new A303 I suspect.Foxy said:
Oi, some of my ancestors were here when those bloody Angles and Saxons arrived.williamglenn said:
You mean descended from Germanic tribes?notme said:
They are our kith and kin and should come first?Theuniondivvie said:
Something that those three countries have in common that I just can't quite put my finger on..Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).
Now where did I leave my beaker...0 -
At least two of the options that time won majorities.RobD said:
I imagine it's the former, based on what they did for House of Lords reform.Oort said:
What might this achieve if none of the options receives a majority?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
Option A - yes or no? Answer: no, by 300 votes.
Option B - yes or no? Answer: no, by 200 votes.
Option C - yes or no? Answer: no, by 100 votes.
Eliminate option A.
Same answers again for B or C.
Or are they seriously going to ask "Which do you prefer out of A and B, and bear in mind you must answer?" Then same for A and C, and for B and C.
Surely politicians do not actually wish to look even more like the bunch of shitclowns that most of the population already consider them to be? Is this their idea for a Christmas party?
A free vote, with whips agreeing to be bound by the result? So Deal ends up with unanimous support then? What a complete and utter fantasy.0 -
Riots maybe, but probably a bit muted. Not the kind of thing average leaver really does. They’ll be some civil disobedience. And then we’ll start to get information about growing radicalism. Google + sense of grievance = something very very uglybigjohnowls said:
Nah an MP is accountable to their constituents. Nearly 85% of Constiuencies in England voted leave.rural_voter said:
Well, at a time of threats to MPs, especially female ones, and intimations of mob rule, I won't be surprised if some Labour MPs for rough northern seats change their vote from 'rescind A50' to 'accept the deal'.RobD said:
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
If VONCs in the PM can take place by secret ballot, it's disappointing that an exception can't be made for this vote.
As the Kaiser Chiefs would say. I predict a riot.
Half a dozen people with the right motivation....0 -
If we don’t leave the EU now we will be sucked into an ever centralising EU superstate that only wants ever closer union and will not stop until the nation state is fully destroyed. With one president , one army, one currency. We will eventually lose all right to self determination and self rule and consequently our hard won freedoms will be forever lost. Leaving the EU is a once in a lifetime chance to save our nation from being sucked into the coming EU superstate which is engulfing mainland Europe. It would be the end of true democracy ultimately being replaced by a pseudo democracy in name only, run by foreign powers who do not always have our best interest at heart. For me it is make or break now, if brexit fails to be enacted then the UK is forever finished, if we leave there will be birth pains and no doubt some disruption in the short term but in the long term we will have regained our nation and freedomkjohnw said:s
It would settle it for the time being.Benpointer said:
I think you mean 2 further referendums. No way one remain win would settle it.Brom said:="Quote" rel="Benpointer">
You may be right - I hope you are.grabcocque said:
Labour really doesn't want to have to have its internal contradictions exposed any more than the Tories do. Labour's looking for a way to backpedal from their confused mess of a Brexit policy as much as the Tories.Benpointer said:
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect toll be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
By making the votes all be free votes, it's hoped that no one party will get the blame for the (almost certain) remain result this process will produce.
I struggle to see how we could Remain without a further referendum though.
Nothing to stop Leavers campaigning for a further leave ref of course - although I suspect they might want to avoid the "easiest deal in the world", "they need us more than we need them" and "£350m a week for the NHS" arguments next time.
Emotional arguments are powerful ones. But I would say I wouldn't want our nation falling behind in a backwater while our peers worked together to produce a strong European continent. Which one of us has the better vision?0 -
Er, sorry to disappoint you but...bigjohnowls said:
Santa Claus is coming to TownBenpointer said:
... that's the week after, as any fule kno.0 -
It looks like they're trying to get Labour MPs, in particular, make a decision between the three actual options without reference to the makeup of the government.Oort said:
What might this achieve if none of the options receives a majority?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
Option A - yes or no? Answer: no, by 300 votes.
