politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW PB / Polling Matters podcast on the Tory leader runners an

kjh said:

Just to make sure I have understood this correctly:
a) Am I right in saying there is no real expectation of this passing today or have I missed something?
b) If a) is true why do it? Is it just desperation i.e. might as well have a go, nothing to lose except reputation.
c) Is removing the PD really a substantial change? If so I don't understand why.

What do people think?

Re (b), may I refer the honourable poster to the un-named Cabinet Minister quoted on Newsnight?

An extraordinarily reverential interview by John Humphrys with Mervyn King on Today ; he challenged him on virtually none of his highly contentious Brexit points, with the general air of a fireside chat, and the respect afforded to some form of demi-god of the polis.

Charles said:

But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign

The UK could leave without the agreement of Ireland but would have to be prepared to weather the political fallout in the six counties. This British government isn't prepared to. It's got nothing to do with sovereignty.

The Republic could certainly make it easier but why would they given 800 years of English oppression and invasion?

kle4 said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1111543872818167808

Parliament having high involvement has not been a triumph but if it saw the thing pass it should be agreed. But how many beyond the signatories would back it from labour ranks? 5? 10?

They need 30+

This reminds me of Gordon Brown cutting the Prime Ministers pay just before he left office to spite Cameron, TMay should accept this to get a few more votes and leave it for the next PM to have to deliver on.

Pulpstar said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1111543872818167808

Govt should whip to support, it's the only way they're winning today

Still a loser I think. You'd lose more Conservatives who don't trust their fellow MPs.

https://twitter.com/pundamentalism/status/1111554479458013184?s=21

TheScreamingEagles said:

GIN1138 said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/theousherwood/status/1111541966578348033

This Parliament have banned Brexit Day they'll be trying to ban Christmas Day next!

For shits and giggles the government should announce we’re joining the Euro on the 29th of March 2020.

I remember when you pretended to be a eurosceptic...

CarlottaVance said:

And Macron has the support of French public opinion.....he could do with a popular policy;

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1111540928119037952

Macron can take responsibility for No Deal exit then. Very big of him.

He would at least get a Christmas card from the ERG. If not from the heads of states whose economies he has plunged into recession....

Scrapheap_as_was said:

kle4 said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1111543872818167808

Parliament having high involvement has not been a triumph but if it saw the thing pass it should be agreed. But how many beyond the signatories would back it from labour ranks? 5? 10?

They need 30+

This reminds me of Gordon Brown cutting the Prime Ministers pay just before he left office to spite Cameron, TMay should accept this to get a few more votes and leave it for the next PM to have to deliver on.

You mean Gordon Brown cut his own salary but did not boast about it for political pointscoring? Had Cameron not already pledged to cut it, and did it not also reduce Brown's pension? In any case, the incoming government could have trebled the PM's salary if Cameron felt that strongly about it.

When the WA fails today what is TMs plan B : resign?, revoke?, referendum? GE?, No Deal Exit? She must have thought through what her next step is, surely ?

GIN1138 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

GIN1138 said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/theousherwood/status/1111541966578348033

This Parliament have banned Brexit Day they'll be trying to ban Christmas Day next!

For shits and giggles the government should announce we’re joining the Euro on the 29th of March 2020.

I remember when you pretended to be a eurosceptic...

Being a Eurosceptic doesn't mean you're a Leaver.

NickPalmer said:

On another subject, Biden still well ahead of Sanders, O'Rourke in with a shot, everyone else trailing:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

Trump's ratings have improved a bit since Mueller, but still near -10.

It's the last Iowa poll that suggested the field (particularly if Biden does not run or flip flops around as per history) is much wider

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html

Tissue_Price said:

kinabalu said:

Morning all, genuine gold plated betting tip!

Paddy and Betfair Sportsbook have mispriced an Oct GE. They have it as a quite ridiculous 33/1. Other bookies are where it should be (the 10/1 range) and it is layable on the Exchange at 19s.

I can't do it unfortunately since I am banned by PP and Sportsbook but if anybody has accounts with either, there is just the one thing to say - FILL YOUR BOOTS!

:-)

Good tip. September at the same price is surely also value.

The main difference between Powers and Ladbrokes is that Powers favour a May election (6/4 vs 5/1) whereas Ladbrokes think October is 8/1 not 33/1). Other months are more-or-less in line (even if 100 per cent out in a probably illiquid market). Both have next year a shade of odds-on.

NickPalmer said:

On another subject, Biden still well ahead of Sanders, O'Rourke in with a shot, everyone else trailing:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

Trump's ratings have improved a bit since Mueller, but still near -10.

