politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

Options

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

SystemSystem Posts: 12,563
edited February 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Ladbrokes 3/1 on a deal being agreed looks like a value bet

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:

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,080
    First?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,614
    logical_song said:

    First?

    Looks like you were!
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,287
    edited February 2019
    First. But even with all Leaver Tories on board, that is some way short of a majority. Also, where is the evidence that any of this is "sinking in " with the headbangers? The.ERG want No Deal. They achieve that by voting the Deal down, not by supporting it. They aren't going to vote for it.
    I beg to differ with OGH.
  • kfowkeskfowkes Posts: 20
    https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1100069547900628992
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,581
    dixiedean said:

    First. But even with all Remain Tories on board, that is some way short of a majority. Also, where is the evidence that any of this is "sinking in " with the headbangers? The.ERG want No Deal. They aren't going to vote for it.
    I beg to differ with OGH.

    The trick to getting a first is to post it as quickly as possible. Adding extra fluff simply slows you down :o
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,287
    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    First. But even with all Remain Tories on board, that is some way short of a majority. Also, where is the evidence that any of this is "sinking in " with the headbangers? The.ERG want No Deal. They aren't going to vote for it.
    I beg to differ with OGH.

    The trick to getting a first is to post it as quickly as possible. Adding extra fluff simply slows you down :o
    Indeed. As does reading the header. However, poring over detail and prevaricating before producing a piece of meaningless waffle seems to be the way to get to and remain Primus inter pares these days.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    edited February 2019
    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    First. But even with all Remain Tories on board, that is some way short of a majority. Also, where is the evidence that any of this is "sinking in " with the headbangers? The.ERG want No Deal. They aren't going to vote for it.
    I beg to differ with OGH.

    The trick to getting a first is to post it as quickly as possible. Adding extra fluff simply slows you down :o
    Post first post first, then edit to add content.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,065

    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.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1100420798911791104
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 46,087
    I think the deal will pass but most likely after another round of nonsense following an extension.

    3/1 it passes MV2 - not bad but that is a no bet pour moi.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/gordonrayner/status/1100416885789618177
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,614
    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    First. But even with all Remain Tories on board, that is some way short of a majority. Also, where is the evidence that any of this is "sinking in " with the headbangers? The.ERG want No Deal. They aren't going to vote for it.
    I beg to differ with OGH.

    The trick to getting a first is to post it as quickly as possible. Adding extra fluff simply slows you down :o
    Indeed. As does reading the header. However, poring over detail and prevaricating before producing a piece of meaningless waffle seems to be the way to get to and remain Primus inter pares these days.
    Not that you're bothered of course :wink:
  • eekeek Posts: 30,615
    Sean_F said:


    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.

    Given zero growth in Italy for 20 years caused by it's inability to compete on level pricing with Germany that's not surprising. The lira used inflation to inflate debts away which is impossible in a German controlled low inflation economy...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,133
    FPT
    SunnyJim said:

    I've been thinking this for a while now.

    If we end up in an R2 situation it is far better for May to be seen fighting against it initially, then fighting for 'no deal' to be an option, then fighting against Labours deal being the option on the ballot.

    If she can 'lose' all 3 she will come out of this looking like a hero to most of the electorate.

    It would be a remarkable trick.

    This thread is essential reading to understand the way May conducts politics.

    https://twitter.com/SimonFRCox/status/859799583249108992
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,581
    Endillion said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    First. But even with all Remain Tories on board, that is some way short of a majority. Also, where is the evidence that any of this is "sinking in " with the headbangers? The.ERG want No Deal. They aren't going to vote for it.
    I beg to differ with OGH.

    The trick to getting a first is to post it as quickly as possible. Adding extra fluff simply slows you down :o
    Post first post first, then edit to add content.
    The power of the edit button, but you are left with the mark of shame.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,133
    Sean_F said:


    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.

    Do you find it credible that the French economy would have been 55% like Australia in the absence of the Euro? It's a nonsense study.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2019
    The problem with MPs in general is that most of them are to to the right of the public on economic issues, and to the left of it on social issues. But they're unrepentant. They think they're right, and the public is wrong.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    FIRST.