Option B - yes or no? Answer: no, by 200 votes.
Option C - yes or no? Answer: no, by 100 votes.
Eliminate option A.
Same answers again for B or C.
Or are they seriously going to ask "Which do you prefer out of A and B, and bear in mind you must answer?" Then same for A and C, and for B and C.
Surely politicians do not actually wish to look even more like the bunch of shitclowns that most of the population already consider them to be? Is this their idea for a Christmas party?
A free vote, with whips agreeing to be bound by the result? Then a whipped vote after the free vote. So Deal ends up with unanimous support then? What a complete and utter fantasy. There is absolutely no way this will yield a majority for any option.0 -
They aren't the same as votes on laws though. I think it would be pretty outrageous for article 50 to be revoked after a secret ballot in the commons. I note the EU parliament has no such scruples, and used a secret ballot to vote on the budget a few years ago!grabcocque said:There are, in fact, a couple of votes in Parliament that are conducted by secret ballot:
The election of the speaker of the house.
The election of select committee chairs.
These were changed from open to secret ballots because it was felt that the party whips had too much control over these elections and it weakened the impartiality these roles were intended to possess.0 -
Oh look, another leaver making ominous but vague threats of violence again.
Once again I remind you that a phalanx of elderly gammons on mobility scooters with placards saying "brexit mean's brexit" isn't frightening anyone.0 -
Does Santa remind you of anyone?Benpointer said:
Er, sorry to disappoint you but...bigjohnowls said:
Santa Claus is coming to TownBenpointer said:
... that's the week after, as any fule kno.0 -
I agree with you, but what's being talked about here isn't votes on legislation, it's "indicative" votes, which are presumably designed to indicate where the real numbers lie. A series of secret ballots would almost certainly produce the most accurate numbers.RobD said:
They aren't the same as votes on laws though. I think it would be pretty outrageous for article 50 to be revoked after a secret ballot in the commons. I note the EU parliament has no such scruples, and used a secret ballot to vote on the budget a few years ago!grabcocque said:There are, in fact, a couple of votes in Parliament that are conducted by secret ballot:
The election of the speaker of the house.
The election of select committee chairs.
These were changed from open to secret ballots because it was felt that the party whips had too much control over these elections and it weakened the impartiality these roles were intended to possess.
But any legislation brought forward as a result of the indicative votes most certainly will and must be public, as you say.0 -
No. But the younger ones should. You can become a terrorist without being a member of the ‘religion of peace’.grabcocque said:Oh look, another leaver making ominous but vague threats of violence again.
Once again I remind you that a phalanx of elderly gammons on mobility scooters with placards saying "brexit mean's brexit" isn't frightening anyone.0 -
Relax, the UK has plenty of experience of putting nazi fuckwits back in their box. I think we got this.notme said:
No. But the younger ones should. You can become a terrorist without being a member of the ‘religion of peace’.grabcocque said:Oh look, another leaver making ominous but vague threats of violence again.
Once again I remind you that a phalanx of elderly gammons on mobility scooters with placards saying "brexit mean's brexit" isn't frightening anyone.0 -
It would be as easy as asking them to list their demands. That should keep them busy arguing until they give up.grabcocque said:
Relax, the UK has plenty of experience of putting nazi fuckwits back in their box. I think we got this.notme said:
No. But the younger ones should. You can become a terrorist without being a member of the ‘religion of peace’.grabcocque said:Oh look, another leaver making ominous but vague threats of violence again.
Once again I remind you that a phalanx of elderly gammons on mobility scooters with placards saying "brexit mean's brexit" isn't frightening anyone.0 -
There will be a price to pay if Brexit is cancelled. If it’s cancelled due to a second referendum result to remain, there will be a lot,of shrugging of shoulders and general disgruntlement, but if it’s just revoked because it was too difficult, there won’t be enough boxes. There will be a price to pay, and it will be high.grabcocque said:
Relax, the UK has plenty of experience of putting nazi fuckwits back in their box. I think we got this.notme said:
No. But the younger ones should. You can become a terrorist without being a member of the ‘religion of peace’.grabcocque said:Oh look, another leaver making ominous but vague threats of violence again.