And this polling suggests that Biden has a decent chance of winning the nomination, should he decide to go for it:
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/436358-poll-84-of-dems-do-not-think-race-or-gender-are-important-factors-in

It's been suggested that he's waiting until after the end of the month before announcing, as he want to avoid direct comparison of fundraising figures - declared candidates will have to make filings on the 31st, and Sanders and O'Rourke will be well ahead of the rest.

NickPalmer said:

HYUFD said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1111543872818167808

If that motion passes and I expect May would not be too concerned about it that could well see the Withdrawal Agreement over the line today as ERG opposition to it collapses and it gets more Labour MPs switching to back it even if the DUP remain opposed

I may be wrong but my sense is that May's anticipated resignation has led to a certain fatalism about today's vote - I can't see many Labour MPs joining in this. But it may well be quite close.

I think some will vote to get the WA over the line today then for permanent Customs Union as the future relationship in the PD to get over the line on Monday

Looks like Ali Campbell's starting to get worried on twitter..

TheWhiteRabbit said:

NickPalmer said:

On another subject, Biden still well ahead of Sanders, O'Rourke in with a shot, everyone else trailing:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

Trump's ratings have improved a bit since Mueller, but still near -10.

It's the last Iowa poll that suggested the field (particularly if Biden does not run or flip flops around as per history) is much wider

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html

Biden on 26% in Iowa and Sanders on 24.5% neck and neck there, everyone else trailing. Harris a distant third on 9%

Dura_Ace said:

Charles said:

But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign

The UK could leave without the agreement of Ireland but would have to be prepared to weather the political fallout in the six counties. This British government isn't prepared to. It's got nothing to do with sovereignty.

The Republic could certainly make it easier but why would they given 800 years of English oppression and invasion?

The point is despite independence the economic relationship between Eire and the UK has remained extraordinarily close - the obvious parallel is Australia and New Zealand. The Republic joined with us in 1973. Had Ireland voted to leave the EU with us it would have been so much easier but they didn't and for the first time the two countries are going down different economic routes.

It would actually be real independence for Ireland after all this time - okay, they would be tied to Brussels but they wouldn't be tied to London.

HYUFD said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

NickPalmer said:

On another subject, Biden still well ahead of Sanders, O'Rourke in with a shot, everyone else trailing:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

Trump's ratings have improved a bit since Mueller, but still near -10.

It's the last Iowa poll that suggested the field (particularly if Biden does not run or flip flops around as per history) is much wider

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html

TheWhiteRabbit said:

NickPalmer said:

On another subject, Biden still well ahead of Sanders, O'Rourke in with a shot, everyone else trailing:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

Trump's ratings have improved a bit since Mueller, but still near -10.

It's the last Iowa poll that suggested the field (particularly if Biden does not run or flip flops around as per history) is much wider

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html

Biden on 26% in Iowa and Sanders on 24.5% neck and neck there, everyone else trailing

Plenty of time and no debates yet. Biden is gaffe prone and the electorate is getting ever more lefty.

I highly recommend the Five thirty-eight politics podcast, they recently did a live taped show shoot the 2020 field.

Dura_Ace said:

Charles said:

But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign

The UK could leave without the agreement of Ireland but would have to be prepared to weather the political fallout in the six counties. This British government isn't prepared to. It's got nothing to do with sovereignty.

The Republic could certainly make it easier but why would they given 800 years of English oppression and invasion?

That people don't understand this transparently simple point remains a wonder.

kinabalu said:

Tissue_Price said:

Good tip. September at the same price is surely also value.

Yes, I would say so. But Oct IMO a touch better since it is a more 'electiony' month than Sept in this country. There has never been a GE in Sept.

Disappointing PS: The 33 has now been cut to 25.

A September election would presumably mean the campaign runs through August, our peak summer holiday season. That might be why there has never been one,

WhisperingOracle said:

Theuniondivvie said:

'Okay lads, we're scraping the bottom of the barrel of tired, old repeated memes; the EU has blinked is exhausted, the Paddies are shitting themselves is done, DEPLOY THE ROYAL YACHT!'

https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/1111530933092380673

Reminding me of Theresa May's long-ingrained concept of "uniting the country", which is curiously similar to uniting the Tory party.

Along with rationing, no doubt.

stodge said:

Dura_Ace said:

Charles said:

But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign

The UK could leave without the agreement of Ireland but would have to be prepared to weather the political fallout in the six counties. This British government isn't prepared to. It's got nothing to do with sovereignty.

