politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After the likely failure of today’s confidence vote then what?
Options
Comments
-
Soubry puts the boot in to Corbyn0
-
Well she might also have wanted to be involved in something so historic. And remember that the Tories have been breaking pairing arrangements lately.Sean_F said:
She wanted to vote in person, so that all could view her martyrdom.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
0 -
Did Paul Flynn ask for a pair ?Sean_F said:
She wanted to vote in person, so that all could view her martyrdom.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
Is he present today ?0 -
Thank you.TheScreamingEagles said:
Sorry to hear about Harry Kane.Scrapheap_as_was said:
of course failing to honour a pair with her on the vote last night wouldn't have attracted any attention at all.Gallowgate said:
Irrelivent because all trust was lost after the last pairing debarcle. This is the Tories own making.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
0 -
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.0 -
That might be a credible argument for a confidence vote, but for yesterdays vote ??Gallowgate said:
Irrelivent because all trust was lost after the last pairing debacle. This is the Tories' own making.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
0 -
I think we need a 'big open and generous' apology to the nation. It might even work. He's good at that sort of thing. I remember his Bloody Sunday one. Top notch.anothernick said:And the FTPA is, of course, another legacy of the political genius who got us into this mess, D Cameron Esq.
0 -
Dont mention the wall
Michal Martin leader of Fianna Fail says RoI politicans all know they are heading for a hard border.
Varadkar doubles up and says no and hes making no further preparations for it
https://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/dont-mention-the-war-private-understanding-hard-border-is-increasingly-likely-martin-claims-37717865.html0 -
Well, it was going to be so close that the whips didn't want to take any risks...Nigelb said:
That might be a credible argument for a confidence vote, but for yesterdays vote ??Gallowgate said:
Irrelivent because all trust was lost after the last pairing debacle. This is the Tories' own making.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
0 -
Rot. That vote wasn’t exactly close was it.Gallowgate said:
Irrelivent because all trust was lost after the last pairing debarcle. This is the Tories own making.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
0 -
Yep all of these things could be being addressed instead of a stupid pointless thing called Brexit. An obsession of people who will mainly be dead in another 20 to 30 years - though I do hope enough of us oldies who voted remain will be alive to see the day when we go back in and the UK has to accept a full fat version of the EU with the Euro and all of the other madcap ever-closer-union "advances" that would not have been there had we stayed in. It will be hilarious to watch the swivel-eyed going into apoplectic overdrive.Alanbrooke said:
ooh we could reform the house of Lords perhaps, have an economic policy, build some roads and houses, reform University financing, reform overseas aid, stick some meaningful green policies like maritime no fishing zones, plant some forests, delegate more powers down to local government and finance it properly etcJohnLilburne said:
Like what?Alanbrooke said:
no doubt there is fun to be had, but in between there is no governance and things the country needs to do just dont get doneJohnLilburne said:
That's a feature not a bug, surely. I'm enjoying the House of Commons actually acting like a legislature and not a patsy of the Government.Alanbrooke said:
and it was sensible for that periodTheScreamingEagles said:The FTPA was created by the Lib Dems because they feared the Tory party might ditch David Cameron and replace him with headbanger who might cut and run and call an early election.
now we have the spectacle of a government held to ransom by its own backbenchers, anybody can flounce on anything and theres no downside until the next GE0 -
Rather spoiled by his being somewhere in (I think) the Guardian today saying he didn't regret holding the referendum....kinabalu said:
I think we need a 'big open and generous' apology to the nation. It might even work. He's good at that sort of thing. I remember his Bloody Sunday one. Top notch.anothernick said:And the FTPA is, of course, another legacy of the political genius who got us into this mess, D Cameron Esq.
