politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Something has changed. For the first time I can see how Brexit

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1105770088911781888

AlastairMeeks said:

Theresa May's concession speech last night outlined the options:

Revoke now
Re-referend
Seek a different deal

Parliament is going to need to choose a course of action pronto.

Parliament has chosen a course of action repeatedly. A deal without a backstop.

The EU not wanting to negotiate that doesn't mean Parliament hasn't made a choice.

AlastairMeeks said:

I realise that panic is the current zeitgeist but it is worth pausing to note that no deal isn't very good for the EU either. For all this morning's protestations, there is going to be a powerful impetus towards agreeing an extension if one is sought.

If we go to the EU with a clear plan to achieve an outcome agreeable with them, then perhaps.

notme2 said:

TOPPING said:

notme2 said:

TOPPING said:

Cyclefree said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Cyclefree said:

Slackbladder said:

I simply cannot understand the ERGs position. simple maths shows they do not, and will not have the numbers for a hard Brexit/no deal.

Therefore they have two tactics.

1) Get a no-deal by default, despite the numbers in the house being against it. Which i think is highly unlikely given an extention or even revoking is much more palatable.

2) Topple May. get a ERGer as PM/Leader and win a GE. which I think is also hugely improbable as the ERG are not the majority of MPs (and would result in huge defections out of the party if they did win), and good luck winning a majority on a utterly split party.

The ERG don’t need the numbers. They have no deal on the statute book already. They think - and, sadly, they may well be right in this - that so long as no alternative legislation is passed they win.

At least they're being honest about what they want.

The MPs who voted for A50 but are against a deal and no deal are the hypocrites.

The ERG were liars during the referendum campaign when they claimed a deal would be easy peasy. I don’t recall them saying that if we voted Leave it meant a No Deal exit.

Conversely a Leaver would have to be a special kind of dim not to have foreseen precisely this outcome. Whatever the outcome will be of course.

I foresaw a smooth movement to EEA, a reversion to common market trade agreement with common standards. And a government creating the infrastructure to properly introduce the entirely legal free movement of labour rules that exist and have not been used. The EU would be fairly cooperative of something that kept us within their sphere influence.

There would need to be a customs agreement, that might take a bit longer, but that’s what a time period is for. I didn’t realise the utter madness that was the PMs redlines would become an article of faith.

Touching.

But not a keen student of politics though.

I was when I graduated in Politics twenty plus years ago. Maybe my mind is rotting.

Your mind has become numbed by the intervening couple of decades of stable and non-bonkers leaders. That era ended some time ago.

Philip_Thompson said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/jamesmatesitv/status/1105768400180137985?s=21

*something* is a deal without a backstop. You don't like that something but let's not pretend it doesn't exist.

And don't pretend it hasn't already been explicitly rejected by the EU.

notme2 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I realise that panic is the current zeitgeist but it is worth pausing to note that no deal isn't very good for the EU either. For all this morning's protestations, there is going to be a powerful impetus towards agreeing an extension if one is sought.

But to achieve what? There’s nothing that can’t be achieved in the next fifteen days that can be achieved in the next sixty.

Correct, which is why it needs to be a longer extension, nine months or so for a GE+/- a #peoplesvote

Thread;

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1105769615064477697

SeanT said:

Can someone clever explain to me how today’s vote changes anything? Even if parliament expresses a clear rejection of No Deal, No Deal is still the default in 17 days, right?

I mean, don’t they actively have to vote FOR an alternative - the Deal, Revoke, etc - to rule out No Deal? Maybe I am missing something. Maybe this has been explained upthread but it’s a total pain wading through Vanilla threads.

In itself it doesn't do much, but the background is what TMay said about the votes:
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-may-text/pm-mays-statement-after-second-defeat-of-her-eu-deal-idUSKBN1QT2SZ

So if parliament votes for No Deal tonight, she's saying the government will go ahead and do No Deal. Which is a big deal, although I assume she'd still have another go at the meaningful vote once minds were suitably concentrated.

If it votes against No Deal, it gets a vote on an extension, and if it votes for that then she says she'll ask for one. This is where stuff starts happening. However, that's not the end of the magic trick, because the EU then says, "an extension to do what", and I don't think anyone knows what happens next.