Once again I remind you that a phalanx of elderly gammons on mobility scooters with placards saying "brexit mean's brexit" isn't frightening anyone.0 -
Before they riot, could someone tell them to aim their anger where it belongs, i.e. at Whitehall not Brussels for the following grievances (solutions in brackets)notme said:
Riots maybe, but probably a bit muted. Not the kind of thing average leaver really does. They’ll be some civil disobedience. And then we’ll start to get information about growing radicalism. Google + sense of grievance = something very very uglybigjohnowls said:
Nah an MP is accountable to their constituents. Nearly 85% of Constiuencies in England voted leave.rural_voter said:
Well, at a time of threats to MPs, especially female ones, and intimations of mob rule, I won't be surprised if some Labour MPs for rough northern seats change their vote from 'rescind A50' to 'accept the deal'.RobD said:
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
If VONCs in the PM can take place by secret ballot, it's disappointing that an exception can't be made for this vote.
As the Kaiser Chiefs would say. I predict a riot.
Half a dozen people with the right motivation....
'voting doesn't have any effect' (bring in PR)
'our MP is a useless tosser' (maybe have an IQ test, pay them more)
'all that happens is that the rich get richer, the poor get poorer' (reverse the move to regressive taxation)
et al
and only aim their anger at Brussels for pooling sovereignty but it was with the full agreement of the UK PM so there I think responsibility is divided.
With that, good night ...0 -
1) NO MUSLAMICS SEND EM BACK TO MUSLAMIAwilliamglenn said:
It would be as easy as asking them to list their demands. That should keep them busy arguing until they give up.grabcocque said:
Relax, the UK has plenty of experience of putting nazi fuckwits back in their box. I think we got this.notme said:
No. But the younger ones should. You can become a terrorist without being a member of the ‘religion of peace’.grabcocque said:Oh look, another leaver making ominous but vague threats of violence again.
Once again I remind you that a phalanx of elderly gammons on mobility scooters with placards saying "brexit mean's brexit" isn't frightening anyone.
2) NO QUEERS SEND EM BACK TO QUEERSLAND
3) BRING BACK HANGING FOR PEEEEDOOOOOS0 -
I grow tired of saying this, but we are leaving. In 103 days. The question before us is how best to handle the departure. Few people in Government or Parliament seem to have a clue how to achieve this and several are actively considering a chaotic departure in the hope that they personally will profit.kjohnw said:If we don’t leave the EU now we will be sucked into an ever centralising EU superstate that only wants ever closer union and will not stop until the nation state is fully destroyed. With one president , one army, one currency. We will eventually lose all right to self determination and self rule and consequently our hard won freedoms will be forever lost. Leaving the EU is a once in a lifetime chance to save our nation from being sucked into the coming EU superstate which is engulfing mainland Europe. It would be the end of true democracy ultimately being replaced by a pseudo democracy in name only, run by foreign powers who do not always have our best interest at heart. For me it is make or break now, if brexit fails to be enacted then the UK is forever finished, if we leave there will be birth pains and no doubt some disruption in the short term but in the long term we will have regained our nation and freedom
Aaargh.
I've had a bad day. I'll better stop posting now because I'm repeating myself. Good night everybody.0 -
Tony Blair?bigjohnowls said:
Does Santa remind you of anyone?Benpointer said:
Er, sorry to disappoint you but...bigjohnowls said:
Santa Claus is coming to TownBenpointer said:
... that's the week after, as any fule kno.