0 -
Because Cameron bottled out of taking on the headbangers himself and thought that the electorate could do it for him. Probably the worst single political judgment ever made by any British PM, especially since we now know the decision was taken against the advice of his closest colleagues.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.0 -
I expect that minister not to be reselected by his constituency association...Scott_P said:0 -
So? It’s just another own goal.Mortimer said:
Rot. That vote wasn’t exactly close was it.Gallowgate said:
Irrelivent because all trust was lost after the last pairing debarcle. This is the Tories own making.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
0 -
In meetings all day today so can someone fill me in on the big story - did the ground level letterboxes bill get a second reading?0
-
Having a baby on the floor of the House of Commons, or in the No lobby, would certainly be historicRecidivist said:
Well she might also have wanted to be involved in something so historic. And remember that the Tories have been breaking pairing arrangements lately.Sean_F said:
She wanted to vote in person, so that all could view her martyrdom.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
0 -
I am not sympathetic to their cause, but UKIP should be the most disgruntled group. They campaigned long and hard, and with sufficient diligence to get their referendum. And they won it. But the whole thing has unwound because the government did not take the possibility of their winning seriously and had no plan in place for what to do. That is the undemocratic bit. Giving an option without the means to deliver it is the real betrayal.TOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.0 -
or Corbyn doesn't have a grip on what he's talking about.Recidivist said:
Well she might also have wanted to be involved in something so historic. And remember that the Tories have been breaking pairing arrangements lately.Sean_F said:
She wanted to vote in person, so that all could view her martyrdom.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
Which seems *most* likely?0 -
they had no seats, they werent the government and they got lots of Tory votes because the Tories told their supporters to eff and vote UKIPTOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
Not that clever really0 -
If she wanted to be involved fair enough - let's hope there are no bad consequences - but it rather weakens the case for outrage.Recidivist said:
Well she might also have wanted to be involved in something so historic. And remember that the Tories have been breaking pairing arrangements lately.Sean_F said:
She wanted to vote in person, so that all could view her martyrdom.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
0 -
For similar reasons to Smithson junior, perhaps ?TOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
Expecting Norway would readily be agreed shortly thereafter.0 -
I'm not watching - Was Corbyn's speech as incoherent and rambling as it appears from the Guardian Live Blog?0
-
Can anyone confirm if Pulpstar has this right?TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, but Bercow would only ever vote in a tie.Pulpstar said:Pulpstar said:Do Laing, Winterton and Hoyle get a vote in the confidence motion ?
Bercow + 7 Sinn Fein don't/won't...
2 tellers each side that don't count also ?
650 - Bercow = 649
649 - Sinn Fein = 642
642 - 4 tellers = 638 max ?
But I note the 2017 vote was 323 to 309 = 632..
Thanks,TheScreamingEagles said:The Deputy Speakers don’t vote.
650 - (Bercow+ 3 Deputies) = 646
646 - Sinn Fein = 639
639 - 4 tellers = 635 max ?
Do 3 deputy speakers and 4 tellers definitely not vote in a VONC? And Paul Flynn is ill and unable to vote? So including the Speaker and 7 Sinn Fein there will be 16 no voters. 634 will vote - the same number who voted yesterday, when 432 were against the Deal and 202 for the Deal?
0 -
Would it count as two votes if it was in the No lobby?JohnLilburne said:
Having a baby on the floor of the House of Commons, or in the No lobby, would certainly be historicRecidivist said:
Well she might also have wanted to be involved in something so historic. And remember that the Tories have been breaking pairing arrangements lately.Sean_F said:
She wanted to vote in person, so that all could view her martyrdom.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
0 -
and you were doing so well until you got to swivel eyedNigel_Foremain said:
Yep all of these things could be being addressed instead of a stupid pointless thing called Brexit. An obsession of people who will mainly be dead in another 20 to 30 years - though I do hope enough of us oldies who voted remain will be alive to see the day when we go back in and the UK has to accept a full fat version of the EU with the Euro and all of the other madcap ever-closer-union "advances" that would not have been there had we stayed in. It will be hilarious to watch the swivel-eyed going into apoplectic overdrive.Alanbrooke said:
ooh we could reform the house of Lords perhaps, have an economic policy, build some roads and houses, reform University financing, reform overseas aid, stick some meaningful green policies like maritime no fishing zones, plant some forests, delegate more powers down to local government and finance it properly etcJohnLilburne said:
Like what?Alanbrooke said:
no doubt there is fun to be had, but in between there is no governance and things the country needs to do just dont get doneJohnLilburne said:
That's a feature not a bug, surely. I'm enjoying the House of Commons actually acting like a legislature and not a patsy of the Government.Alanbrooke said:
and it was sensible for that periodTheScreamingEagles said:The FTPA was created by the Lib Dems because they feared the Tory party might ditch David Cameron and replace him with headbanger who might cut and run and call an early election.
now we have the spectacle of a government held to ransom by its own backbenchers, anybody can flounce on anything and theres no downside until the next GE0 -
There was an option to Leave presented last night, leaving the EU is hardly some great impossibility.Recidivist said:
That is the undemocratic bit. Giving an option without the means to deliver it is the real betrayal.TOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
I
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
The problem is the incoherence of what Leave wanted and campaigned for means no form of Leave has a mandate.0 -
0
-
Very likely.Slackbladder said:0 -
Our workshop foreman spontaneously mentioned it, said Corbyn was a joke.Richard_Nabavi said:I'm not watching - Was Corbyn's speech as incoherent and rambling as it appears from the Guardian Live Blog?