    (I believe very strongly indeed that I am)
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    Adopting the ERG approach....
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,059
    First, because all of the other posts are Fake News!
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,154
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/gordonrayner/status/1100416885789618177

    Oh ffs. That's going to play *really* well ...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,059
    AndyJS said:

    The problem with MPs in general is that most of them are to to the right of the public on economic issues, and to the left of it on social issues. But they're unrepentant. They think they're right, and the public is wrong.

    Generally correct place to be though, as history shows repeatedly.
  • eekeek Posts: 30,615
    https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1100421558953263106
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,355
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/gordonrayner/status/1100416885789618177

    For the many ...terrorists....not the few...victims...
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,065
    williamglenn said:

    Sean_F said:


    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.

    Do you find it credible that the French economy would have been 55% like Australia in the absence of the Euro? It's a nonsense study.
    56,000 over 20 years is 2,800 a year. So, that adds about 6% to GDP per head. That would bump France up a bit, but not to anything like Australia's figure.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/DanielHewittITV/status/1100422630321147904
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,133
    edited February 2019
    Sean_F said:

    williamglenn said:

    Sean_F said:


    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.

    Do you find it credible that the French economy would have been 55% like Australia in the absence of the Euro? It's a nonsense study.
    56,000 over 20 years is 2,800 a year. So, that adds about 6% to GDP per head. That would bump France up a bit, but not to anything like Australia's figure.
    Read the report. To get the French figure they have just extrapolated from an imagined country that is 55% based on Australia and 45% based on the UK.

    image
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1100423194253627392
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,581
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1100423194253627392

    I know of one way to ensure Brexit is not delayed, Rees-Mogg.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,065
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1100423194253627392

    I know of one way to ensure Brexit is not delayed, Rees-Mogg.
    I doubt if that's occurred to him.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1100423194253627392

    Is this an audition for an opinion piece gig in the Telegraph and if not rather than a commentary, how about some actual implementing of something!!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,065
    Re Hizbollah, I'm only surprised it wasn't banned long ago.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1100423194253627392

    I know of one way to ensure Brexit is not delayed, Rees-Mogg.
    So
    So
    So
    BORED
    of Brexit.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,051
    Does anyone have any idea what the Ladbrokes odds relate to? The vote on 12 March? Any vote before 29 March? Any vote at all?

    Given that Betfair's "No Deal" market doesn't actually cover No Deal after 29 March, these details may be worth knowing.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    Having thought about how today's events affect the probabilities of various outcomes, such as leaving on time with a deal, leaving without a deal, or extending A50 for a referendum, I am now prepared to share my considered conclusion with you all: I haven't the faintest idea.
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    kfowkes said:

    https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1100069547900628992

    God, I never thought I would find myself agreeing with George Galloway!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,059
    williamglenn said:

    Sean_F said:

    williamglenn said:

    Sean_F said:


    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.

    Do you find it credible that the French economy would have been 55% like Australia in the absence of the Euro? It's a nonsense study.
    56,000 over 20 years is 2,800 a year. So, that adds about 6% to GDP per head. That would bump France up a bit, but not to anything like Australia's figure.
    Read the report. To get the French figure they have just extrapolated from an imagined country that is 55% based on Australia and 45% based on the UK.

    image
    Yes, that model shows quite noticeable variation between orange and blue line in the two decades before the Euro!
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,340
    Chris said:

    Does anyone have any idea what the Ladbrokes odds relate to? The vote on 12 March? Any vote before 29 March? Any vote at all?

    Given that Betfair's "No Deal" market doesn't actually cover No Deal after 29 March, these details may be worth knowing.

    Indeed.. I was about to ask Mike "*a* meaningful vote or *the* meaningful vote?"
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,051
    Harris_Tweed said:

    Chris said:

    Does anyone have any idea what the Ladbrokes odds relate to? The vote on 12 March? Any vote before 29 March? Any vote at all?

    Given that Betfair's "No Deal" market doesn't actually cover No Deal after 29 March, these details may be worth knowing.

    Indeed.. I was about to ask Mike "*a* meaningful vote or *the* meaningful vote?"
    Managed to find it. It refers to "Next Meaningful Vote" (void if not by 14 March):
    https://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/betting/politics/uk/uk-politics/eu-specials/225327493/
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,351
    Fun fact: UKIP have made more parliamentary by-election gains than Labour in the last 20 years.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,133
    Foxy said:

    williamglenn said:

    Sean_F said:

    williamglenn said:

    Sean_F said:


    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.