Philip_Thompson said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Theresa May's concession speech last night outlined the options:

Revoke now
Re-referend
Seek a different deal

Parliament is going to need to choose a course of action pronto.

Parliament has chosen a course of action repeatedly. A deal without a backstop.

The EU not wanting to negotiate that doesn't mean Parliament hasn't made a choice.

And that has proven unattainable. So one returns to Theresa May's three options.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Something I was thinking about last night, there seems to be an incredibly arrogant unspoken assumption that an extension will automatically be granted (By implication this is for remainers voting against the deal). It probably will be, but it might not.

https://twitter.com/DanielBoffey/status/1105758532777971712

Why would the EU grant an extension unless it is for some clear purpose?

The only reasons from their perspective which make sense are:-

1. To allow the necessary legislation/tidying up of loose ends for the WA, having been passed.
2. To allow a referendum.
3. To permit revocation, on the assumption that time is needed for this to be enacted legislatively before 29 March.

1 is now ruled out. So only 2 or 3 are options. I am not at all sure that the EU would even grant an extension for a GE. First, because there is no certainty that it would change the Parliamentary arithmetic. Second, even if there were a government with a majority, that does not mean there is a majority for the only deal around; and, third, I am not at all sure that they have any longer any appetite to negotiate another deal on the basis of different red lines with another government, with all the possibility of going through the same nonsense at the end of it.

I think the EU is at the stage of saying - if you don't like this deal, go without or stay. Your call. But we are not wasting any more time indulging your nonsense. I can't say I blame them.

IanB2 said:

El_Capitano said:

TGOHF said:

Today's and tomorrows votes are all about giving the virtue signalling numpties in parly something to virtue signal about "oooh I voted against/for no deal then tweeted about it".

They have forgotten how to lead and govern.

Mr Malthouse at least seems to have worked out a plan - whether you like it or not at least it has some detail.

The rest are just thrashing around suggesting can kicking or referendums with loaded questions which would leave the country ungovernable afterwards.

Norway Plus / Common Market 2.0 / UK4EFTA / etc. counts as "a plan", too. It has disadvantages, yes, but what doesn't.

It also has the crucial advantage that our laws will be made by actual grown-ups in Brussels rather than overgrown toddlers in Westminster.

The reason Labour has started talking up its deal again is because something along those lines is probably the least unpopular and would have emerged top had Parliament held the indicative votes that were being proposed weeks back.

May's deal has been rejected heavily. No deal will be rejected even more heavily today. A second referendum would probably be rejected less heavily, if still significantly. Revocation and remaining would also be rejected heavily.

A soft Brexit Labour type deal would be rejected narrowly - and might even pass with other options already ruled out. And the EU has already hinted it would be acceptable.

It's where a sensible PM would have started from, two years back. Only the humiliation of seeing the opposition's plan voted through and two years of Tory effort going down the toilet stops May from embracing it.

Let's just ignore that the Labour plan is a bat-shit crazy outcome then?

Streeter said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

"This deal is getting worse all the time!" - Lando Calrissian.

Do you still Be Leave, my chirpy chum?

Um, this may raise a few eyebrows on here, but it's getting to the point that I may abstain or even vote Remain if there's another referendum...

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Streeter said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

"This deal is getting worse all the time!" - Lando Calrissian.

Do you still Be Leave, my chirpy chum?

Um, this may raise a few eyebrows on here, but it's getting to the point that I may abstain or even vote Remain if there's another referendum...

Are you reverting from FarageSunil to MilibandSunil?

SeanT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Slackbladder said:

i'm f**king done with the tories. If they continue to run towards this cliff edge, then they deserve everything coming to them, including a Corbyn government.

Leave voters need to accept their share of responsibility for where the country now is. They leapt before they looked.

OK then, agreed. Just as long as europhiles who pushed Britain towards ever greater integration, without allowing us a referendum, on previous Treaties (which would have rendered Brexit superfluous), accept THEIR responsibility for this mess.

We do need some reconciliation here. We need to stop hating each other. We need to very very quickly accept that we are nearly ALL responsible.

Presuming you’re big enough to agree to that, I shall go first.

Yes, I didn’t properly consider all the problematic issues surrounding Brexit as I voted. My vote was always reluctant, the economic case was Stay, the democratic case was Leave; in the end I went with the democratic case BUT, as I say, I did not think about all the possible consequences.