0 -
Damn. I'd missed the Kane news. That may have scuppered my FA Cup bet. Perhaps I can switch to Man Utd as another top six club unlikely to be distracted by the sharp end of the Champions League.TheScreamingEagles said:
Sorry to hear about Harry Kane.Scrapheap_as_was said:
of course failing to honour a pair with her on the vote last night wouldn't have attracted any attention at all.Gallowgate said:
Irrelivent because all trust was lost after the last pairing debarcle. This is the Tories own making.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
0 -
John Baron congratulates PM on only losing her vote by 230 compared to his mahoosive loss before highlighting the risk of a Lab Govt0
-
'cept the Deal is leaving. I mean beyond Norway, Canada, you name it.Recidivist said:
I am not sympathetic to their cause, but UKIP should be the most disgruntled group. They campaigned long and hard, and with sufficient diligence to get their referendum. And they won it. But the whole thing has unwound because the government did not take the possibility of their winning seriously and had no plan in place for what to do. That is the undemocratic bit. Giving an option without the means to deliver it is the real betrayal.TOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.0 -
spot onanothernick said:
Because Cameron bottled out of taking on the headbangers himself and thought that the electorate could do it for him. Probably the worst single political judgment ever made by any British PM, especially since we now know the decision was taken against the advice of his closest colleagues.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
cameron simply struggled with party management and had no bridge to the parts of the Conservative party old Etonians couldnt reach0 -
It was close enough that the government chose to renege on its agreement.Mortimer said:
Rot. That vote wasn’t exactly close was it.Gallowgate said:
Irrelivent because all trust was lost after the last pairing debarcle. This is the Tories own making.Scrapheap_as_was said:Corbyn makes big attack on Tories forcing heavily pregnant Tulipp to come to vote yesterday..... Soubry raises point of order to ask if a pair was offered.... Bercow confirms it was ....
0 -
Mark Francois allowed to speak and in support of TMay...
Still a bell end0 -
Worse.Richard_Nabavi said:I'm not watching - Was Corbyn's speech as incoherent and rambling as it appears from the Guardian Live Blog?
0 -
Of course we can leave. Lots of countries aren't in the EU. And we can leave with minimal disruption. It will just take about 10 years, if not longer. Cameron said during the campaign that Article 50 would be invoked immediately. It wasn't unreasonable for us punters to assume that there was a plan in place. I voted to remain, but I seriously weighed up the alternative. So I was as misled as anyone.JonathanD said:
There was an option to Leave presented last night, leaving the EU is hardly some great impossibility.Recidivist said:
That is the undemocratic bit. Giving an option without the means to deliver it is the real betrayal.TOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
I
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
The problem is the incoherence of what Leave wanted and campaigned for means no form of Leave has a mandate.0 -
It was a pressure group. Arguably the most successful one in history. It's how pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
they had no seats, they werent the government and they got lots of Tory votes because the Tories told their supporters to eff and vote UKIPTOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
Not that clever really0 -
Just in case there was any glimmer of doubt in Tory MPs about their willingness to not vote for May, Corbyn spends two days at the dispatch box in screaming hysteria.Scrapheap_as_was said:https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1085531660014080000
Unexpected... on many levels..0 -
I think it is astounding that the country is being allowed to hurl towards No Deal when Corbyn's Labour and May's Tories are almost agreed. The political declaration should be changed.Richard_Nabavi said:
Very likely.Slackbladder said:0 -
Corbyn's seems to be getting worse day by day.Pulpstar said:
Our workshop foreman spontaneously mentioned it, said Corbyn was a joke.Richard_Nabavi said:I'm not watching - Was Corbyn's speech as incoherent and rambling as it appears from the Guardian Live Blog?
0 -
Just heard suella braveman on wato. What a complete ar*e0
-
He perhaps is putting his country before career and party. That would be novel wouldn't it? He has a degree in economics, so he perhaps doesn't agree that a hard brexit will be fine. Boris, by perfect contrast has a degree in....?Slackbladder said:0 -
Nah. If the Leave campaigns had been honest about the deliverables there wouldn't have been a Leave result.Recidivist said:
I am not sympathetic to their cause, but UKIP should be the most disgruntled group. They campaigned long and hard, and with sufficient diligence to get their referendum. And they won it. But the whole thing has unwound because the government did not take the possibility of their winning seriously and had no plan in place for what to do. That is the undemocratic bit. Giving an option without the means to deliver it is the real betrayal.TOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.0 -
This is what I call the Gove Defence (easily countered by the "Logic Gambit"). If Leavers really were dumb enough not to wargame possible outcomes of a Leave vote then they deserve the bewilderment that currently possesses them.Nigelb said:
For similar reasons to Smithson junior, perhaps ?TOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
Expecting Norway would readily be agreed shortly thereafter.