The Republic could certainly make it easier but why would they given 800 years of English oppression and invasion?

The point is despite independence the economic relationship between Eire and the UK has remained extraordinarily close - the obvious parallel is Australia and New Zealand. The Republic joined with us in 1973. Had Ireland voted to leave the EU with us it would have been so much easier but they didn't and for the first time the two countries are going down different economic routes.

It would actually be real independence for Ireland after all this time - okay, they would be tied to Brussels but they wouldn't be tied to London.

"For the first time the two countries are going down different economic routes"

That's very wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Irish_Trade_War

HYUFD said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

NickPalmer said:

On another subject, Biden still well ahead of Sanders, O'Rourke in with a shot, everyone else trailing:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

Trump's ratings have improved a bit since Mueller, but still near -10.

It's the last Iowa poll that suggested the field (particularly if Biden does not run or flip flops around as per history) is much wider

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html

Biden on 26% in Iowa and Sanders on 24.5% neck and neck there, everyone else trailing. Harris a distant third on 9%

John Edwards was polling around 24% in Iowa as late as November 2007, so I'm not convinced current polling tells us a great deal beyond name recognition.

Speaker not allowing amendments

Cox on his feet

Charles said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Charles said:

Fundamentally nothing has changed in months

Once Ireland and the EU insisted on the backstop then the path was set

Either that is acceptable to the UK parliament or it isn’t

If it isn’t then it’s no deal or revoke

But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign

Of course we can Leave.

The difference is that Vote Leave said we could leave cost free without any disruption, ‘we hold all the cards’ etc and that’s untrue.

PS - The universe loves irony. I mean for how long did we take Ireland’s sovereignty?

Not if we revoke - we are acknowledging that we need the backstop to leave

No, we are acknowledging we don't like leaving with the backstop in place.

Charles said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Charles said:

Fundamentally nothing has changed in months

Once Ireland and the EU insisted on the backstop then the path was set

Either that is acceptable to the UK parliament or it isn’t

If it isn’t then it’s no deal or revoke

But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign

Of course we can Leave.

The difference is that Vote Leave said we could leave cost free without any disruption, ‘we hold all the cards’ etc and that’s untrue.

PS - The universe loves irony. I mean for how long did we take Ireland’s sovereignty?

Not if we revoke - we are acknowledging that we need the backstop to leave

Did you support the Anglo-Irish Agreement and the Good Friday Agreement at the time?

DecrepitJohnL said:

Charles said:

Fundamentally nothing has changed in months

Once Ireland and the EU insisted on the backstop then the path was set

Either that is acceptable to the UK parliament or it isn’t

If it isn’t then it’s no deal or revoke

But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign

Is the backstop just the dichotomy you suggest or do different parties have different objections to the backstop? The DUP's principal objection is to a border down the Irish Sea, the GFA says no new border along the border, and the ERG objects mainly to becoming trapped as a vassal state. If so then one could imagine it might be possible to reassure some hold-outs but not others.

Sure and I think you give the people of NI a choice between reunification and limited checks on good entering the Uk

Presumably posted yesterday but v interesting:

"According to a ConservativeHome survey, 60% of Tory party members now think MPs should back Theresa May’s deal. As ConservativeHome’s Paul Goodman explains, that is quite a turnaround. Previously the membership was strongly opposed.

The month before last, 19 per cent of Party member respondents to our survey said that the agreement was acceptable to them. Last month, the total saying that MPs should vote for it touched 40 per cent. This month, it has reached 60 per cent.

That’s the first time the deal has obtained the backing of a majority of replies in any form. Three in five is a clear-cut margin – although over one in three party members remain opposed, if our survey is anything to go by."

SouthamObserver said:

kjohnw said:

When the WA fails today what is TMs plan B : resign?, revoke?, referendum? GE?, No Deal Exit? She must have thought through what her next step is, surely ?

The Nandy amendment looks like it could deliver a fair few Labour votes if the government accepts it. I do think it is rather sweet that any Labour MP would trust the government to deliver on it in any meaningful way, though.

Speaker rejects

Cox confirms the government had an alternative plan to bring IV2 forward to this morning and follow with a motion this afternoon. But chose to charge the cannons instead.

AlastairMeeks said:

Boris decides to accept the Carthaginian peace:

https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1111564131071676416

Guardian reckons 30 Tory switchers which implies a negative majority of c.80 which feels right to me

TheWhiteRabbit said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Boris decides to accept the Carthaginian peace:

https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1111564131071676416

Guardian reckons 30 Tory switchers which implies a negative majority of c.80 which feels right to me

Yes that doesn't sound far away. Perhaps a little on the high side for the number of switchers.