Good to see him leading Labour again this week.0 -
Eh, nobody cares what a bunch of 70 IQ troglodytes think about Brexit or anything else. If you ever find yourself agreeing with Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, you deserve to be ignored and/or ridiculed.notme said:
There will be a price to pay if Brexit is cancelled. If it’s cancelled due to a second referendum result to remain, there will be a lot,of shrugging of shoulders and general disgruntlement, but if it’s just revoked because it was too difficult, there won’t be enough boxes. There will be a price to pay, and it will be high.grabcocque said:
Relax, the UK has plenty of experience of putting nazi fuckwits back in their box. I think we got this.notme said:
No. But the younger ones should. You can become a terrorist without being a member of the ‘religion of peace’.grabcocque said:Oh look, another leaver making ominous but vague threats of violence again.
Once again I remind you that a phalanx of elderly gammons on mobility scooters with placards saying "brexit mean's brexit" isn't frightening anyone.0 -
Blame clearly lies in our own shores.rural_voter said:
Before they riot, could someone tell them to aim their anger where it belongs, i.e. at Whitehall not Brussels for the following grievances (solutions in brackets)notme said:
Riots maybe, but probably a bit muted. Not the kind of thing average leaver really does. They’ll be some civil disobedience. And then we’ll start to get information about growing radicalism. Google + sense of grievance = something very very uglybigjohnowls said:
Nah an MP is accountable to their constituents. Nearly 85% of Constiuencies in England voted leave.rural_voter said:
Well, at a time of threats to MPs, especially female ones, and intimations of mob rule, I won't be surprised if some Labour MPs for rough northern seats change their vote from 'rescind A50' to 'accept the deal'.RobD said:
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
If VONCs in the PM can take place by secret ballot, it's disappointing that an exception can't be made for this vote.
As the Kaiser Chiefs would say. I predict a riot.
Half a dozen people with the right motivation....
'voting doesn't have any effect' (bring in PR)
'our MP is a useless tosser' (maybe have an IQ test, pay them more)
'all that happens is that the rich get richer, the poor get poorer' (reverse the move to regressive taxation)
et al
and only aim their anger at Brussels for pooling sovereignty but it was with the full agreement of the UK PM so there I think responsibility is divided.
With that, good night ...0 -
We do. Our vision is based on individual rights and accountable Government, on free trade with the 93% of the world that is not in the EU.Recidivist said:
Emotional arguments are powerful ones. But I would say I wouldn't want our nation falling behind in a backwater while our peers worked together to produce a strong European continent. Which one of us has the better vision?
Theirs is based on centralisation, Government by technocrats and punishment for any country that does not conform.0 -
TBH if you have a functioning time machine, then why the crap are you hanging out here talking shite if you've already seen what's going to happen?viewcode said:
I grow tired of saying this, but we are leaving. In 103 days
0 -
Massive Sack!!Jonathan said:
Tony Blair?bigjohnowls said:
Does Santa remind you of anyone?Benpointer said:
Er, sorry to disappoint you but...bigjohnowls said:
Santa Claus is coming to TownBenpointer said:
... that's the week after, as any fule kno.
Good to see him leading Labour again this week.0 -
This is depressing as all heck, and mostly because it's true.
0 -
Brexit isn't over. On education, Gove has been consistently vindicated.ydoethur said:
Like himself and Adonis, you mean?oldpolitics said:
Not even that. He was being critical of pretended experts who keep coming up with the wrong answer but are somehow still touted as experts.kle4 said:
Wasn't he just being critical of specific experts not expertise in general?ydoethur said:
I'd say his hubris and administrative incompetence are bigger issues.kle4 said:
I'd say Gove's capricious nature if more significant than his being an ideologue.Gardenwalker said:
Depressingly, May is still “better” than any contender.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Walker, a second May manifesto might do the trick.
Javid? Lightweight.
Hunt? Weasel.
Gove? Ideologue.
Johnson? Clown.
Rees-Mogg? Throwback.
Hammond? Boring.
Gauke, Lidington, Hind? Invisible.
Rudd? Another lightweight.
Leadsom, Mordaunt? More lightweights.
Raab? Klutz.
Etc
The few good Tories who could satisfyingly lead the country are not yet in Cabinet or even in Westminster.
That, and the fact that he sees experts who dare to disagree with him as 'the enemy'.
