politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Very shortly the credibility of so many Tory leavers could be
Comments
-
It's a motion to revoke if we look to be heading out with no deal. The interesting bit is it is pushing the laughable'revoke and maybe we will reinvoke option'. Clause 4 looks extremely woolly.Pulpstar said:How are MPs meant to vote on G) ? parliament can't vote two options against each other in one vote.
That -(1) If, at midday on the second last Day before exit day, the condition specified in section 13(1)(d) of the Act (the passing of legislation approving a withdrawal agreement) is not satisfied, Her Majesty’s Government must immediately seek the agreement of the European Council under Article 50(3) of the Treaty to extend the date upon which the Treaties shall cease to apply to the United Kingdom;
(2) If, at midday on the last Day before exit day, no agreement has been reached (pursuant to (1) above) to extend the date upon which the Treaties shall cease to apply to the United Kingdom, Her Majesty’s Government must immediately put a motion to the House of Commons asking it to approve ‘No Deal’;
(3) If the House does not approve the motion at (2) above, Her Majesty’s Government must immediately ensure that the notice given to the European Council under Article 50 of the United Kingdom’s intention to withdraw from the European Union is revoked in accordance with United Kingdom and European law;
(4) If the United Kingdom’s notice under Article 50 is revoked pursuant to (3) above a Minister of Her Majesty’s Government shall cause an inquiry to be held under the Inquiries Act 2005 into the question whether a model of a future relationship with the European Union likely to be acceptable to the European Union is likely to have majority support in the United Kingdom;
(5) If there is a referendum it shall be held on the question whether to trigger Article 50 and renegotiate that model;
(6) The Inquiry under paragraph (4) shall start within three months of the revocation; and
(7) References in this Motion to “Days” are to House of Commons sitting days; references to “exit day” are references to exit day as defined in the Act; references to the Act are to The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018; and references to the Treaty are to the Treaty on European Union0 -
Part of the Letwin planRichard_Tyndall said:
notwithstanding the practice of the House, any motion on matters that have been the subject of a prior decision of the House in the current Session may be the subject of a decision
If there was a majority for the deal it seems the gov could always have gotten round Bercow if they had to, but there isn't. Given the Letwin motion is explicit in allowing past rejected decisions to be reconsidered it'd be a bit weird if the House did not direct the speaker to allow the MV again, if they want.0 -
It looks like we will end up with two narrow parties at each extreme and FPTP causing carnage among the innocent moderates in between.AmpfieldAndy said:GIN1138 said:
Never thought much of Gauke since was Osborne’s Chief Sec to the Treasury and ordinarily wouldn’t be sorry to see him sacked because he is as hopeless as Grayling but in fairness to him he has been very loyal to May.
As a Leaver, I still prefer broad church political parties to narrow single issue ones.0 -
-
The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?0 -
To me nothing beats Hamish as being a Scottish name.Theuniondivvie said:
My own first name is the Gaelic version of John, fairly common, but a few others for your delectation:viewcode said:
I know how to pronounce that. And Taliaferro. And St. James. And Siobhan. And Taoiseach. And Tanaiste. But "Mhari" defeats me.Theuniondivvie said:
It's revenge for Featherstonaugh.viewcode said:
So it's either pronounced "Varry" or "Marry", and one doesn't know which it is until one asks. Aaargh...Theuniondivvie said:
In theory the 'Mh' should always be 'V' in Gaelic, though a lot of Mhairis seem to go for Marree.viewcode said:
How does one pronounce "Mhairi"?Theuniondivvie said:I hope you'll all be as moved as I was.