    Do you find it credible that the French economy would have been 55% like Australia in the absence of the Euro? It's a nonsense study.
    56,000 over 20 years is 2,800 a year. So, that adds about 6% to GDP per head. That would bump France up a bit, but not to anything like Australia's figure.
    Read the report. To get the French figure they have just extrapolated from an imagined country that is 55% based on Australia and 45% based on the UK.

    image
    Yes, that model shows quite noticeable variation between orange and blue line in the two decades before the Euro!
    Their dotted line doesn't look like it's in the right place either. The Euro came into being in 1999, with notes and coins entering into circulation in 2002.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,051
    edited February 2019
    Chris said:

    Harris_Tweed said:

    Chris said:

    Does anyone have any idea what the Ladbrokes odds relate to? The vote on 12 March? Any vote before 29 March? Any vote at all?

    Given that Betfair's "No Deal" market doesn't actually cover No Deal after 29 March, these details may be worth knowing.

    Indeed.. I was about to ask Mike "*a* meaningful vote or *the* meaningful vote?"
    Managed to find it. It refers to "Next Meaningful Vote" (void if not by 14 March):
    https://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/betting/politics/uk/uk-politics/eu-specials/225327493/
    Wouldn't it be better value to lay the "Not by 30 March" option of Betfair's "When will House of Commons pass Brexit vote?"
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,794
    david_herdson said:

    Fun fact: UKIP have made more parliamentary by-election gains than Labour in the last 20 years.

    I'd say that they haven't had any. The 2 they won to the HoC already had sitting UKIP MPs when the by-election took place. What were you thinking of?

    (Sorry about your cat btw)
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,340
    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Harris_Tweed said:

    Chris said:

    Does anyone have any idea what the Ladbrokes odds relate to? The vote on 12 March? Any vote before 29 March? Any vote at all?

    Given that Betfair's "No Deal" market doesn't actually cover No Deal after 29 March, these details may be worth knowing.

    Indeed.. I was about to ask Mike "*a* meaningful vote or *the* meaningful vote?"
    Managed to find it. It refers to "Next Meaningful Vote" (void if not by 14 March):
    https://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/betting/politics/uk/uk-politics/eu-specials/225327493/
    Wouldn't it be better value to lay the "by 30 March" option of Betfair's "When will House of Commons pass Brexit vote?"
    I'm not too sure 3/1 on it being passed in a fortnight is value yet.. especially if they (collectively) know they have a can-kicking option the next day.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,059
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Having thought about how today's events affect the probabilities of various outcomes, such as leaving on time with a deal, leaving without a deal, or extending A50 for a referendum, I am now prepared to share my considered conclusion with you all: I haven't the faintest idea.

    This is a board of intelligent and well informed folk across the political spectrum often with niche insights. I think it fair to say that nobody is sure what happens next or what the outcome will be.

    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.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,576
    3-1? You must be joking right. We need 115 MPs who voted against last time to switch. Do we have any names? I think there may be a few on the Labour side. I can see Snell, Mann, Flint, Nandy and Laura Smith switching. There's 5. Can anyone supply the other 110?

    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?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,794
    Foxy said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Having thought about how today's events affect the probabilities of various outcomes, such as leaving on time with a deal, leaving without a deal, or extending A50 for a referendum, I am now prepared to share my considered conclusion with you all: I haven't the faintest idea.

    This is a board of intelligent and well informed folk across the political spectrum often with niche insights. I think it fair to say that nobody is sure what happens next or what the outcome will be.

    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.
    It really is an unforgivable state of affairs. Completely irresponsible.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,351
    Foxy said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Having thought about how today's events affect the probabilities of various outcomes, such as leaving on time with a deal, leaving without a deal, or extending A50 for a referendum, I am now prepared to share my considered conclusion with you all: I haven't the faintest idea.

    This is a board of intelligent and well informed folk across the political spectrum often with niche insights. I think it fair to say that nobody is sure what happens next or what the outcome will be.

    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.
    It almost certainly isn't 4 weeks to go. That's the only thing we can be reasonably sure about.

    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.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,379
    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Having thought about how today's events affect the probabilities of various outcomes, such as leaving on time with a deal, leaving without a deal, or extending A50 for a referendum, I am now prepared to share my considered conclusion with you all: I haven't the faintest idea.