In particular, I paid scant attention to the Irish border issue, and how it could potentially screw up the whole process, and threaten peace and prosperity across the Irish Sea.

If I had thought about that, I might have voted the other way. I genuinely don’t know.

Anyway I regret my wilful ignorance and apologise to the Irish people, north and south.

Your go!

I'm not sure what you would like me to apologise for, since I was against Britain joining the Euro and against the Lisbon treaty. I'm not so much Europhile as anti-Leave. Given the abject performance of Leavers as a cohort before during and since the referendum, I consider myself completely vindicated.

Morning all

High drama aplenty yesterday but in truth, to use the cliché, nothing has changed. The WA was lost and to a heavier defeat than I expected - I thought the deficit might have been down to 50 - and of course that doesn't "kill" it at all as it remains the only Deal so far agreed by the EU.

Today's drama will have even less significance as voting down No Deal also means nothing as it remains the default position in lieu of no agreement and no extension.

Listening to the exasperated tones from the EU last night, I did half wonder if they would reject an extension request - that would politically play right into May's hands in terms of having someone to blame for the consequences of a No Deal. However, I did also detect the notion that an extension would be granted to consider a plan which would be BOTH acceptable to the EU AND enjoy a majority in the Commons.

I suspect the EU could and would quickly move to a revised Deal especially if the prospects for it clearly and quickly clearing the UK Parliament were strong and even more so if it tied the UK more closely to the EU in terms of remaining in the CU.

Cyclefree said:

[snip]
I think the EU is at the stage of saying - if you don't like this deal, go without or stay. Your call. But we are not wasting any more time indulging your nonsense. I can't say I blame them.

As regards the Withdrawal Agreement, that is true, and has been their consistent position since November. However, they would be open to discussing a different long-term relationship, involving a softer Brexit. That has always been available. It basically makes no difference from the EU's point of view, because the final relationship hasn't been negotiated in any detail anyway (we haven't really started that bit, thanks to their sequencing). The only practical effect of moving in that direction is that it might give Labour MPs an excuse for voting for the current WA. But that assumes that Labour won't just continue to oppose for the sake of opposition.

MarqueeMark said:

IanB2 said:

El_Capitano said:

TGOHF said:

Today's and tomorrows votes are all about giving the virtue signalling numpties in parly something to virtue signal about "oooh I voted against/for no deal then tweeted about it".

They have forgotten how to lead and govern.

Mr Malthouse at least seems to have worked out a plan - whether you like it or not at least it has some detail.

The rest are just thrashing around suggesting can kicking or referendums with loaded questions which would leave the country ungovernable afterwards.

Norway Plus / Common Market 2.0 / UK4EFTA / etc. counts as "a plan", too. It has disadvantages, yes, but what doesn't.

It also has the crucial advantage that our laws will be made by actual grown-ups in Brussels rather than overgrown toddlers in Westminster.

The reason Labour has started talking up its deal again is because something along those lines is probably the least unpopular and would have emerged top had Parliament held the indicative votes that were being proposed weeks back.

May's deal has been rejected heavily. No deal will be rejected even more heavily today. A second referendum would probably be rejected less heavily, if still significantly. Revocation and remaining would also be rejected heavily.

A soft Brexit Labour type deal would be rejected narrowly - and might even pass with other options already ruled out. And the EU has already hinted it would be acceptable.

It's where a sensible PM would have started from, two years back. Only the humiliation of seeing the opposition's plan voted through and two years of Tory effort going down the toilet stops May from embracing it.

Let's just ignore that the Labour plan is a bat-shit crazy outcome then?

Brexit is crazy period

I'm a Remainer but I'm quite fond of having a functioning democracy.

I don't *want* the managed decline that is likely under May's deal or even Labour's deal, but I see that it would satisfy the demands of the 2016 referendum (the legitimacy of which is dubious) and avoid a potential backlash against representative democracy itself. (Yes, there would be moaners but not to the extent of what would happen if we revoked A50).

So I would be content for May's deal or something similar to go through.