https://twitter.com/MhairiMcF/status/1112389540533227520
Tormod
Uisdean
Eachann
Friseal
Teàrlach
and of course the biggy
Dòmhnall0 -
F1: post-race ramble:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2019/03/bahrain-post-race-analysis-2019.html0 -
Sunil_Prasannan said:
0 -
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/0 -
I understood it was stage 2 of the same indicative processRichard_Tyndall said:0 -
Súníl ò'PràsànnànTheuniondivvie said:
My own first name is the Gaelic version of John, fairly common, but a few others for your delectation:viewcode said:
I know how to pronounce that. And Taliaferro. And St. James. And Siobhan. And Taoiseach. And Tanaiste. But "Mhari" defeats me.Theuniondivvie said:
It's revenge for Featherstonaugh.viewcode said:
So it's either pronounced "Varry" or "Marry", and one doesn't know which it is until one asks. Aaargh...Theuniondivvie said:
In theory the 'Mh' should always be 'V' in Gaelic, though a lot of Mhairis seem to go for Marree.viewcode said:
How does one pronounce "Mhairi"?Theuniondivvie said:I hope you'll all be as moved as I was.
https://twitter.com/MhairiMcF/status/1112389540533227520
Tormod
Uisdean
Eachann
Friseal
Teàrlach
and of course the biggy
Dòmhnall0 -
Not an expert, but I think the h added after the initial consonant in Gaelic puts the word into the vocative case. Mairi is the nominative but when you address her or do something to her she becomes Mhairi (pronounced "Vahri")viewcode said:
So it's either pronounced "Varry" or "Marry", and one doesn't know which it is until one asks. Aaargh...Theuniondivvie said:
In theory the 'Mh' should always be 'V' in Gaelic, though a lot of Mhairis seem to go for Marree.viewcode said:
How does one pronounce "Mhairi"?Theuniondivvie said:I hope you'll all be as moved as I was.
https://twitter.com/MhairiMcF/status/11123895405332275200 -
-
Schengen and the Euro?williamglenn said:0 -
And whatever the final choice is they should be made to rank them or knock out the least popular etc. and not just vote them as individual propositions. I assume that is the general idea, although whether that is the specific idea for tomorrow, not sure.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?0 -
That could be one way to NO DEAL!!!!williamglenn said: 0 -
Theuniondivvie said:
In theory the 'Mh' should always be 'V' in Gaelic, though a lot of Mhairis seem to go for Marree.viewcode said:
How does one pronounce "Mhairi"?Theuniondivvie said:I hope you'll all be as moved as I was.
https://twitter.com/MhairiMcF/status/1112389540533227520
'Mh' is also meant to be 'V' in Irish.0 -
edit - double post
0 -
Doesn't seem to be given Wednesday is also to be used, so not sure what the first round even accomplished. Multi stage is fine, but it could be knocked out in a day.solarflare said:
And whatever the final choice is they should be made to rank them or knock out the least popular etc. and not just vote them as individual propositions. I assume that is the general idea, although whether that is the specific idea for tomorrow, not sure.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?0 -
what is the point then , we are just as well staying as we are and having some influence rather than paying all the fees and being told what to do , what our laws are , etc.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?0 -
Yeah, this is why a true Norway option is superior. Cut Northern Ireland off at the knees.malcolmg said:
what is the point then , we are just as well staying as we are and having some influence rather than paying all the fees and being told what to do , what our laws are , etc.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?0 -
Letwin I believe wants to shift from FPTP last week to AV or STV next week to ensure a majority for 1 of the options which Bercow chooses. May then intends to put her Deal up against whichever option wins the indicative votes in a final Brexit runoff amongst MPsMarqueeMark said:
We had 8 options voted on the other day. Wasn't that supposed to have greatly narrowed the field?Scott_P said:
This is the Legislature taking the piss.....on the road to No Deal.
0 -
Customs Union with North Korea. Single Market with Somalia. Free Travel Area with Syria. Currency Union with Venezuela and Zimbabwe.williamglenn said:
0 -
Remember that next time you try for independence Malc.malcolmg said:
what is the point then , we are just as well staying as we are and having some influence rather than paying all the fees and being told what to do , what our laws are , etc.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?0 -
Sounds like Williams wet dreamkyf_100 said:
Schengen and the Euro?williamglenn said:0 -
They should use AV, which is clearly what Letwin wants, but he is of course dealing with a load of dinosaurs used to 18th century procedure.kle4 said:
Doesn't seem to be given Wednesday is also to be used, so not sure what the first round even accomplished. Multi stage is fine, but it could be knocked out in a day.solarflare said:
And whatever the final choice is they should be made to rank them or knock out the least popular etc. and not just vote them as individual propositions. I assume that is the general idea, although whether that is the specific idea for tomorrow, not sure.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
As I understood it tomorrow was to identify a preferred option and Wednesday, maybe, was to choose between it and May's deal and decide how to proceed.
