Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Ladbrokes 3/1 on a deal being agreed looks like a value be

I’ve just had a small wager at 3/1 with Ladbrokes that a deal that the Commons “meaningful vote” will secure the backing of MPs for the deal.This is what the Indy’s John Rentoul wrote after yesterday’s cabinet meeting:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I beg to differ with OGH.
FPT the study of the impact of the Euro on individual countries. IMO, it suggests that GDP per head would be about 11% higher in Italy, and 6% higher in France, had they remained outside the Euro.
3/1 it passes MV2 - not bad but that is a no bet pour moi.
https://twitter.com/SimonFRCox/status/859799583249108992
(I believe very strongly indeed that I am)
many...terrorists....not thefew...victims...So
So
BORED
of Brexit.
Given that Betfair's "No Deal" market doesn't actually cover No Deal after 29 March, these details may be worth knowing.
https://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/betting/politics/uk/uk-politics/eu-specials/225327493/
(Sorry about your cat btw)
4 weeks to go and we are all in the fog. I am not convinced that either MPs or Civil Service are any better informed.
I'd be more interested in the chances of the deal losing by over 100 votes again. People are too entrenched, and I can't see the DUP evangelising for the deal, which is what would be needed to get it over the line.
What I am worried about is MPs getting to the extension vote, and it still not passing due to a three way split between no extension, short extension and long extension. So if parliament votes against the Deal, then against No Deal, then against an extension, what the heck happens next?
Either for reasons of can-kicking (forced by either the govt or by parliament), or because the government needs time to implement the deal, it's highly likely that there'll be an A50 extension.
It is possible that the EU might veto an extension or attach unacceptable conditions but I think the risk is relatively low, providing that the date doesn't go beyond June 30.
No Deal shouldn't be ruled out - it's easy enough to cause it by accident, never mind design - but I think it's become quite unlikely this last 7 days.
Fault belong MPs.
5-1 feels like fair value, but not 3-1. I'd love to be wrong.
But if you don't like that fun fact, here's another one: Labour's net gains in by-elections since the 2010GE is -1.
(Thanks for the condolences re Frankie cat. The house is still quiet).
With Jeremy Labour garnering the support of just 14% of the electorate in the latest YouGov, behind the combined TIG/LD support, it's hard to see where any future by election gains for Jeremy Labour will be coming from.
"Imagine the Independent Group put up
candidates at the next general election. The
Conservative party, Labour, Liberal Democrats
and other parties also stand. How would you
then vote?"
Con 21
Lab 14
TIG 11
LD 4
SNP 3
Other 7
Would Not Vote 10
Dont Know 29
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/tz1pyhcbhb/TheTimes_190224_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
If the backstop is acceptable but not ideal then yes OGH is right but its irresponsible this wasn't ratified months ago.
Which is the sequence of events I fear TM is hoping for. To bring the MV back a third time with an actual course of action as an alternative.
It is a reckless, reckless gamble of an almost unforgivable magnitude.
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1100437083238400000
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1100437279322058754
Good evening, everybody.
1) Will the MV pass? Unlikely; therefore
2) Will Lab vote for no no deal? Difficult, because
3) That will be seen as a vote for the government; so
4) If no no deal fails then will A50 extension pass? No, for the same reason as 3), therefore;
5) We are back where we started and the ERG wait for us to leave with no deal, so
6) We are fucked. Unless
7) Cooper whips Lab votes for her amendment which is unlikely, so therefore the only option is
8) The MV passes.
Voila!
I can see the first 2 votes falling way short.
Then extension comes along. T May proposes extension to the end of June. Labour (Cooper?) amend to say the end of the year. Vince Cable amends to say the end of 2049.
What happens then? If one side loses, would they vote against an extension at all?
Then again, so is the Prime Minister’s position. It is still the case that MPs are against everything and for very little. There is not, a majority for the Prime Minister’s deal and there is not a majority for no deal or a second referendum either. Brexit continues as limbo.
https://capx.co/the-brexit-mirage-lots-of-movement-but-nothing-has-changed/
It remains the case that it will have to be own side on side plus some Lab splitters.
Secondly, agree MV passes either in March or soon after. All options look improbable. Most are in practical terms impossible. MV passing on TMs (slightly tweaked) deal is not impossible or the realm of fantasy. No deal is fantasy, given parliament's actual opinions, as is some very different WA, as is revoke. WA as it more or less stands is improbable but will happen. It's a Sherlock Holmes principle. Eliminate the impossible, and then unlikely things become possible ('whatever remains, however improbable must be the truth').
Can't see Labour voting against it if it is put forward, regardless of who brings it up or why.
That really would cleave the Party in two.
What is more, No Deal would be a vote Labour could unite around, bar the odd outlier like Hoey, Mann, Skinner.
Tories would be split on it.
https://twitter.com/LilianGreenwood/status/1100420369687683075
I hope the blockquotes are correct :-) . You misquote me, I am afraid. I said basic salary *package*, which includes the personal perks.
Without needing to go into some of the smaller ones or more inchoate ones, we have:
Basic salary - 77,379 . Now, just that basic salary with nothing else puts your basic MP in the top 5%. To suggest that being in the top 5% of the population is "underpaid" when expenses include a pile of things most of us pay for ourselves (eg travel?) is ludicrous to me.
But without looking very hard we also have:
Resettlement allowance at end = £6614 / yr - 1 month/yr. First 30k tax iirc. Though these are always changing.
Employer Pension Contributions = £10319 - 13% of salary the last time I looked. And the actual benefit is worth several times that compared to what most of the population get for their pension contributions).
Just those puts it into "some way north of 100k", without getting into a range of other things that are in the package (subsidised meals, heavily subsidised pied-a-terre, parking in Central London for many, office facilities 24/7 in London, opportunities for other work due to position, iirc lifetime access to the Parliamentary Estate, and so on).
MPs are a lot of good and bad things; underpaid is not one of them.
To wrap up, look at the range across Europe; ours are about average with their peers.