But if the ERG and DUP (backed by radicalized leavers in the population) have torpedoed the deal because they want the purity of a crash-out no deal - and that ends up with us having a second referendum, I would be sorely tempted to go full FBPE, European flag and all, and canvass door-to-door for Remain.

I'm willing to tolerate a compromise but every time people like Boles, Cooper, even Corbyn try to create some kind of consensus they get spat in their faces. I can't be the only one feeling like this.

AlastairMeeks said:

SeanT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Slackbladder said:

i'm f**king done with the tories. If they continue to run towards this cliff edge, then they deserve everything coming to them, including a Corbyn government.

Leave voters need to accept their share of responsibility for where the country now is. They leapt before they looked.

OK then, agreed. Just as long as europhiles who pushed Britain towards ever greater integration, without allowing us a referendum, on previous Treaties (which would have rendered Brexit superfluous), accept THEIR responsibility for this mess.

We do need some reconciliation here. We need to stop hating each other. We need to very very quickly accept that we are nearly ALL responsible.

Presuming you’re big enough to agree to that, I shall go first.

Yes, I didn’t properly consider all the problematic issues surrounding Brexit as I voted. My vote was always reluctant, the economic case was Stay, the democratic case was Leave; in the end I went with the democratic case BUT, as I say, I did not think about all the possible consequences.

In particular, I paid scant attention to the Irish border issue, and how it could potentially screw up the whole process, and threaten peace and prosperity across the Irish Sea.

If I had thought about that, I might have voted the other way. I genuinely don’t know.

Anyway I regret my wilful ignorance and apologise to the Irish people, north and south.

Your go!

I'm not sure what you would like me to apologise for, since I was against Britain joining the Euro and against the Lisbon treaty. I'm not so much Europhile as anti-Leave. Given the abject performance of Leavers as a cohort before during and since the referendum, I consider myself completely vindicated.

With great respect Alastair, you're picking and choosing which 'brand' of remainer you are, saying 'but i was for this...and against this', yet tarring all 'leavers' with a blanket 'all leavers are XYZ'.

The truth is all people come on a spectrum of all manner of beliefs, so maybe less accusations about people on one thing?

Morning all,

Looks like another mad day is ahead of us.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Cyclefree said:

[snip]
I think the EU is at the stage of saying - if you don't like this deal, go without or stay. Your call. But we are not wasting any more time indulging your nonsense. I can't say I blame them.

As regards the Withdrawal Agreement, that is true, and has been their consistent position since November. However, they would be open to discussing a different long-term relationship, involving a softer Brexit. That has always been available. It basically makes no difference from the EU's point of view, because the final relationship hasn't been negotiated in any detail anyway (we haven't really started that bit, thanks to their sequencing). The only practical effect of moving in that direction is that it might give Labour MPs an excuse for voting for the current WA. But that assumes that Labour won't just continue to oppose for the sake of opposition.

May might have been more successful if she had been less dismissive of opposition concerns.

She has created conditions where no opposition MP would want to work with her.

SeanT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

SeanT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Slackbladder said:

i'm f**king done with the tories. If they continue to run towards this cliff edge, then they deserve everything coming to them, including a Corbyn government.

Leave voters need to accept their share of responsibility for where the country now is. They leapt before they looked.

OK then, agreed. Just as long as europhiles who pushed Britain towards ever greater integration, without allowing us a referendum, on previous Treaties (which would have rendered Brexit superfluous), accept THEIR responsibility for this mess.

We do need some reconciliation here. We need to stop hating each other. We need to very very quickly accept that we are nearly ALL responsible.

Presuming you’re big enough to agree to that, I shall go first.

Yes, I didn’t properly consider all the problematic issues surrounding Brexit as I voted. My vote was always reluctant, the economic case was Stay, the democratic case was Leave; in the end I went with the democratic case BUT, as I say, I did not think about all the possible consequences.

In particular, I paid scant attention to the Irish border issue, and how it could potentially screw up the whole process, and threaten peace and prosperity across the Irish Sea.

If I had thought about that, I might have voted the other way. I genuinely don’t know.

Anyway I regret my wilful ignorance and apologise to the Irish people, north and south.

Your go!

I'm not sure what you would like me to apologise for, since I was against Britain joining the Euro and against the Lisbon treaty. I'm not so much Europhile as anti-Leave. Given the abject performance of Leavers as a cohort before during and since the referendum, I consider myself completely vindicated.