The useless load of motions tabled by MPs don't fill me with great hope that someone is in command of this process. Yet I thought the same last Wednesday, but Bercow did a great job cutting out all the pointless options and wrecking amendments. I can only hope he'll do the same tomorrow.0 -
Schengen with Africa.algarkirk said:
Customs Union with North Korea. Single Market with Somalia. Free Travel Area with Syria. Currency Union with Venezuela and Zimbabwe.williamglenn said:0 -
-
Leave, but join the Euro. And Scotland continues paying our membership fees out of the N Sea oil revenue we don't let them have.algarkirk said:
Customs Union with North Korea. Single Market with Somalia. Free Travel Area with Syria. Currency Union with Venezuela and Zimbabwe.williamglenn said:0 -
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?0 -
Lots to get through tomorrow. How long will be allocated to the Great Petition Debate?IanB2 said:
They should use AV, which is clearly what Letwin wants, but he is of course dealing with a load of dinosaurs used to 18th century procedure.kle4 said:
Doesn't seem to be given Wednesday is also to be used, so not sure what the first round even accomplished. Multi stage is fine, but it could be knocked out in a day.solarflare said:
And whatever the final choice is they should be made to rank them or knock out the least popular etc. and not just vote them as individual propositions. I assume that is the general idea, although whether that is the specific idea for tomorrow, not sure.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
As I understood it tomorrow was to identify a preferred option and Wednesday, maybe, was to choose between it and May's deal and decide how to proceed.
The useless load of motions tabled by MPs don't fill me with great hope that someone is in command of this process. Yet I thought the same last Wednesday, but Bercow did a great job cutting out all the pointless options and wrecking amendments. I can only hope he'll do the same tomorrow.0 -
Why are we only leaving a small part of France?Sunil_Prasannan said:0 -
Edit: and which MP will put his/er head above the parapet and speak in favour of Revoke?Ishmael_Z said:
Lots to get through tomorrow. How long will be allocated to the Great Petition Debate?IanB2 said:
They should use AV, which is clearly what Letwin wants, but he is of course dealing with a load of dinosaurs used to 18th century procedure.kle4 said:
Doesn't seem to be given Wednesday is also to be used, so not sure what the first round even accomplished. Multi stage is fine, but it could be knocked out in a day.solarflare said:
And whatever the final choice is they should be made to rank them or knock out the least popular etc. and not just vote them as individual propositions. I assume that is the general idea, although whether that is the specific idea for tomorrow, not sure.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
As I understood it tomorrow was to identify a preferred option and Wednesday, maybe, was to choose between it and May's deal and decide how to proceed.
The useless load of motions tabled by MPs don't fill me with great hope that someone is in command of this process. Yet I thought the same last Wednesday, but Bercow did a great job cutting out all the pointless options and wrecking amendments. I can only hope he'll do the same tomorrow.0 -
re Newport West, a Guardian reporter filed this on the by-election.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/31/newport-west-byelection-voters-look-away-from-main-parties-for-renewal?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Apologies if others posted a link earlier.0 -
Surprised Boles is still taking the Tory Whip after resigning from Grantham. Doubt Smith will worry to much about what Boles thinks and for once Smith would be right.williamglenn said:0 -
They should grow a pair then and just leave, they are bigger fearties than Scotland , seems whole of UK is spineless Full of wind and piss and scared to do it for themselves.Floater said:
Remember that next time you try for independence Malc.malcolmg said:
what is the point then , we are just as well staying as we are and having some influence rather than paying all the fees and being told what to do , what our laws are , etc.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?0 -
Never a truer word said in jest.Endillion said:
Leave, but join the Euro. And Scotland continues paying our membership fees out of the N Sea oil revenue we don't let them have.algarkirk said:
Customs Union with North Korea. Single Market with Somalia. Free Travel Area with Syria. Currency Union with Venezuela and Zimbabwe.williamglenn said:0 -
Leicester were the best team in the league that year. Liverpool certainly are not the best team in the league this year. City are far superior. But, football can be a capricious mistress.Foxy said:
Leicester were the best team of the year, and we have trophy to prove itkle4 said:
A Tory and Liverpool fan - a nervous time for you.TheScreamingEagles said:Thank you Hugo Lloris.