I don't care whether he said any such thing - I don't know if he did. I'm telling you how he acts. He sees anyone who disagrees with him as the enemy. Even and perhaps especially when they are proved right, as they have been over both education and Brexit.
That is why he would be a dreadful choice as Prime Minister, a slightly less principled and considerably more arrogant version of Corbyn.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/13/gap-wealthy-poor-pupils-closing-wake-gove-primary-school-reforms/
He would be a poor choice of Conservative leader because they need an election winner, voters are fickle, and he has a punchable face. If the question were one of merit, he'd be right up there.0 -
People who live in glass houses centralised, multinational states with glaring constitutional problems shouldn't throw stones vote for Brexit in the name of protesting against the same.Richard_Tyndall said:
We do. Our vision is based on individual rights and accountable Government, on free trade with the 93% of the world that is not in the EU.Recidivist said:
Emotional arguments are powerful ones. But I would say I wouldn't want our nation falling behind in a backwater while our peers worked together to produce a strong European continent. Which one of us has the better vision?
Theirs is based on centralisation, Government by technocrats and punishment for any country that does not conform.0 -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_protection_conjecturegrabcocque said:
TBH if you have a functioning time machine, then why the crap are you hanging out here talking shite if you've already seen what's going to happen?viewcode said:
I grow tired of saying this, but we are leaving. In 103 days0 -
You were right the first time you posted it and are not any less right now.viewcode said:
I grow tired of saying this, but we are leaving. In 103 days. The question before us is how best to handle the departure. Few people in Government or Parliament seem to have a clue how to achieve this and several are actively considering a chaotic departure in the hope that they personally will profit.kjohnw said:If we don’t leave the EU now we will be sucked into an ever centralising EU superstate that only wants ever closer union and will not stop until the nation state is fully destroyed. With one president , one army, one currency. We will eventually lose all right to self determination and self rule and consequently our hard won freedoms will be forever lost. Leaving the EU is a once in a lifetime chance to save our nation from being sucked into the coming EU superstate which is engulfing mainland Europe. It would be the end of true democracy ultimately being replaced by a pseudo democracy in name only, run by foreign powers who do not always have our best interest at heart. For me it is make or break now, if brexit fails to be enacted then the UK is forever finished, if we leave there will be birth pains and no doubt some disruption in the short term but in the long term we will have regained our nation and freedom
Aaargh.
I've had a bad day. I'll better stop posting now because I'm repeating myself. Good night everybody.0 -
Brexit isn't over, its just in an ICT and being revived twice a night by a crash team because its relatives hate it too much to pull and the plug and let it die a peaceful death.0
-
TM is spot on about the damage a 2nd Referendum would do to politics.
In fact almost as much damage as theTM premiership, but not quite.0 -
How certain are you that Brexit won’t happen? What odds?grabcocque said:Brexit isn't over, its just in an ICT and being revived twice a night by a crash because its relatives hate it too much to pull and the plug and let it die a peaceful death.
0 -
A lot of people claim the Corbyn is happy to let a chaotic no-deal Brexit happen as long as the Tories carry the can for it. And I can buy that it *might* be true, what I'm missing is any convincing evidence that it *is* true.Richard_Tyndall said:
You were right the first time you posted it and are not any less right now.viewcode said:
I've had a bad day. I'll better stop posting now because I'm repeating myself. Good night everybody.
I guess it all depends how much of a sociopath we assume Corbyn is?
0 -
I look at those flowcharts of the 77 possible different outcomes and the part of my brain that understands probabilities just goes breeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeenotme said:
How certain are you that Brexit won’t happen? What odds?grabcocque said:Brexit isn't over, its just in an ICT and being revived twice a night by a crash because its relatives hate it too much to pull and the plug and let it die a peaceful death.
0 -
grabcocque said:
I look at those flowcharts of the 77 possible different outcomes and the part of my brain that understands probabilities just goes breeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeenotme said:
How certain are you that Brexit won’t happen? What odds?grabcocque said:Brexit isn't over, its just in an ICT and being revived twice a night by a crash because its relatives hate it too much to pull and the plug and let it die a peaceful death.