Sigh. OK Alistair YOU WERE TOTALLY RIGHT AND WE ARE ALL DICKHEADS.

Now can we start reconciling? We really NEED to, and FAST

First, add FBPE to your twitter profile and then we can start reconciliation

kle4 said:

Cyclefree said:

If Parliament has voted against leaving with a deal and votes today against leaving without a deal, then logically it is saying that it wants to Remain.

There is no other choice. There is no other deal on the table.

So it has to revoke Article 50 or seek a long enough extension to allow a referendum to be held to let us make a decision. But since Parliament doesn’t seem able or willing to enact the decisions made by referenda, then the only thing left to do, given how little time there is left, is to revoke while we work out what we do want to do.

But I fear that through panic and incompetence and stupidity we will end up exiting in chaos. Those hard right Tory MPs who think this will benefit their style of politics do not seem to realise that this makes a hard Left government increaingly likely and will be the first to be crying out for the protections that EU membership gave us.

It is very depressing and very sad.

Whatever happens we have done a great deal of harm to our reputation as a stable sensible country.

People are getting overblown on this. We are still stable we are just having a period of very fraught politics, as many nations do from time to time, even very stable ones. It's a crisis but people do no favours in pretending very intense and difficult political issues are in themselves a sign of the end times.

I didn't say it was the end of times. But we should not kid ourselves that we have done anything other than harm our reputation as a solid stable sensible country. That will have implications for us, long after these febrile times are over. We will need solid sensible politicians to guide us through the next stages. And who is on the horizon - Corbyn and co.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Streeter said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

"This deal is getting worse all the time!" - Lando Calrissian.

Do you still Be Leave, my chirpy chum?

Um, this may raise a few eyebrows on here, but it's getting to the point that I may abstain or even vote Remain if there's another referendum...

In honour of the restoration of your sanity have a butchers at this beautiful map

https://twitter.com/simongerman600/status/1105213060153778181?s=19

Cyclefree said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Slackbladder said:

i'm f**king done with the tories. If they continue to run towards this cliff edge, then they deserve everything coming to them, including a Corbyn government.

Leave voters need to accept their share of responsibility for where the country now is. They leapt before they looked.

True. Some leapt before they looked. Some were naive. Some were over-optimistic. Some (and I know a couple like this) never thought leave would win but just wanted to register discontent with the EU. Some were misled. And some wanted what seems likely to happen.

It is always easy to say what you don't like. That was the mistake of the Leave campaign. Parliament is now doing the same thing. Saying what they don't want. Not what they do. So they will fall into the trap laid by the ultras who have their Leave on the statute book thanks to Mrs Miller's court case (oh the irony!)

Like voting 2017 Corbyn, a fair few people voted leave as a protest never expecting it to be close, or just didn't want a big remain win

With reference to the currently inaccessible new(ish) thread, now that it looks almost certain that Biden will run, it's amusing how some US commentators are saying his nomination is inevitable, and others that he has almost no chance at all.

I'll be updating this metaphor this weekend.

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/722391453599723520

Theuniondivvie said:

malcolmg said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Today's and tomorrows votes are all about giving the virtue signalling numpties in parly something to virtue signal about "oooh I voted against/for no deal then tweeted about it".

They have forgotten how to lead and govern.

Mr Malthouse at least seems to have worked out a plan - whether you like it or not at least it has some detail.

The rest are just thrashing around suggesting can kicking or referendums with loaded questions which would leave the country ungovernable afterwards.

We need to choose better politicians and hammer them at the ballot box when they fail to deliver. Some good may come of this.

Who & where are those better politicians of whom you speak?

TUD, they will parachute in their crack regional sub office teams, they are brimming with talent. Ruth the Mooth will sort it out along with her little Labour helpers top talent assisting
assisting

I know she's a new parent & everything but Ruthie's complete silence is a bit strange, particularly with someone with such a deep affection for the sound of her own voice.

Maybe still polishing up the resignation letter.

Richard_Nabavi said:

AlastairMeeks said:

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1105777295753691136

Let them vote for their unicorn paddock in a free vote if they wish to. The motion is not going to pass anyway.