Being a Liverpool fan is going to kill me.
I'm just hoping Liverpool are the Leicester of this year - clearly not the best team in the league, but squeak over the line nevertheless.
Some of them do notsolarflare said:The problem is the indicative votes process - which I support - needs to reach a result reasonably quickly to be credible. Dragging the process out is exactly the faint lifeline May needs to keep hanging on by her fingertips. The HoC coalescing around something quickly is important, not least because of the time pressures.
Also some of these options are a bit...weird. I hope they make more sense on the order paper than in a tweet.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190401.pdf
I'm irritated it is not even the plan to definitively settle it tomorrow. Given they had a first go last week, why couldn't they say that no matter what tomorrow they whittle them down to the final option? It adds to the question of what last week was even about.
I really don't see why Bercow would call some of them again though, if they receive so few votes last time
Looks like we may well spoil Wolves party. Shame0 -
The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.0
-
Well in 7 games time, we will see._Anazina_ said:
Leicester were the best team in the league that year. Liverpool certainly are not the best team in the league this year. City are far superior. But, football can be a capricious mistress.Foxy said:
Leicester were the best team of the year, and we have trophy to prove itkle4 said:
A Tory and Liverpool fan - a nervous time for you.TheScreamingEagles said:Thank you Hugo Lloris.
Being a Liverpool fan is going to kill me.
I'm just hoping Liverpool are the Leicester of this year - clearly not the best team in the league, but squeak over the line nevertheless.
Some of them do notsolarflare said:The problem is the indicative votes process - which I support - needs to reach a result reasonably quickly to be credible. Dragging the process out is exactly the faint lifeline May needs to keep hanging on by her fingertips. The HoC coalescing around something quickly is important, not least because of the time pressures.
Also some of these options are a bit...weird. I hope they make more sense on the order paper than in a tweet.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190401.pdf
I'm irritated it is not even the plan to definitively settle it tomorrow. Given they had a first go last week, why couldn't they say that no matter what tomorrow they whittle them down to the final option? It adds to the question of what last week was even about.
I really don't see why Bercow would call some of them again though, if they receive so few votes last time
Looks like we may well spoil Wolves party. Shame
After our new form under Rogers, that last game of the season for Man City at home may not be the walkover that was expected.0 -
Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?_Anazina_ said:The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.
0 -
No deal ain’t happening.geoffw said:Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.0 -
Maybe. But United have to set about becoming the primary team in Manchester again. That requires City to start losing the title....._Anazina_ said:The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.
0 -
Plus United fans do not want the treble equalled/superseded.tlg86 said:
Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?_Anazina_ said:The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.
0 -
They do. But still. I reckon most Utd fans would trade a CL place for Liverpool not winning the title!tlg86 said:
Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?_Anazina_ said:The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.
0 -
Deal plus Customs Union leads with Deltapoll today 36% for 29% against, as opposed to 45% opposed to No Deal 38% for, 37% opposed to EEA/EFTA 28% for and 36% opposed to the Malthouse compromise and 23% for.Richard_Tyndall said:
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
Revoke only leads 41% to 41% and EUref2 only leads 40% to 38% and Common Market 2.0 only leads 40% to 35% so all have lower leads than Deal plus Customs Union.