Cameron would likely resign, so who could possibly take over? Well "me [Gove], obviously". So what could derail that....
It is the most basic scenario analysis that was lacking. The dolts. Not anyone on this site, obvs. OBVS.0 -
Is Flynn definitely too ill to attend?
If so, and if Govt gets Lady Hermon, then the Betfair favourite must lose (unless any Con/DUP vote against Govt).0 -
pressure groups have been with us for as long as I can remember, One has just taken over the Labour party,TOPPING said:
It was a pressure group. Arguably the most successful one in history. It's how pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
they had no seats, they werent the government and they got lots of Tory votes because the Tories told their supporters to eff and vote UKIPTOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
Not that clever really
If the EU was the most important thing in our lives the referendum should never have been called ot the work should have been does to make it clear what was being voted for. Its as simple as that. Doing no downside planning was monumentally incompetent.0 -
I don't think it is necessarily right that a Dep Speaker doesn't vote in a VoNC. They do stand as party politicians at elections (unlike the Speaker), and while they give up any active political role in parliament outside of their Dep Speaker roles, they do remain part of their party's caucus. I think they can therefore vote (it'd be interesting to see the data from 1979, particularly given that that vote was carried by just 1).stjohn said:
Can anyone confirm if Pulpstar has this right?TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, but Bercow would only ever vote in a tie.Pulpstar said:Pulpstar said:Do Laing, Winterton and Hoyle get a vote in the confidence motion ?
Bercow + 7 Sinn Fein don't/won't...
2 tellers each side that don't count also ?
650 - Bercow = 649
649 - Sinn Fein = 642
642 - 4 tellers = 638 max ?
But I note the 2017 vote was 323 to 309 = 632..
Thanks,TheScreamingEagles said:The Deputy Speakers don’t vote.
650 - (Bercow+ 3 Deputies) = 646
646 - Sinn Fein = 639
639 - 4 tellers = 635 max ?
Do 3 deputy speakers and 4 tellers definitely not vote in a VONC? And Paul Flynn is ill and unable to vote? So including the Speaker and Sinn Fein there will be 16 no voters. 634 will vote - the same number who voted yesterday, when 432 were against the Deal and 202 for the Deal?
Flynn is ill but I don't think we know whether he's so ill that he can't vote. He may not have voted yesterday because the whips advised him that it would not be close and that his vote wouldn't matter. That assurance can't be given today. Again, in 1979, Callaghan instructed Alfred Broughton (who was terminally ill and died five days later) not to attend due to the risk that the journey might kill him. Had he gone to Westminster (and arrived), Labour would have survived.0 -
Definitely!AlastairMeeks said:
Not that much really, I took under £150 off them yesterday, being allowed a maximum £3.75 an MP on two occasions.Sandpit said:
LOL. What price and value did you screw them for yesterday?AlastairMeeks said:Harrumph. I've been limited to £1 an MP today by Sporting Index. I mean, really.
I do have a good track record with them, I admit, but presumably they have plenty of people on the other side of the spreads if they set them where they set them. Yesterday there was obviously plenty of upward pressure on the price, which rose as high as 223-231 at one point (and an eight point spread was pretty cheeky - it's only three points today). I'm not taking advantage of them but of their other customers. They should be prepared to take the rough with the smooth.
Today’s vote is also going to be a lot more predictable than yesterday’s, it’s going to be 325-310 less maybe a couple of abstentions from the Opposition or a Conservative who’s happy to end his career. There’s no reason they shouldn’t allow £100 a seat on such a market.0 -
There was plenty of downside planning. Or "Project Fear" as the Leavers called it. So was it right to call something which could have had such a downside? Of course it was.Alanbrooke said:
pressure groups have been with us for as long as I can remember, One has just taken over the Labour party,TOPPING said:
It was a pressure group. Arguably the most successful one in history. It's how pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
they had no seats, they werent the government and they got lots of Tory votes because the Tories told their supporters to eff and vote UKIPTOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
Not that clever really
If the EU the most important thing in our lives the referendum should never have been called ot the work should have been does to make it clear what was being voted for. Its as simple as that. Doing no downside planning was monumentally incompetent.