0 -
He doesn't need to be a sociopath. Look at it this way:grabcocque said:
A lot of people claim the Corbyn is happy to let a chaotic no-deal Brexit happen as long as the Tories carry the can for it. And I can buy that it *might* be true, what I'm missing is any convincing evidence that it *is* true.Richard_Tyndall said:
You were right the first time you posted it and are not any less right now.viewcode said:
I've had a bad day. I'll better stop posting now because I'm repeating myself. Good night everybody.
I guess it all depends how much of a sociopath we assume Corbyn is?
The revolution is inevitable.
The midwife of the revolution is war.
However, a car crash brexit might also work.
Which would you prefer, a car crash brexit or war?0 -
He is a marxist - they need chaos to thrivegrabcocque said:
A lot of people claim the Corbyn is happy to let a chaotic no-deal Brexit happen as long as the Tories carry the can for it. And I can buy that it *might* be true, what I'm missing is any convincing evidence that it *is* true.Richard_Tyndall said:
You were right the first time you posted it and are not any less right now.viewcode said:
I've had a bad day. I'll better stop posting now because I'm repeating myself. Good night everybody.
I guess it all depends how much of a sociopath we assume Corbyn is?0 -
I think it would be worse - but I understand where you are coming frombigjohnowls said:TM is spot on about the damage a 2nd Referendum would do to politics.
In fact almost as much damage as theTM premiership, but not quite.
0 -
Almost as bad as Ullwater to Invernessviewcode said:
Ouch, that's a rough commute.Big_G_NorthWales said:I will go for your upgrade. My daughter regularly travels from Abergele/Rhyl to Bridgend and Llanelli for meetings and not only does she have to stay in a hotel overnight, she has chaotic delays and cancellations all via the new Wales government franchise
https://www.thetrainline.com/train-times/rhyl-to-llanelli
😇0 -
She'd better get out on the stage and deny she's trying to pave the way to another referendum using "indicative votes" in the Commons then.bigjohnowls said:TM is spot on about the damage a 2nd Referendum would do to politics.
If she does keep to the line that a referendum would be oh so awful, she'll probably be out of office by Thursday.
A lot of this isn't her fault but David Cameron's. If he'd heard the message the electorate sent him in the 2014 EU election, he wouldn't have waited two years to negotiate special status for Britain in the EU, "Dave's deal". (When a party with no MPs elected on its manifesto wins a nationwide election, there is a message there somewhere.) He'd have negotiated the "deal" in 2014 and thrown the media some events showing how the continentals plus Irish were all holding hands making their union "ever closer" as Britain looked in the air and whistled, or concentrated on eating chips out of newspaper, or on making corn dollies, or something. Then he'd have held the referendum after two years of that, and won.
0 -
He must love the Tory party then - they created it. Until 2016 most on the Labour left couldn't have given a monkey's whether Britain was or wasn't in the EU. It was always a Tory issue, whipped up in the Tory press, foot-stamped about by Tories who were fuming at their own lad Edward Heath's "treachery" in the early 1970s, and who almost bust blood vessels when they thought of the units petrol came to be sold in.Floater said:
He is a marxist - they need chaos to thrivegrabcocque said:
A lot of people claim the Corbyn is happy to let a chaotic no-deal Brexit happen as long as the Tories carry the can for it. And I can buy that it *might* be true, what I'm missing is any convincing evidence that it *is* true.Richard_Tyndall said:
You were right the first time you posted it and are not any less right now.viewcode said:
I've had a bad day. I'll better stop posting now because I'm repeating myself. Good night everybody.
I guess it all depends how much of a sociopath we assume Corbyn is?0 -
The message being that pledging an in/out referendum had legitimised the loons instead of marginalising them as Cameron had hoped.Oort said:(When a party with no MPs elected on its manifesto wins a nationwide election, there is a message there somewhere.)