Even Tory voters support Deal plus CU 42% to 27%, albeit more support No Deal
http://www.deltapoll.co.uk/polls/brexit-conservatives
0 -
I disagree. I think Spurs were the best side in 2015-16, they just didn't realise it until it was too late. In August 2015 they were happy to play out a 0-0 draw at home to Everton, for example._Anazina_ said:
Leicester were the best team in the league that year. Liverpool certainly are not the best team in the league this year. City are far superior. But, football can be a capricious mistress.Foxy said:
Leicester were the best team of the year, and we have trophy to prove itkle4 said:
A Tory and Liverpool fan - a nervous time for you.TheScreamingEagles said:Thank you Hugo Lloris.
Being a Liverpool fan is going to kill me.
I'm just hoping Liverpool are the Leicester of this year - clearly not the best team in the league, but squeak over the line nevertheless.
Some of them do notsolarflare said:The problem is the indicative votes process - which I support - needs to reach a result reasonably quickly to be credible. Dragging the process out is exactly the faint lifeline May needs to keep hanging on by her fingertips. The HoC coalescing around something quickly is important, not least because of the time pressures.
Also some of these options are a bit...weird. I hope they make more sense on the order paper than in a tweet.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190401.pdf
I'm irritated it is not even the plan to definitively settle it tomorrow. Given they had a first go last week, why couldn't they say that no matter what tomorrow they whittle them down to the final option? It adds to the question of what last week was even about.
I really don't see why Bercow would call some of them again though, if they receive so few votes last time
Looks like we may well spoil Wolves party. Shame0 -
-
I don't think they know what they are voting for!Richard_Tyndall said:
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
Our non-EU trade is greater than our EU trade, too.
0 -
They won't roll over, they are still chasing a Champions League spot. They might well lose but that's a different matter._Anazina_ said:The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.
0 -
A MP is paid £77k a year. They get further expenses to run an office and employ staff. They have a pension scheme and get their travel expenses paid and get help with accommodation costs.
They really should be doing better than this... 0 -
I would love to agree, as my son supports them, and I support Forest. But they simply lacked the killer instinct. Leicester ground out wins very often by being unplayable on the counter attack, and were the better team overall.tlg86 said:
I disagree. I think Spurs were the best side in 2015-16, they just didn't realise it until it was too late. In August 2015 they were happy to play out a 0-0 draw at home to Everton, for example._Anazina_ said:
Leicester were the best team in the league that year. Liverpool certainly are not the best team in the league this year. City are far superior. But, football can be a capricious mistress.Foxy said:
Leicester were the best team of the year, and we have trophy to prove itkle4 said:
A Tory and Liverpool fan - a nervous time for you.TheScreamingEagles said:Thank you Hugo Lloris.
Being a Liverpool fan is going to kill me.
I'm just hoping Liverpool are the Leicester of this year - clearly not the best team in the league, but squeak over the line nevertheless.
Some of them do notsolarflare said:The problem is the indicative votes process - which I support - needs to reach a result reasonably quickly to be credible. Dragging the process out is exactly the faint lifeline May needs to keep hanging on by her fingertips. The HoC coalescing around something quickly is important, not least because of the time pressures.
Also some of these options are a bit...weird. I hope they make more sense on the order paper than in a tweet.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190401.pdf
I'm irritated it is not even the plan to definitively settle it tomorrow. Given they had a first go last week, why couldn't they say that no matter what tomorrow they whittle them down to the final option? It adds to the question of what last week was even about.
I really don't see why Bercow would call some of them again though, if they receive so few votes last time
Looks like we may well spoil Wolves party. Shame0 -
Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.Richard_Tyndall said:
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
Go Liam.0 -
Still think they’d trade that to avoid a Scouser title.TheScreamingEagles said:
Plus United fans do not want the treble equalled/superseded.tlg86 said:
Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?_Anazina_ said:The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.
0 -
The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there._Anazina_ said:
No deal ain’t happening.geoffw said:Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-477563770 -
Revoke figure should be 41% to 40%, amendedHYUFD said:
Deal plus Customs Union leads with Deltapoll today 36% for 29% against, as opposed to 45% opposed to No Deal 38% for, 37% opposed to EEA/EFTA 28% for and 36% opposed to the Malthouse compromise and 23% for.Richard_Tyndall said:
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
Revoke only leads 41% to 40% and EUref2 only leads 40% to 38% and Common Market 2.0 only leads 40% to 35% so all have lower leads than Deal plus Customs Union.