I could link to dozens of papers detailing why a Corbyn government would be a disaster. Doesn't mean (sadly) that Corbyn's Labour Party should be banned from taking part in the next GE.0 -
Can we just have customs union and workers rights alignment written into the WA and be done with it now?0
-
May has the same answer to every question. It’s just moronic.0
-
Laing, Hoyle, Winterton, Bercow, 7 SF and Gregory Campbell of the DUP are the abstentions from the https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-06-29/division/529E63FC-2CE0-40C8-831C-38FFB4C65FDE/EconomyAndJobs?outputType=Party division. + 1 more Labour, can't work out who though.david_herdson said:
I don't think it is necessarily right that a Dep Speaker doesn't vote in a VoNC. They do stand as party politicians at elections (unlike the Speaker), and while they give up any active political role in parliament outside of their Dep Speaker roles, they do remain part of their party's caucus. I think they can therefore vote (it'd be interesting to see the data from 1979, particularly given that that vote was carried by just 1).stjohn said:
Can anyone confirm if Pulpstar has this right?TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, but Bercow would only ever vote in a tie.Pulpstar said:Pulpstar said:Do Laing, Winterton and Hoyle get a vote in the confidence motion ?
Bercow + 7 Sinn Fein don't/won't...
2 tellers each side that don't count also ?
650 - Bercow = 649
649 - Sinn Fein = 642
642 - 4 tellers = 638 max ?
But I note the 2017 vote was 323 to 309 = 632..
Thanks,TheScreamingEagles said:The Deputy Speakers don’t vote.
650 - (Bercow+ 3 Deputies) = 646
646 - Sinn Fein = 639
639 - 4 tellers = 635 max ?
Do 3 deputy speakers and 4 tellers definitely not vote in a VONC? And Paul Flynn is ill and unable to vote? So including the Speaker and Sinn Fein there will be 16 no voters. 634 will vote - the same number who voted yesterday, when 432 were against the Deal and 202 for the Deal?
Flynn is ill but I don't think we know whether he's so ill that he can't vote. He may not have voted yesterday because the whips advised him that it would not be close and that his vote wouldn't matter. That assurance can't be given today. Again, in 1979, Callaghan instructed Alfred Broughton (who was terminally ill and died five days later) not to attend due to the risk that the journey might kill him. Had he gone to Westminster (and arrived), Labour would have survived.
It's not O'Mara or Woodcock. Or Flynn.0 -
PR stunts are not planning. Planning has a balance of risks and recommendations as to what to do to mitigate them. They also look at upsides since you need to plan for those as wellTOPPING said:
There was plenty of downside planning. Or "Project Fear" as the Leavers call it. So was it right to call something which could have had such a downside? Of course it was.Alanbrooke said:
pressure groups have been with us for monumentally incompetent.TOPPING said:
It was a pressure group. Arguably the most successful one in history. It's how pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
they had no seats, they werent the government and they got lots of Tory votes because the Tories told their supporters to eff and vote UKIPTOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
Not that clever really
I could link to dozens of papers detailing why a Corbyn government would be a disaster. Doesn't mean (sadly) that Corbyn's Labour Party should be banned from taking part in the next GE.
HMG did neither.0 -
The same questions keep getting asked though.Gallowgate said:May has the same answer to every question. It’s just moronic.
0 -
Indeed. While remain might have been accused of exaggerating (although that is looking less and less accurate), Leave lied and obfuscated throughout the entire campaign. They were surprisingly quite clever though, in a populist kind of way. Labelling genuine economic concerns "Project Fear" they managed to neutralise the impact of economic probabilities while falling back on the most basic and odious irrational fear there is; that of the foreignerFF43 said:
Nah. If the Leave campaigns had been honest about the deliverables there wouldn't have been a Leave result.Recidivist said:
I am not sympathetic to their cause, but UKIP should be the most disgruntled group. They campaigned long and hard, and with sufficient diligence to get their referendum. And they won it. But the whole thing has unwound because the government did not take the possibility of their winning seriously and had no plan in place for what to do. That is the undemocratic bit. Giving an option without the means to deliver it is the real betrayal.TOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.0 -
In 1979 the Deputy Speakers voted. Don't know if they would again0
-
Was that last paragraph intentionally incoherent or have you had a good lunch?Alanbrooke said:
pressure groups have been with us for as long as I can remember, One has just taken over the Labour party,TOPPING said:
It was a pressure group. Arguably the most successful one in history. It's how pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
they had no seats, they werent the government and they got lots of Tory votes because the Tories told their supporters to eff and vote UKIPTOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
Not that clever really
If the EU was the most important thing in our lives the referendum should never have been called ot the work should have been does to make it clear what was being voted for. Its as simple as that. Doing no downside planning was monumentally incompetent.0 -
If the deputy speakers are voting I think it edges the likely total up to 311 in my opinion.MikeL said:Is Flynn definitely too ill to attend?