The government has effectively ceased to have a functioning Brexit policy now. Theresa May should either resign or make a virtue of reality and formally hand over policy to Parliament. Or both.

Actually, both sounds like a really good idea.

notme2 said:

_Anazina_ said:

notme2 said:

TOPPING said:

Cyclefree said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Cyclefree said:

Slackbladder said:

I simply cannot understand the ERGs position. simple maths shows they do not, and will not have the numbers for a hard Brexit/no deal.

Therefore they have two tactics.

1) Get a no-deal by default, despite the numbers in the house being against it. Which i think is highly unlikely given an extention or even revoking is much more palatable.

2) Topple May. get a ERGer as PM/Leader and win a GE. which I think is also hugely improbable as the ERG are not the majority of MPs (and would result in huge defections out of the party if they did win), and good luck winning a majority on a utterly split party.

The ERG don’t need the numbers. They have no deal on the statute book already. They think - and, sadly, they may well be right in this - that so long as no alternative legislation is passed they win.

At least they're being honest about what they want.

The MPs who voted for A50 but are against a deal and no deal are the hypocrites.

The ERG were liars during the referendum campaign when they claimed a deal would be easy peasy. I don’t recall them saying that if we voted Leave it meant a No Deal exit.

Conversely a Leaver would have to be a special kind of dim not to have foreseen precisely this outcome. Whatever the outcome will be of course.

I foresaw a smooth movement to EEA, a reversion to common market trade agreement with common standards. And a government creating the infrastructure to properly introduce the entirely legal free movement of labour rules that exist and have not been used. The EU would be fairly cooperative of something that kept us within their sphere influence.

There would need to be a customs agreement, that might take a bit longer, but that’s what a time period is for. I didn’t realise the utter madness that was the PMs redlines would become an article of faith.

Thank you for finally confirming that you are delusional.

You don’t think a complete move to EEA/Norway style status could not be agreed within the first two years, and the further two years of the WA?

The problems come down to the red lines of insisting no ECJ jurisdiction, no free movement and not participation in the customs union. It doesn’t really give the EU much to work with, or her.

There is no ECJ jurisdiction over EFTA members. And EFAT members are not in the Customs Union. So the only sticking point on her red lines would be Freedom of Movement.

AlastairMeeks said:

SeanT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

SeanT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Slackbladder said:

i'm f**king done with the tories. If they continue to run towards this cliff edge, then they deserve everything coming to them, including a Corbyn government.

Leave voters need to accept their share of responsibility for where the country now is. They leapt before they looked.

OK then, agreed. Just as long as europhiles who pushed Britain towards ever greater integration, without allowing us a referendum, on previous Treaties (which would have rendered Brexit superfluous), accept THEIR responsibility for this mess.

We do need some reconciliation here. We need to stop hating each other. We need to very very quickly accept that we are nearly ALL responsible.

Presuming you’re big enough to agree to that, I shall go first.

Yes, I didn’t properly consider all the problematic issues surrounding Brexit as I voted. My vote was always reluctant, the economic case was Stay, the democratic case was Leave; in the end I went with the democratic case BUT, as I say, I did not think about all the possible consequences.

In particular, I paid scant attention to the Irish border issue, and how it could potentially screw up the whole process, and threaten peace and prosperity across the Irish Sea.

If I had thought about that, I might have voted the other way. I genuinely don’t know.

Anyway I regret my wilful ignorance and apologise to the Irish people, north and south.

Your go!

I'm not sure what you would like me to apologise for, since I was against Britain joining the Euro and against the Lisbon treaty. I'm not so much Europhile as anti-Leave. Given the abject performance of Leavers as a cohort before during and since the referendum, I consider myself completely vindicated.

Sigh. OK Alistair YOU WERE TOTALLY RIGHT AND WE ARE ALL DICKHEADS.

Now can we start reconciling? We really NEED to, and FAST

I'm afraid the reconciliation is a long way off yet. A third of the population would rather eat grass than see an accommodation with the EU. A third of the population would introduce Logan's Run policies to get rid of the Leave population.

The civil war took 20 years to play out before a stable settlement emerged (and that was upended a generation later). We can only hope the timescales are a bit shorter this time.

The greatest journey starts with a single step...or whatever the saying is.

Actually surely one thing which is needed is a functioning stable government, and it looks like thats impossible at the moment. With both May and Corbyn...