Even Tory voters support Deal plus CU 42% to 27%, albeit more support No Deal
http://www.deltapoll.co.uk/polls/brexit-conservatives0 -
Goal difference can be taken as a proxy for how good teams are, but its not everything - by that measure England should have romped home in the 6 nations. The 10 odd points Leicester finished ahead of Spurs probably meant more than their superior GD._Anazina_ said:
I would love to agree, as my son supports them, and I support Forest. But they simply lacked the killer instinct. Leicester ground out wins very often by being unplayable on the counter attack, and were the better team overall.tlg86 said:
I disagree. I think Spurs were the best side in 2015-16, they just didn't realise it until it was too late. In August 2015 they were happy to play out a 0-0 draw at home to Everton, for example._Anazina_ said:
Leicester were the best team in the league that year. Liverpool certainly are not the best team in the league this year. City are far superior. But, football can be a capricious mistress.Foxy said:
Leicester were the best team of the year, and we have trophy to prove itkle4 said:
A Tory and Liverpool fan - a nervous time for you.TheScreamingEagles said:Thank you Hugo Lloris.
Being a Liverpool fan is going to kill me.
I'm just hoping Liverpool are the Leicester of this year - clearly not the best team in the league, but squeak over the line nevertheless.
Some of them do notsolarflare said:The problem is the indicative votes process - which I support - needs to reach a result reasonably quickly to be credible. Dragging the process out is exactly the faint lifeline May needs to keep hanging on by her fingertips. The HoC coalescing around something quickly is important, not least because of the time pressures.
Also some of these options are a bit...weird. I hope they make more sense on the order paper than in a tweet.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190401.pdf
I'm irritated it is not even the plan to definitively settle it tomorrow. Given they had a first go last week, why couldn't they say that no matter what tomorrow they whittle them down to the final option? It adds to the question of what last week was even about.
I really don't see why Bercow would call some of them again though, if they receive so few votes last time
Looks like we may well spoil Wolves party. Shame0 -
I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.Ishmael_Z said:
The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there._Anazina_ said:
No deal ain’t happening.geoffw said:Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-477563770 -
Wouldn't we all_Anazina_ said:
Still think they’d trade that to avoid a Scouser title.TheScreamingEagles said:
Plus United fans do not want the treble equalled/superseded.tlg86 said:
Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?_Anazina_ said:The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.
0 -
This is an interesting write-up from the campaign for the Newport West by-election:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/31/newport-west-byelection-voters-look-away-from-main-parties-for-renewal
How many saved deposits will there be?
It wouldn't surprise me if there were still only two saved.0 -
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:0 -
I am sure you are, but you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed for all the good it will do, unless we can tell the EU what we *do* want, sharpish.TOPPING said:
I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.Ishmael_Z said:
The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there._Anazina_ said:
No deal ain’t happening.geoffw said:Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-477563770 -
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:0 -
Ain’t happeningIshmael_Z said:
The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there._Anazina_ said:
No deal ain’t happening.geoffw said:Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-477563770 -
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:0 -
Don't say that. The MPs will add it as Option H...Ishmael_Z said:
...you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed...TOPPING said:
I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.Ishmael_Z said:
The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there._Anazina_ said:
No deal ain’t happening.geoffw said:Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377
0 -
Pulpstar said:
Wouldn't we all_Anazina_ said:
Still think they’d trade that to avoid a Scouser title.TheScreamingEagles said:
Plus United fans do not want the treble equalled/superseded.tlg86 said:
Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?_Anazina_ said:The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.