If so, and if Govt gets Lady Hermon, then the Betfair favourite must lose (unless any Con/DUP vote against Govt).0 -
Nothing I've seen indicates that the undoubted huge frustration with the Brexit process will turn into a groundswell of support for a Corbyn government.
I think defeat for him tonight will be a blessing in disguise for Labour. On two counts: there will be a massive "what the hell are you playing at this close to Brexit?" narrative, and he needs to let TMay own Brexit (/lack thereof) until at least March 29th.
I suspect a GE now would probably leave us more or less where we are now. But him picking up the pieces a fortnight before D-Day would mean Brexit gets added to the large pile of stuff which is his fault very soon after.0 -
Sometimes I think the HOC over-debates things. Everyone knows how they're going to vote, just get on with it.Pulpstar said:
The same questions keep getting asked though.Gallowgate said:May has the same answer to every question. It’s just moronic.
0 -
The reasons the same question are being asked and same responses are given shows how polarised the mps are.
TM is not going to suddenly move to a CU or anything else until she is able to consider how to move forward. It is clear that she is seeking to retain ERG and DUP support but hopefully to find a compromise on her deal, but it is clear she is anti a second referendum.0 -
0
-
Agreed, of course.TOPPING said:
This is what I call the Gove Defence (easily countered by the "Logic Gambit"). If Leavers really were dumb enough not to wargame possible outcomes of a Leave vote then they deserve the bewilderment that currently possesses them. ....Nigelb said:
For similar reasons to Smithson junior, perhaps ?TOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
Expecting Norway would readily be agreed shortly thereafter.0 -
Correct. But I personally don't believe they will vote - indeed I would be astounded if they vote.paulyork64 said:
If the deputy speakers are voting I think it edges the likely total up to 311 in my opinion.MikeL said:Is Flynn definitely too ill to attend?
If so, and if Govt gets Lady Hermon, then the Betfair favourite must lose (unless any Con/DUP vote against Govt).
It's 311-324 if Govt just gets DUP.
If they get Hermon it's 310-325.
If get Hermon and Flynn isn't there it's then 309-325.0 -
-
For the want of a nail, the kingdom was lost. I was not aware of that story. Amazing.david_herdson said:Again, in 1979, Callaghan instructed Alfred Broughton (who was terminally ill and died five days later) not to attend due to the risk that the journey might kill him. Had he gone to Westminster (and arrived), Labour would have survived.
0 -
Did you read the NIESR reports?Alanbrooke said:
PR stunts are not planning. Planning has a balance of risks and recommendations as to what to do to mitigate them. They also look at upsides since you need to plan for those as wellTOPPING said:
There was plenty of downside planning. Or "Project Fear" as the Leavers call it. So was it right to call something which could have had such a downside? Of course it was.Alanbrooke said:
pressure groups have been with us for monumentally incompetent.TOPPING said:
It was a pressure group. Arguably the most successful one in history. It's how pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
they had no seats, they werent the government and they got lots of Tory votes because the Tories told their supporters to eff and vote UKIPTOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
It is a future trade agreements (and headbanger) thing. A Customs Union prevents us doing independent trade deals but it doesn't prevent us trading with China, US etc. and we can take advantage of the numerous free trade deals that the EU have negotiated. It hardly featured in the referendum campaign. It is a totem for the headbangers.
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
Not that clever really
I could link to dozens of papers detailing why a Corbyn government would be a disaster. Doesn't mean (sadly) that Corbyn's Labour Party should be banned from taking part in the next GE.
HMG did neither.0 -
The debate is merely to allow Hansard to record an MP's words for posterity...Slackbladder said:
Sometimes I think the HOC over-debates things. Everyone knows how they're going to vote, just get on with it.Pulpstar said:
The same questions keep getting asked though.Gallowgate said:May has the same answer to every question. It’s just moronic.
0 -
She seems to lack political skills, which is not great for a politician.IanB2 said:The first part was what I was floating this morning. From my experience in industrial relations, things always seem the worst in the moments before a way through is found and agreed. The problem, I think, is that our PM (despite her underestimated skills in progressing determinedly down a single path, on which I have commented before) doesn't have the skill set to deliver a majority in Parliament for any proposal of her own.
Yet I am far from convinced that anybody else who the Tories could have picked post DC would have done substantially better.
I think the problem with Brexit is, fundamentally, Brexit.0 -
Indeed, unless you compare her to Mr. Shoutyman/ Jeremy "2Es" Corbyn, and then she looks like a colossus of intellect!Gallowgate said:May has the same answer to every question. It’s just moronic.