0 -
The same message would have been sent even if he hadn't promised that kind of referendum. But if he'd heard the message when the 2014 election results came in, he could have pondered about the causes.williamglenn said:
The message being that pledging an in/out referendum had legitimised the loons instead of marginalising them as Cameron had hoped.Oort said:(When a party with no MPs elected on its manifesto wins a nationwide election, there is a message there somewhere.)
Meanwhile, the BBC are reporting in direct quotation what Theresa May is going to say to the Commons tomorrow.
But Mrs May will tell MPs on Monday: "Let us not break faith with the British people by trying to stage another referendum.
"Another vote which would do irreparable damage to the integrity of our politics, because it would say to millions who trusted in democracy, that our democracy does not deliver.
"Another vote which would likely leave us no further forward than the last.
"And another vote which would further divide our country at the very moment we should be working to unite it."
Does John Bercow think it's acceptable for a government minister to release the text of their Commons speech to the media before they deliver it to the Commons?0 -
Zimmer frames at the ready.....notme said:
Riots maybe, but probably a bit muted. Not the kind of thing average leaver really does. They’ll be some civil disobedience. And then we’ll start to get information about growing radicalism. Google + sense of grievance = something very very uglybigjohnowls said:
Nah an MP is accountable to their constituents. Nearly 85% of Constiuencies in England voted leave.rural_voter said:
Well, at a time of threats to MPs, especially female ones, and intimations of mob rule, I won't be surprised if some Labour MPs for rough northern seats change their vote from 'rescind A50' to 'accept the deal'.RobD said:
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
If VONCs in the PM can take place by secret ballot, it's disappointing that an exception can't be made for this vote.
As the Kaiser Chiefs would say. I predict a riot.
Half a dozen people with the right motivation....0 -
You can argue for multiple groups angling for a no deal Brexit if you want to apply dark motives to them.edmundintokyo said:
He doesn't need to be a sociopath. Look at it this way:grabcocque said:
A lot of people claim the Corbyn is happy to let a chaotic no-deal Brexit happen as long as the Tories carry the can for it. And I can buy that it *might* be true, what I'm missing is any convincing evidence that it *is* true.Richard_Tyndall said:
You were right the first time you posted it and are not any less right now.viewcode said:
I've had a bad day. I'll better stop posting now because I'm repeating myself. Good night everybody.
I guess it all depends how much of a sociopath we assume Corbyn is?
The revolution is inevitable.
The midwife of the revolution is war.
However, a car crash brexit might also work.
Which would you prefer, a car crash brexit or war?
Left, get chaos, blame the Tories. According to critics the only way they are getting back in.
Centre, Labour, get chaos, blame Corbyn and the Tories. According to critics the only way they are getting back in.
Similarly the centre Tories might hope that crash out Brexit discredits the right. Tory right have their own targets lined up as well although some in this group are actually intentionally going for no deal.
0 -
May doing anything now to ram her deal down our throats.
New EU referendum would break faith with Britons, May to warn MPs http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-465866730 -
There has been a sharp rise in far right extremism since the Brexit vote. If giving the knuckle draggers what they want encourages them, there doesn’t seem any downside on that front from not giving them what they want.notme said:
Riots maybe, but probably a bit muted. Not the kind of thing average leaver really does. They’ll be some civil disobedience. And then we’ll start to get information about growing radicalism. Google + sense of grievance = something very very uglybigjohnowls said:
Nah an MP is accountable to their constituents. Nearly 85% of Constiuencies in England voted leave.rural_voter said:
Well, at a time of threats to MPs, especially female ones, and intimations of mob rule, I won't be surprised if some Labour MPs for rough northern seats change their vote from 'rescind A50' to 'accept the deal'.RobD said:
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
If VONCs in the PM can take place by secret ballot, it's disappointing that an exception can't be made for this vote.
As the Kaiser Chiefs would say. I predict a riot.
Half a dozen people with the right motivation....