Nigelb said:

With reference to the currently inaccessible new(ish) thread, now that it looks almost certain that Biden will run, it's amusing how some US commentators are saying his nomination is inevitable, and others that he has almost no chance at all.

He has a very good chance, he's more well known than he was around his runs in the 80s, and the field lacks any candidate near Obama. The real mystery is Harris' short price, who is my worst result right now.

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/ProfBrianCox/status/1105743522215399425

And why won't the DUP think this the best think they could ever have introduced to NI? Retail bonanza.....

Mr. Eagles, quite.

Does today's vote actually matter?

notme2 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Freggles said:

I'm a Remainer but I'm quite fond of having a functioning democracy.

I don't *want* the managed decline that is likely under May's deal or even Labour's deal, but I see that it would satisfy the demands of the 2016 referendum (the legitimacy of which is dubious) and avoid a potential backlash against representative democracy itself. (Yes, there would be moaners but not to the extent of what would happen if we revoked A50).

So I would be content for May's deal or something similar to go through.

But if the ERG and DUP (backed by radicalized leavers in the population) have torpedoed the deal because they want the purity of a crash-out no deal - and that ends up with us having a second referendum, I would be sorely tempted to go full FBPE, European flag and all, and canvass door-to-door for Remain.

I'm willing to tolerate a compromise but every time people like Boles, Cooper, even Corbyn try to create some kind of consensus they get spat in their faces. I can't be the only one feeling like this.

The complete failure of prominent Leavers to contemplate a stable settlement is the most baffling political failure of the last three years. It is why Brexit is now in such desperate peril.

On that we agree.

I banged on about this for months, boring for England on the subject. Leavers thought I was trolling.

Slackbladder said:

AlastairMeeks said:

SeanT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Slackbladder said:

i'm f**king done with the tories. If they continue to run towards this cliff edge, then they deserve everything coming to them, including a Corbyn government.

Leave voters need to accept their share of responsibility for where the country now is. They leapt before they looked.

OK then, agreed. Just as long as europhiles who pushed Britain towards ever greater integration, without allowing us a referendum, on previous Treaties (which would have rendered Brexit superfluous), accept THEIR responsibility for this mess.

We do need some reconciliation here. We need to stop hating each other. We need to very very quickly accept that we are nearly ALL responsible.

Presuming you’re big enough to agree to that, I shall go first.

Yes, I didn’t properly consider all the problematic issues surrounding Brexit as I voted. My vote was always reluctant, the economic case was Stay, the democratic case was Leave; in the end I went with the democratic case BUT, as I say, I did not think about all the possible consequences.

In particular, I paid scant attention to the Irish border issue, and how it could potentially screw up the whole process, and threaten peace and prosperity across the Irish Sea.

If I had thought about that, I might have voted the other way. I genuinely don’t know.

Anyway I regret my wilful ignorance and apologise to the Irish people, north and south.

Your go!

I'm not sure what you would like me to apologise for, since I was against Britain joining the Euro and against the Lisbon treaty. I'm not so much Europhile as anti-Leave. Given the abject performance of Leavers as a cohort before during and since the referendum, I consider myself completely vindicated.

With great respect Alastair, you're picking and choosing which 'brand' of remainer you are, saying 'but i was for this...and against this', yet tarring all 'leavers' with a blanket 'all leavers are XYZ'.

The truth is all people come on a spectrum of all manner of beliefs, so maybe less accusations about people on one thing?

Moreover as the EU continues to develop we will see that Alastair's own red lines are completely unrealistic. His EU is just as much a unicorn in the long term as the various 'clean' Brexits

CarlottaVance said:

One reason for a short extension (if any...)

https://twitter.com/BrunoBrussels/status/1105780261214662656

Yes, but the delay could last until the new European MPs actually take their seats, which is July, I think ?

Jonathan said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Jonathan said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Cyclefree said:

[snip]
I think the EU is at the stage of saying - if you don't like this deal, go without or stay. Your call. But we are not wasting any more time indulging your nonsense. I can't say I blame them.