SouthamObserver said:

kjohnw said:

When the WA fails today what is TMs plan B : resign?, revoke?, referendum? GE?, No Deal Exit? She must have thought through what her next step is, surely ?

The Nandy amendment looks like it could deliver a fair few Labour votes if the government accepts it. I do think it is rather sweet that any Labour MP would trust the government to deliver on it in any meaningful way, though.

Can they accept an amendment that the speaker didn't select?

Stereotomy said:

SouthamObserver said:

kjohnw said:

When the WA fails today what is TMs plan B : resign?, revoke?, referendum? GE?, No Deal Exit? She must have thought through what her next step is, surely ?

The Nandy amendment looks like it could deliver a fair few Labour votes if the government accepts it. I do think it is rather sweet that any Labour MP would trust the government to deliver on it in any meaningful way, though.

Can they accept an amendment that the speaker didn't select?

I missed that bit!

Alistair said:

Charles said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Charles said:

Fundamentally nothing has changed in months

Once Ireland and the EU insisted on the backstop then the path was set

Either that is acceptable to the UK parliament or it isn’t

If it isn’t then it’s no deal or revoke

But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign

Of course we can Leave.

The difference is that Vote Leave said we could leave cost free without any disruption, ‘we hold all the cards’ etc and that’s untrue.

PS - The universe loves irony. I mean for how long did we take Ireland’s sovereignty?

Not if we revoke - we are acknowledging that we need the backstop to leave

No, we are acknowledging we don't like leaving with the backstop in place.

But if we are not willing to leave with the backstop and the backstop is the only way to leave then our sovereignty is diminished

williamglenn said:

Charles said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Charles said:

Fundamentally nothing has changed in months

Once Ireland and the EU insisted on the backstop then the path was set

Either that is acceptable to the UK parliament or it isn’t

If it isn’t then it’s no deal or revoke

But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign

Of course we can Leave.

The difference is that Vote Leave said we could leave cost free without any disruption, ‘we hold all the cards’ etc and that’s untrue.

PS - The universe loves irony. I mean for how long did we take Ireland’s sovereignty?

Not if we revoke - we are acknowledging that we need the backstop to leave

Did you support the Anglo-Irish Agreement and the Good Friday Agreement at the time?

I was too young in 86 to have a view but yes to the GFA. I would have also supported Sunnyngdale

SouthamObserver said:

Charles said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Charles said:

Fundamentally nothing has changed in months

Once Ireland and the EU insisted on the backstop then the path was set

Either that is acceptable to the UK parliament or it isn’t

If it isn’t then it’s no deal or revoke

But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign

Of course we can Leave.

The difference is that Vote Leave said we could leave cost free without any disruption, ‘we hold all the cards’ etc and that’s untrue.

PS - The universe loves irony. I mean for how long did we take Ireland’s sovereignty?

Not if we revoke - we are acknowledging that we need the backstop to leave

That makes no sense whatsoever. We don't need the backstop to leave. We need the backstop to leave with a deal. We can choose to leave without a deal if we accept the damaging political and economic consequences that will deliver.

The point is if parliament says we are not willing to under any circumstances then de facto we can’t

Stark_Dawning said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Boris decides to accept the Carthaginian peace:

https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1111564131071676416

If only he hadn't poured opprobrium on Theresa's deal in the first place and then flounced off in DD's wake. Had he stayed in the government to fight the case - maybe, just maybe, he would have won round enough of the ultras. Too late now surely.

Much of the pain of voting for this deal is going to come from the ridicule he receives:

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1111565337848352768

"Labour’s Ian Lucas asks Cox to admit that this motion does not comply with section 13 of the EU Withdrawal Act, which says that for the withdrawal agreement to be ratified, MPs must pass a resolution backing the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration.

Cox says the motion is not intended to be a resolution of the required under section 13 of the act."

I see the gov't is taking a different approach to the one I suggested, but with much the same effect.

Charles said:

williamglenn said:

Charles said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Charles said:

Fundamentally nothing has changed in months

Once Ireland and the EU insisted on the backstop then the path was set

Either that is acceptable to the UK parliament or it isn’t

If it isn’t then it’s no deal or revoke

But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign

Of course we can Leave.

The difference is that Vote Leave said we could leave cost free without any disruption, ‘we hold all the cards’ etc and that’s untrue.

PS - The universe loves irony. I mean for how long did we take Ireland’s sovereignty?