0 -
But surely tax is only for the little people ?Scott_P said:Some light relief
https://twitter.com/NinjaEconomics/status/1085537153172484096
(C. Leona Helmsley)0 -
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-06-29/division/529E63FC-2CE0-40C8-831C-38FFB4C65FDE/EconomyAndJobs?outputType=Party = 257 LabourMikeL said:
Correct. But I personally don't believe they will vote - indeed I would be astounded if they vote.paulyork64 said:
If the deputy speakers are voting I think it edges the likely total up to 311 in my opinion.MikeL said:Is Flynn definitely too ill to attend?
If so, and if Govt gets Lady Hermon, then the Betfair favourite must lose (unless any Con/DUP vote against Govt).
Winterton, Hoyle + 2 tellers = 261.
262 Labour were elected. Who is the missing link ?!0 -
Yes, and if anything last night's vote made the polarisation worse. The fact that both the ERG and the ultra-remainers/people's-voters were jubilant at the result means that both extremes think they are winning - so why would either side compromise?Big_G_NorthWales said:The reasons the same question are being asked and same responses are given shows how polarised the mps are.
TM is not going to suddenly move to a CU or anything else until she is able to consider how to move forward. It is clear that she is seeking to retain ERG and DUP support but hopefully to find a compromise on her deal, but it is clear she is anti a second referendum.0 -
10 years? Project Fear. David Davis is confident "within a year, everything will be ironed out".Recidivist said:
Of course we can leave. Lots of countries aren't in the EU. And we can leave with minimal disruption. It will just take about 10 years, if not longer.JonathanD said:
There was an option to Leave presented last night, leaving the EU is hardly some great impossibility.Recidivist said:
That is the undemocratic bit. Giving an option without the means to deliver it is the real betrayal.TOPPING said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
why did the Conservatives call the referendumTOPPING said:
Why. The. Fuck. Did. You. Vote. Leave?RochdalePioneers said:
Apparently the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the ones negotiated by the EU. You just have to close your eyes and say "I believe in Liam Fox" three times.Barnesian said:
It's not an immigration thing. That's to do with the Single Market (and Norway deal).Anorak said:PB Brains Trust: In brief, what is the problem with CU membership? Is it an immigration thing, a "future trade agreements" thing, or just a headbanger thing?
I
I don't know why May is so resistant to a CU. I understand her resistance to the SM because of her anti- immigration views. If she conceded on the CU, she'd have trouble with her headbangers (but she has that in spades anyway) but she would take the wind out of Corbyn's sails.
The problem is the incoherence of what Leave wanted and campaigned for means no form of Leave has a mandate.
No one can starve to death in just a year. Everything will be fine.0 -
The governments of the day hid behind the EU pronouncements because it was always a convenient fig-leaf for unpopular policies. It came back to bite them on the bum. They couldn't then say "See what the Romans have done for us?"
They only had the hyperbolic Project Fear. When we have eat each other, can I have a fat one without a gammy leg, please? Monty Python fans will know what I mean.0 -
At some point, and I don't think it will occur soon with Corbyn in charge, voters will have been exposed to so much division amongst the Conservatives, that the Labour Party could support the deal and not be punished for it at a subsequent general election. The impression would be that the Labour Party had saved the day.Harris_Tweed said:Nothing I've seen indicates that the undoubted huge frustration with the Brexit process will turn into a groundswell of support for a Corbyn government.
I think defeat for him tonight will be a blessing in disguise for Labour. On two counts: there will be a massive "what the hell are you playing at this close to Brexit?" narrative, and he needs to let TMay own Brexit (/lack thereof) until at least March 29th.
I suspect a GE now would probably leave us more or less where we are now. But him picking up the pieces a fortnight before D-Day would mean Brexit gets added to the large pile of stuff which is his fault very soon after.
With the FTPA however, the wait is too long to contemplate such a move now, IMO (Nick?).0 -
At this moment TM would be an asset to the party v Corbyn in a GENigel_Foremain said:
Indeed, unless you compare her to Mr. Shoutyman/ Jeremy "2Es" Corbyn, and then she looks like a colossus of intellect!Gallowgate said:May has the same answer to every question. It’s just moronic.
0 -
TOPPING said:Alanbrooke said:
were they the government of the day ?TOPPING said:
Did you read the NIESR reports?Alanbrooke said:
PR stunts are not planning. Planning has a balance of risks and recommendations as to what to do to mitigate them. They also look at upsides since you need to plan for those as wellTOPPING said:
There was plenty of downside planning. Or "Project Fear" as the L part in the next GE.Alanbrooke said:
pressure groups have been with us for monumentally incompetent.TOPPING said:
It was a pressure group. Arguably the most successful one in history. It's how pressure groups work.Alanbrooke said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - beca UKIPTOPPING said:
Not that clever really
HMG did neither.0 -
Even though precedent seems to be that they did in 1979, and that they stood as party MPs?MikeL said:
Correct. But I personally don't believe they will vote - indeed I would be astounded if they vote.paulyork64 said:
If the deputy speakers are voting I think it edges the likely total up to 311 in my opinion.MikeL said:Is Flynn definitely too ill to attend?