    This is a board of intelligent and well informed folk across the political spectrum often with niche insights. I think it fair to say that nobody is sure what happens next or what the outcome will be.

    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.
    It really is an unforgivable state of affairs. Completely irresponsible.
    The legislature wanted to get in on the Brexit game. They have proven to be desperately ill-equipped to take on the function of the executive.

    Fault belong MPs.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    tpfkar said:

    3-1? You must be joking right. We need 115 MPs who voted against last time to switch. Do we have any names? I think there may be a few on the Labour side. I can see Snell, Mann, Flint, Nandy and Laura Smith switching. There's 5. Can anyone supply the other 110?

    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?

    It will take the ERG to panic about No Brexit and thus vote for the deal. I think their wake would drag enough support to get it passed.

    5-1 feels like fair value, but not 3-1. I'd love to be wrong.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,351
    DavidL said:

    david_herdson said:

    Fun fact: UKIP have made more parliamentary by-election gains than Labour in the last 20 years.

    I'd say that they haven't had any. The 2 they won to the HoC already had sitting UKIP MPs when the by-election took place. What were you thinking of?

    (Sorry about your cat btw)
    Those two were still gains based on the usual criterion of measuring against the previous general election, even if there's an asterisk against them.

    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).
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/1100433063539101698
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,051
    Harris_Tweed said:

    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Harris_Tweed said:

    Chris said:

    Does anyone have any idea what the Ladbrokes odds relate to? The vote on 12 March? Any vote before 29 March? Any vote at all?

    Given that Betfair's "No Deal" market doesn't actually cover No Deal after 29 March, these details may be worth knowing.

    Indeed.. I was about to ask Mike "*a* meaningful vote or *the* meaningful vote?"
    Managed to find it. It refers to "Next Meaningful Vote" (void if not by 14 March):
    https://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/betting/politics/uk/uk-politics/eu-specials/225327493/
    Wouldn't it be better value to lay the "by 30 March" option of Betfair's "When will House of Commons pass Brexit vote?"
    I'm not too sure 3/1 on it being passed in a fortnight is value yet.. especially if they (collectively) know they have a can-kicking option the next day.
    Me neither, but if people do want to bet on it I think there are options with better value.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,783
    david_herdson said:

    Fun fact: UKIP have made more parliamentary by-election gains than Labour in the last 20 years.

    In due course even with UKIP going out of business you'll probably be extending that to the last 25 years, 30 years.......

    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

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    If the backstop is truly unacceptable as I believe then no loaf is better than a poisonous one.

    If the backstop is acceptable but not ideal then yes OGH is right but its irresponsible this wasn't ratified months ago.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,287
    tpfkar said:

    3-1? You must be joking right. We need 115 MPs who voted against last time to switch. Do we have any names? I think there may be a few on the Labour side. I can see Snell, Mann, Flint, Nandy and Laura Smith switching. There's 5. Can anyone supply the other 110?

    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?

    Which is why there is no chance of the DUP/ERG voting in favour on the 12th. Because we still crash out on 29th. They MAY give in and vote in favour IF an extension is voted for.
    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.

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1100434180553486337
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Wulfrun_Phil said:

    david_herdson said:

    Fun fact: UKIP have made more parliamentary by-election gains than Labour in the last 20 years.

    In due course even with UKIP going out of business you'll probably be extending that to the last 25 years, 30 years.......

    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

    Is c.40% WNV/DK some sort of record?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,051
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1100434180553486337

    A neat enough illustration of how much of politics is reduced to the level of caricature these days.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 5,609
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/1100433063539101698

    Should be leader of the party . I’ve been really impressed with Yvette Cooper over the last few months.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,737
    tpfkar said:

    3-1? You must be joking right. We need 115 MPs who voted against last time to switch. Do we have any names? I think there may be a few on the Labour side. I can see Snell, Mann, Flint, Nandy and Laura Smith switching. There's 5. Can anyone supply the other 110?

    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?

    Lucy Powell and Stephen Kinnock potentially.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    nico67 said:

    Should be leader of the party . I’ve been really impressed with Yvette Cooper over the last few months.

    How different life might be if the £3 tories hadn't voted for Jezza. Twice.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,724
    Mr. P, whilst I agree that was daft, it also didn't make a difference. He won by a mile and most of the £3 persons with closer to the SWP than the blues.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,097
    david_herdson said:

    Foxy said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Having thought about how today's events affect the probabilities of various outcomes, such as leaving on time with a deal, leaving without a deal, or extending A50 for a referendum, I am now prepared to share my considered conclusion with you all: I haven't the faintest idea.