Not if we revoke - we are acknowledging that we need the backstop to leave

Did you support the Anglo-Irish Agreement and the Good Friday Agreement at the time?

I was too young in 86 to have a view but yes to the GFA. I would have also supported Sunnyngdale

Given that they involve giving Ireland a role in the governance of Northern Ireland, haven't you already conceded the principle that our sovereignty is partially constrained?

TheWhiteRabbit said:

"Labour’s Ian Lucas asks Cox to admit that this motion does not comply with section 13 of the EU Withdrawal Act, which says that for the withdrawal agreement to be ratified, MPs must pass a resolution backing the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration.

Cox says the motion is not intended to be a resolution of the required under section 13 of the act."

I see the gov't is taking a different approach to the one I suggested, but with much the same effect.

He tapdanced on Benn's question repeated from yesterday about further extensions, but implied we could apply for a further one. Grieve picking up the related point that if the motion is agreed but WAIB runs into trouble we could be in difficulty.

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Benpointer said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Stereotomy said:

SouthamObserver said:

kjohnw said:

When the WA fails today what is TMs plan B : resign?, revoke?, referendum? GE?, No Deal Exit? She must have thought through what her next step is, surely ?

The Nandy amendment looks like it could deliver a fair few Labour votes if the government accepts it. I do think it is rather sweet that any Labour MP would trust the government to deliver on it in any meaningful way, though.

Can they accept an amendment that the speaker didn't select?

They could I think put a new motion to the House.

I think though that the government intends to cut the majority to -80 today and then engage with (they hope) 25 or so more Lab switchers.

I thought they had to get the WA approved today at the latest?

To get the May 22 extension as currently agreed, yes.

But does anyone really think this will pass today?

Probably not but it should

Will May be winding up?

AlastairMeeks said:

Looking on twitter, it seems fair to say that Boris Johnson's decision seems to have satisfied almost no one, Leaver or Remainer.

His career has been a steady downward trajectory since referendum day. As to be fair the look on his face the day after did appear to foresee

TGOHF said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Stark_Dawning said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Boris decides to accept the Carthaginian peace:

https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1111564131071676416

If only he hadn't poured opprobrium on Theresa's deal in the first place and then flounced off in DD's wake. Had he stayed in the government to fight the case - maybe, just maybe, he would have won round enough of the ultras. Too late now surely.

Much of the pain of voting for this deal is going to come from the ridicule he receives:

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1111565337848352768

Remainers seem obsessed with Boris - he simply isn't going to be leader - he's finished and not worth the attention some place on him.

While I agree with your last clause, I sincerely hope your second and third are right.

Trouble is it's not that Remainers are obsessed with Boris, some (?much) of the Press is and of course he is, too!

AlastairMeeks said:

Stark_Dawning said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Boris decides to accept the Carthaginian peace:

https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1111564131071676416

If only he hadn't poured opprobrium on Theresa's deal in the first place and then flounced off in DD's wake. Had he stayed in the government to fight the case - maybe, just maybe, he would have won round enough of the ultras. Too late now surely.

Much of the pain of voting for this deal is going to come from the ridicule he receives:

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1111565337848352768

The fact that many Tories still believe Boris is leadership material is truly extraordinary. Against him even Corbyn is a paragon of virtue and political honesty.

Cox just has told Snell the government would have accepted their amendment if the Speaker had not rejected it

TGOHF said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Stark_Dawning said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Boris decides to accept the Carthaginian peace:

https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1111564131071676416

If only he hadn't poured opprobrium on Theresa's deal in the first place and then flounced off in DD's wake. Had he stayed in the government to fight the case - maybe, just maybe, he would have won round enough of the ultras. Too late now surely.

Much of the pain of voting for this deal is going to come from the ridicule he receives:

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1111565337848352768

Remainers seem obsessed with Boris - he simply isn't going to be leader - he's finished and not worth the attention some place on him.

He's second favourite in the betting. I've been laying him bigtime so I agree with you, but others clearly disagree.

Charles said:

TOPPING said:

Dura_Ace said:

Charles said:

But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign

The UK could leave without the agreement of Ireland but would have to be prepared to weather the political fallout in the six counties. This British government isn't prepared to. It's got nothing to do with sovereignty.

The Republic could certainly make it easier but why would they given 800 years of English oppression and invasion?

That people don't understand this transparently simple point remains a wonder.

Not quite - the EU has said the GFA remains in force in all scenarios

Yes I saw that. They, as does the UK government, want to adhere to the GFA. I'm not sure that changes anything unless you think he was accepting an open no-check EU border there.