If so, and if Govt gets Lady Hermon, then the Betfair favourite must lose (unless any Con/DUP vote against Govt).
It's 311-324 if Govt just gets DUP.
If they get Hermon it's 310-325.
If get Hermon and Flynn isn't there it's then 309-325.0 -
They're both as bad as each other.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, and if anything last night's vote made the polarisation worse. The fact that both the ERG and the ultra-remainers/people's-voters were jubilant at the result means that both extremes think they are winning - so why would either side compromise?Big_G_NorthWales said:The reasons the same question are being asked and same responses are given shows how polarised the mps are.
TM is not going to suddenly move to a CU or anything else until she is able to consider how to move forward. It is clear that she is seeking to retain ERG and DUP support but hopefully to find a compromise on her deal, but it is clear she is anti a second referendum.0 -
Luckily for her the IRS is shut down for the foreseeable future.Scott_P said:Some light relief
https://twitter.com/NinjaEconomics/status/10855371531724840960 -
Thanks. So then I think the likely winning band is 300-309.MikeL said:
Correct. But I personally don't believe they will vote - indeed I would be astounded if they vote.paulyork64 said:
If the deputy speakers are voting I think it edges the likely total up to 311 in my opinion.MikeL said:Is Flynn definitely too ill to attend?
If so, and if Govt gets Lady Hermon, then the Betfair favourite must lose (unless any Con/DUP vote against Govt).
It's 311-324 if Govt just gets DUP.
If they get Hermon it's 310-325.
If get Hermon and Flynn isn't there it's then 309-325.0 -
It is the question her father no doubt asks whenever he sees an attractive woman who has avoided taxes, "is she really likely to go down?"Nigelb said:
But surely tax is only for the little people ?Scott_P said:Some light relief
https://twitter.com/NinjaEconomics/status/1085537153172484096
(C. Leona Helmsley)0 -
If Govt do win by 16 tonight then worth noting that if DUP do jump ship they only lose by 4.
So if they could win a Peterborough by-election they would then only need to get one Independent Lab MP onside for a tie.
A long shot but not totally inconceivable.0 -
Anyone betting on 310-319 is in large part betting on the efficiency of Labour’s whipping operation.0
-
Just desserts? What does that mean? Endless Eccles cakes? Semolina ad infinitum? Unlimited rice pudding?DavidL said:
Yes. If only to give those morons in the ERG their just desserts.Freggles said:Can we just have customs union and workers rights alignment written into the WA and be done with it now?
0 -
-
failing french president needs overseas distraction shockwilliamglenn said:
really he's so deep in the poo atm it's all he can do0 -
Apols if posted before but I do like Gove as Trigger in this ...
https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/10852619720636006410 -
Alanbrooke said:
It also involves passing the relevant legislation with the power to bring it in as required, working on the practical issues of import and export, drafting the mini deals needed to mitigate inconvenience, getting any scheme by which EU citizens are to register actually up and running etc etc. As I have said before the incompetence of this government is truly mind blowing.TOPPING said:
PR stunts are not planning. Planning has a balance of risks and recommendations as to what to do to mitigate them. They also look at upsides since you need to plan for those as wellAlanbrooke said:
There was plenty of downside planning. Or "Project Fear" as the Leavers call it. So was it right to call something which could have had such a downside? Of course it was.TOPPING said:
pressure groups have been with us for monumentally incompetent.Alanbrooke said:
It was a pressure group. Arguably the most successful one in history. It's how pressure groups work.TOPPING said:
they had no seats, they werent the government and they got lots of Tory votes because the Tories told their supporters to eff and vote UKIPAlanbrooke said:
Slightly non-sequitorial but I'll answer - because 4m Kippers were effectively disenfranchised and so campaigned for a political party to include the pledge to have a referendum in their manifesto. It's how politics/pressure groups work.TOPPING said:
Not that clever really
I could link to dozens of papers detailing why a Corbyn government would be a disaster. Doesn't mean (sadly) that Corbyn's Labour Party should be banned from taking part in the next GE.
HMG did neither.0 -
I'm in profit on that band but only because I've laid a monkey on the 320-329 band. Even the DUP changing their mind doesn't get it to 320.AlastairMeeks said:Anyone betting on 310-319 is in large part betting on the efficiency of Labour’s whipping operation.
0
This discussion has been closed.