    This is a board of intelligent and well informed folk across the political spectrum often with niche insights. I think it fair to say that nobody is sure what happens next or what the outcome will be.

    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.
    It almost certainly isn't 4 weeks to go. That's the only thing we can be reasonably sure about.

    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.
    No no deal having got down to 1.03 earlier, it's now back to 1.17 with a fair few thousand put on the table waiting to be matched - some of which arrived in £'000s as I was logged in when it was lodged. Someone with deep pockets seems to think no deal on 29/3 is still in play.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 5,609
    Scott_P said:

    nico67 said:

    Should be leader of the party . I’ve been really impressed with Yvette Cooper over the last few months.

    How different life might be if the £3 tories hadn't voted for Jezza. Twice.
    Couldn’t agree more . Corbyn is useless and the cult surrounding him are just watching Labour slowly sink into the abyss . I say this as a Labour supporter who will now be accused by the Corbyn cult of being a Red Tory !
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/HCTrudo/status/1100436467648790533
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1100436820565868549

    https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1100437083238400000

    https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1100437279322058754
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Morris_Dancer said:

    most of the £3 persons with closer to the SWP than the blues.

    Not the ones I know :wink:
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,730
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Having thought about how today's events affect the probabilities of various outcomes, such as leaving on time with a deal, leaving without a deal, or extending A50 for a referendum, I am now prepared to share my considered conclusion with you all: I haven't the faintest idea.

    Sounds like the basis for an interesting thread header.

    Good evening, everybody.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,040
    So

    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!
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    Or, in other words, nothing has changed!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,040
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    Or, in other words, nothing has changed!
    Indeed. Although ERG members would have to be crazy not to be quietly confident that they might get their no deal brexit.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,442
    Foxy said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Having thought about how today's events affect the probabilities of various outcomes, such as leaving on time with a deal, leaving without a deal, or extending A50 for a referendum, I am now prepared to share my considered conclusion with you all: I haven't the faintest idea.

    This is a board of intelligent and well informed folk across the political spectrum often with niche insights. I think it fair to say that nobody is sure what happens next or what the outcome will be.

    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.
    Eek mentioned at the end of the last thread that he thought today's developments mean the choice is between Leave with a Deal or Leave with No Deal. I must admit I thought what has happened today meant almost exactly the opposite but I am willing to be persuaded otherwise. I just don't see what the realistic possible outcomes now are, let alone the odds of each of them
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1100423194253627392

    I know of one way to ensure Brexit is not delayed, Rees-Mogg.
    Yes the same way opposition MPs and hardcore rebels like Grieve could ensure there wasn't no deal.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,051
    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    As far as I know, Theresa May can ask for an extension without being mandated to do so by MPs.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1100439422452056066
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    TOPPING said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    Or, in other words, nothing has changed!
    Indeed. Although ERG members would have to be crazy not to be quietly confident that they might get their no deal brexit.
    Actually I think your point 2 is wrong - Labour will vote to 'rule out' no deal, whatever that means. Also they'd vote for an extension if we get to that stage.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,576
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Foxy said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Having thought about how today's events affect the probabilities of various outcomes, such as leaving on time with a deal, leaving without a deal, or extending A50 for a referendum, I am now prepared to share my considered conclusion with you all: I haven't the faintest idea.

    This is a board of intelligent and well informed folk across the political spectrum often with niche insights. I think it fair to say that nobody is sure what happens next or what the outcome will be.

    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.
    Eek mentioned at the end of the last thread that he thought today's developments mean the choice is between Leave with a Deal or Leave with No Deal. I must admit I thought what has happened today meant almost exactly the opposite but I am willing to be persuaded otherwise. I just don't see what the realistic possible outcomes now are, let alone the odds of each of them
    I'm really not sure either. What I think will need discussion is extension length - which hasn't been discussed at all so far.

    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?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    As best one can tell – and these things are not easy to decipher – Labour currently has three policies on Brexit and a second referendum. There is the Thornberry position, backed by Sir Keir Starmer, in which it’s Leave vs Remain all over again. There is the leadership’s position which appears to be Leave vs Leave. And there is a third position in which all the options – Leave Like This, Leave Like That Instead, and Remain – might be on the ballot paper. Whatever your own view is, Labour has a policy for you. This is many things but it is chiefly hopeless.