As regards the Withdrawal Agreement, that is true, and has been their consistent position since November. However, they would be open to discussing a different long-term relationship, involving a softer Brexit. That has always been available. It basically makes no difference from the EU's point of view, because the final relationship hasn't been negotiated in any detail anyway (we haven't really started that bit, thanks to their sequencing). The only practical effect of moving in that direction is that it might give Labour MPs an excuse for voting for the current WA. But that assumes that Labour won't just continue to oppose for the sake of opposition.

May might have been more successful if she had been less dismissive of opposition concerns.

She has created conditions where no opposition MP would want to work with her.

Not really. Opposition MPs (with a few honourable exceptions) aren't interested in a workable solution. They just want an excuse to mouth absurd slogans such as 'opposing a Tory Brexit', which by definition would be any form of Brexit the government was involved with. In any case they are as deluded as the ERG in terms of what the EU might accept.

You are wrong, she has cosmically pissed people off. You can't see it, but she really has. A different PM is probably now a prerequisite for any consensus. She has screwed up badly.

Oh, I agree with that. As I've posted many times, her character is completely unsuited to wheedling things in a hung parliament. But that doesn't alter the fundamentals, in particular going back to Labour's ludicrous 'six tests' and the fact that Corbyn and his disreputable henchmen want as much chaos as possible.

AlastairMeeks said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

AlastairMeeks said:

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1105777295753691136

Let them vote for their unicorn paddock in a free vote if they wish to. The motion is not going to pass anyway.

The government has effectively ceased to have a functioning Brexit policy now. Theresa May should either resign or make a virtue of reality and formally hand over policy to Parliament. Or both.

Actually, both sounds like a really good idea.

Not right now.
At powerless May in place to facilitate the votes is preferable to the likely chaos if she resigns - unless you're also actively seeking no deal Brexit ?

CarlottaVance said:

One reason for a short extension (if any...)

https://twitter.com/BrunoBrussels/status/1105780261214662656

It doesn't matter what he thinks, The European Parliament has a veto on the deal, but not on an extension.

Mr. Tokyo, why would a Remainer vote 'tactically' for No Deal when their choice at that stage would be between that and staying in? Do you mean they'd tactically oppose May's deal?

Having just two options would be much simpler but then the question becomes which option isn't available.

AlastairMeeks said:

I am not starry-eyed about the EU, which is in a desperate long-term mess of its own. The choice was between competing bad options.

I do understand that from your perspective. The problem is that one option will become progressively worse whilst at the same time slowly eliminating the other option at all. The longer we are in the EU the more difficult it becomes to leave even when things become intolerable for people like yourself who are predisposed to be sympathetic to the EU.

This is why leaving now is so important, not because people might not choose to do so in the future but because they will be unable to have that choice.

Is Cox enabling the May delusions ?

https://twitter.com/BBCNormanS/status/1105775950166401025

He appears to be holding out hope for her deal. Or is he also secretly in favour of no deal, and contributing to the filibuster ?

TheScreamingEagles said:

I'll be updating this metaphor this weekend.

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/722391453599723520

Oddly wasn't that the manifesto every Tory MP was elected on - and Mrs May made very clear what her position was until a few months ago (and technically remains her position).

Given the above represents the relationship 85% of the world has with the EU its perfectly practical as an aspiration - although clearly its not going to be delivered in 16 days!

brendan16 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Meanwhile, in Tory leadership contender matters:

https://twitter.com/mikeysmith/status/1105764295483240448

Probably not the most subtle description by Boris but given police budgets are constrained shouldn't the priority be on tackling crimes happening now where the perpetrator is still alive and can be prosecuted - dead people cannot commit crimes anymore whereas criminals not caught can do?

In large parts of the country there is literally no visible police presence at all. Even in London the only place I am guaranteed to see police officers on a daily basis is around Parliament.

Because if police are in short supply and budgets are constrained don't we need to prioritise e.g. once all the knife crimes are solved we can allocate resources to twitter spats and cases where the perpetrator died a decade ago?

Well, no. Some of this 'historic' abuse isn't necessarily historic, especially if people are suffering the consequences, even if the culprit is dead.

Then there's always the issue of letting culprits know that, however long ago it occurred, you might still be investigated and prosecuted.

Finally, there's the fact that in many cases there are systematic failings that need clearing up: just look at yesterday's prosecution of an officer who abused many boys at a detention centre.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-47258310