If Britain really wants to see a reduction in far right extremism then it needs to tackle the root cause, which is the willingness of slightly softer right figures to indulge in martial language, stirring up the real extremists, and the complicity of the rest of the Leave camp tolerating the far right and its tropes because something else is seen as more important.0 -
Well said.AlastairMeeks said:
There has been a sharp rise in far right extremism since the Brexit vote. If giving the knuckle draggers what they want encourages them, there doesn’t seem any downside on that front from not giving them what they want.notme said:
Riots maybe, but probably a bit muted. Not the kind of thing average leaver really does. They’ll be some civil disobedience. And then we’ll start to get information about growing radicalism. Google + sense of grievance = something very very uglybigjohnowls said:
Nah an MP is accountable to their constituents. Nearly 85% of Constiuencies in England voted leave.rural_voter said:
Well, at a time of threats to MPs, especially female ones, and intimations of mob rule, I won't be surprised if some Labour MPs for rough northern seats change their vote from 'rescind A50' to 'accept the deal'.RobD said:
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
If VONCs in the PM can take place by secret ballot, it's disappointing that an exception can't be made for this vote.
As the Kaiser Chiefs would say. I predict a riot.
Half a dozen people with the right motivation....
If Britain really wants to see a reduction in far right extremism then it needs to tackle the root cause, which is the willingness of slightly softer right figures to indulge in martial language, stirring up the real extremists, and the complicity of the rest of the Leave camp tolerating the far right and its tropes because something else is seen as more important.0 -
I think she is preparing the route to her resignation.Jonathan said:May doing anything now to ram her deal down our throats.
New EU referendum would break faith with Britons, May to warn MPs http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-465866730 -
You weren't whining when Brown forced the Lisbon treaty down our throats, so stop whining now.Jonathan said:May doing anything now to ram her deal down our throats.
New EU referendum would break faith with Britons, May to warn MPs http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46586673
May is trying to get MP's to agree to her proposals. That's democracy.0 -
I think it was Ullapool ...Charles said:
Almost as bad as Ullwater to Invernessviewcode said:
Ouch, that's a rough commute.Big_G_NorthWales said:I will go for your upgrade. My daughter regularly travels from Abergele/Rhyl to Bridgend and Llanelli for meetings and not only does she have to stay in a hotel overnight, she has chaotic delays and cancellations all via the new Wales government franchise
https://www.thetrainline.com/train-times/rhyl-to-llanelli
😇
Still difficult, though.0 -
its 4 hrs 20 mins by road....Charles said:
Almost as bad as Ullwater to Invernessviewcode said:
Ouch, that's a rough commute.Big_G_NorthWales said:I will go for your upgrade. My daughter regularly travels from Abergele/Rhyl to Bridgend and Llanelli for meetings and not only does she have to stay in a hotel overnight, she has chaotic delays and cancellations all via the new Wales government franchise
https://www.thetrainline.com/train-times/rhyl-to-llanelli
😇0 -
People voting is also democracy, as in 'People's Vote'.SquareRoot said:
You weren't whining when Brown forced the Lisbon treaty down our throats, so stop whining now.Jonathan said:May doing anything now to ram her deal down our throats.
New EU referendum would break faith with Britons, May to warn MPs http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46586673
May is trying to get MP's to agree to her proposals. That's democracy.0 -
A lot longer to walk, believe me!SquareRoot said:
its 4 hrs 20 mins by road....Charles said:
Almost as bad as Ullwater to Invernessviewcode said:
Ouch, that's a rough commute.Big_G_NorthWales said:I will go for your upgrade. My daughter regularly travels from Abergele/Rhyl to Bridgend and Llanelli for meetings and not only does she have to stay in a hotel overnight, she has chaotic delays and cancellations all via the new Wales government franchise
https://www.thetrainline.com/train-times/rhyl-to-llanelli
😇
(though Winderemere is the nearest I've been to Ullswater. I don't have very good coverage of the Lake District).0