    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/
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2019
    I wonder how many Labour MPs privately wish that Chris Williamson hadn't won his seat back at the last election?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,040
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    TOPPING said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    Or, in other words, nothing has changed!
    Indeed. Although ERG members would have to be crazy not to be quietly confident that they might get their no deal brexit.
    Actually I think your point 2 is wrong - Labour will vote to 'rule out' no deal, whatever that means. Also they'd vote for an extension if we get to that stage.
    Maybe yes that is the obvious expectation and my fingers hovered over the keyboard. But if it has the vaguest smell of supporting TMay then I'm not so sure.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,040
    Chris said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    As far as I know, Theresa May can ask for an extension without being mandated to do so by MPs.
    Yebbut what then? She won't revoke. She is back on the brink of no deal.
  • RobCRobC Posts: 398
    TOPPING said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    TOPPING said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    Or, in other words, nothing has changed!
    Indeed. Although ERG members would have to be crazy not to be quietly confident that they might get their no deal brexit.
    Actually I think your point 2 is wrong - Labour will vote to 'rule out' no deal, whatever that means. Also they'd vote for an extension if we get to that stage.
    Maybe yes that is the obvious expectation and my fingers hovered over the keyboard. But if it has the vaguest smell of supporting TMay then I'm not so sure.
    They'll cover that by saying they are pushing for a Labour Brexit
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,591
    Chris said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    As far as I know, Theresa May can ask for an extension without being mandated to do so by MPs.
    And the length of the extension is entirely in the hands of the EU. I think it quite likely that parliament will force May to ask for a short extension at the summit on 21 March and the EU could well respond by granting one ... to the end of 2020. And unless May is prepared to countenance no deal at a week's notice she will have to accept.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,069
    I am pleased with TM today. She has put ERG back in their box, killed no deal, and made a lengthy extension possible. Good on her. Time for mps to decide but deal looks likely but a long extension possible, virtually stopping brexit

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,040
    RobC said:

    TOPPING said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    TOPPING said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    Or, in other words, nothing has changed!
    Indeed. Although ERG members would have to be crazy not to be quietly confident that they might get their no deal brexit.
    Actually I think your point 2 is wrong - Labour will vote to 'rule out' no deal, whatever that means. Also they'd vote for an extension if we get to that stage.
    Maybe yes that is the obvious expectation and my fingers hovered over the keyboard. But if it has the vaguest smell of supporting TMay then I'm not so sure.
    They'll cover that by saying they are pushing for a Labour Brexit
    Maybe but there is no evident route to it from there. She can't accommodate any of their demands because having come so far politically, I doubt that they would support a May deal under any circumstances even if she cut and pasted the Brexit blueprint from Jeremy Corbyn's own notebook. It would, as it is now, be propping up the Tories.

    It remains the case that it will have to be own side on side plus some Lab splitters.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 14,883
    Chris said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    As far as I know, Theresa May can ask for an extension without being mandated to do so by MPs.
    I think that needs thought. Legislation already passed has us leaving on 29th March. Plus if parliament is needed to trigger Art 50 (Supreme Court) how do we know it isn't needed for an amendment of the decision?

    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').

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,287
    edited February 2019
    RobC said:

    TOPPING said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    TOPPING said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    Or, in other words, nothing has changed!
    Indeed. Although ERG members would have to be crazy not to be quietly confident that they might get their no deal brexit.
    Actually I think your point 2 is wrong - Labour will vote to 'rule out' no deal, whatever that means. Also they'd vote for an extension if we get to that stage.
    Maybe yes that is the obvious expectation and my fingers hovered over the keyboard. But if it has the vaguest smell of supporting TMay then I'm not so sure.
    They'll cover that by saying they are pushing for a Labour Brexit
    Corbyn has been calling for May to rule out No Deal, loudly and publically, at every opportunity since Christmas.
    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.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,097
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    I am pleased with TM today. She has put ERG back in their box, killed no deal, and made a lengthy extension possible. Good on her. Time for mps to decide but deal looks likely but a long extension possible, virtually stopping brexit

    I'd be happier if someone wasn't slapping round thousands down at long odds on the opposite, tbh
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,069
    anothernick said:

    Chris said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    As far as I know, Theresa May can ask for an extension without being mandated to do so by MPs.
    And the length of the extension is entirely in the hands of the EU. I think it quite likely that parliament will force May to ask for a short extension at the summit on 21 March and the EU could well respond by granting one ... to the end of 2020. And unless May is prepared to countenance no deal at a week's notice she will have to accept.
    I chuckled at your 2020 !! You could be right
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,194
    anothernick said:

    Chris said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    As far as I know, Theresa May can ask for an extension without being mandated to do so by MPs.
    And the length of the extension is entirely in the hands of the EU. I think it quite likely that parliament will force May to ask for a short extension at the summit on 21 March and the EU could well respond by granting one ... to the end of 2020. And unless May is prepared to countenance no deal at a week's notice she will have to accept.
    Are you sure? What about the EU elections? Unless everyone, including the ECJ, agrees that a Member who intends to Leave should be represented in the European Parliament.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,080
    dixiedean said:

    tpfkar said:

    3-1? You must be joking right. We need 115 MPs who voted against last time to switch. Do we have any names? I think there may be a few on the Labour side. I can see Snell, Mann, Flint, Nandy and Laura Smith switching. There's 5. Can anyone supply the other 110?

    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?

    Which is why there is no chance of the DUP/ERG voting in favour on the 12th. Because we still crash out on 29th. They MAY give in and vote in favour IF an extension is voted for.
    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.

    What do you mean 'almost'?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,040
    algarkirk said:

    Chris said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    As far as I know, Theresa May can ask for an extension without being mandated to do so by MPs.
    I think that needs thought. Legislation already passed has us leaving on 29th March. Plus if parliament is needed to trigger Art 50 (Supreme Court) how do we know it isn't needed for an amendment of the decision?

    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').

    Yep. The deal it is. It has to be because everything else is impossible. And also, a bird in the hand, and all that: the deal is there already just needing tweaking. Everything else is a blank page.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    I see the wingnut in chief from Derby is unpopular with his Nottingham colleague... what could be done to stop such in-fighting?

    https://twitter.com/LilianGreenwood/status/1100420369687683075
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,663
    Sean_F said:


    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.

    Interesting: who produced the analysis?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 14,883
    TOPPING said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    TOPPING said:

    So

    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!

    Or, in other words, nothing has changed!
    Indeed. Although ERG members would have to be crazy not to be quietly confident that they might get their no deal brexit.
    I still think the chances of a no deal Brexit are close to zero.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,179
    FPT: MP salaries. Have been out and about.

    I hope the blockquotes are correct :-) .
    prh47bridge said:

    MattW said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:



    MPs are underpaid and under-resourced.

    With a basic salary package some way north of £100k, plus all the extra responsibility, redundancy etc payments and gewgaws, that claim is a bit of a stretch, John.
    An MP's basic salary is £77,379. They do get expenses on top of that but expenses are not additional remuneration. Most do not get any payments for additional responsibilities.
    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.

  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 9,209
    IanB2 said:

    david_herdson said:

    Foxy said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Having thought about how today's events affect the probabilities of various outcomes, such as leaving on time with a deal, leaving without a deal, or extending A50 for a referendum, I am now prepared to share my considered conclusion with you all: I haven't the faintest idea.

    This is a board of intelligent and well informed folk across the political spectrum often with niche insights. I think it fair to say that nobody is sure what happens next or what the outcome will be.

    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.
    It almost certainly isn't 4 weeks to go. That's the only thing we can be reasonably sure about.

    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.
    No no deal having got down to 1.03 earlier, it's now back to 1.17 with a fair few thousand put on the table waiting to be matched - some of which arrived in £'000s as I was logged in when it was lodged. Someone with deep pockets seems to think no deal on 29/3 is still in play.
    Or someone hedging against large potential losses in the real world if there is no deal. An insurance bet rather than an estimate of the probability.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/sarahwollaston/status/1100382005219520513
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,707
    Scrapheap_as_was said:

    I see the wingnut in chief from Derby is unpopular with his Nottingham colleague... what could be done to stop such in-fighting?

    https://twitter.com/LilianGreenwood/status/1100420369687683075

    She needs to hand a file on this over to Tom Watson. He is handling these matters now.
This discussion has been closed.