People say that, and I know what you mean (we’d never hear the end of it!). But City buying the league sticks in the craw and the pseudo-Scousers on here, who have no discernible connection with Merseyside, are clearly decent folk - Eagles, KLE40 -
Exactly right - well expressed sir.Pulpstar said:
Goal difference can be taken as a proxy for how good teams are, but its not everything - by that measure England should have romped home in the 6 nations. The 10 odd points Leicester finished ahead of Spurs probably meant more than their superior GD._Anazina_ said:
I would love to agree, as my son supports them, and I support Forest. But they simply lacked the killer instinct. Leicester ground out wins very often by being unplayable on the counter attack, and were the better team overall.tlg86 said:
I disagree. I think Spurs were the best side in 2015-16, they just didn't realise it until it was too late. In August 2015 they were happy to play out a 0-0 draw at home to Everton, for example._Anazina_ said:
Leicester were the best team in the league that year. Liverpool certainly are not the best team in the league this year. City are far superior. But, football can be a capricious mistress.Foxy said:
Leicester were the best team of the year, and we have trophy to prove itkle4 said:
A Tory and Liverpool fan - a nervous time for you.TheScreamingEagles said:Thank you Hugo Lloris.
Being a Liverpool fan is going to kill me.
I'm just hoping Liverpool are the Leicester of this year - clearly not the best team in the league, but squeak over the line nevertheless.
Some of them do notsolarflare said:The problem is the indicative votes process - which I support - needs to reach a result reasonably quickly to be credible. Dragging the process out is exactly the faint lifeline May needs to keep hanging on by her fingertips. The HoC coalescing around something quickly is important, not least because of the time pressures.
Also some tof these options are a bit...weird. I hope they make more sense on the order paper than in a tweet.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190401.pdf
I'm irritated it is not even the plan to definitively settle it tomorrow. Given they had a first go last week, why couldn't they say that no matter what tomorrow they whittle them down to the final option? It adds to the question of what last week was even about.
I really don't see why Bercow would call some of them again though, if they receive so few votes last time
Looks like we may well spoil Wolves party. Shame0 -
Bill Cash et al stood on a manifesto pledge to ratify the Maastricht Treaty.Mortimer said:
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:
They repeatedly ignored that manifesto commitment until John Major had to make it a confidence matter.
You are reaping what you sowed.0 -
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.Mortimer said:
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:0 -
Corbyn didn't get a majority either...TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:0 -
LOLviewcode said:
Don't say that. The MPs will add it as Option H...Ishmael_Z said:
...you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed...TOPPING said:
I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.Ishmael_Z said:
The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there._Anazina_ said:
No deal ain’t happening.geoffw said:Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377
I have heard that gravity is nothing but a marxist/bourgeois concept delete as applicable., and so should be defeated.
0 -
I was 5 in 1992...TheScreamingEagles said:
Bill Cash et al stood on a manifesto pledge to ratify the Maastricht Treaty.Mortimer said:
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:
They repeatedly ignored that manifesto commitment until John Major had to make it a confidence matter.
You are reaping what you sowed.
All Smith is doing is what Major did.
0 -
0
-
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action._Anazina_ said:
No deal ain’t happening.geoffw said:Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.0 -
Yet you moan about what the EC became in 1993.Mortimer said:
I was 5 in 1992...TheScreamingEagles said:
Bill Cash et al stood on a manifesto pledge to ratify the Maastricht Treaty.Mortimer said:
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:
They repeatedly ignored that manifesto commitment until John Major had to make it a confidence matter.
You are reaping what you sowed.0 -
Why would they in "a" customs union they have access to our market anyway. The only way this works is if we're in "the" customs unionTOPPING said:
Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.Richard_Tyndall said:
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
Go Liam.0 -
I was staring at the very apple tree only yesterday AAMOF.Ishmael_Z said:
I am sure you are, but you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed for all the good it will do, unless we can tell the EU what we *do* want, sharpish.TOPPING said:
I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.Ishmael_Z said:
The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there._Anazina_ said:
No deal ain’t happening.geoffw said:Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377-1 -
The one drawn up by a bunch of spotty schoolboy spods at Central Office that was rejected by the electorate? That one?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:0 -
Not a coalition. Lol.TOPPING said:
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.Mortimer said:
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:0 -
Bill Cash wasn't!Mortimer said:
I was 5 in 1992...TheScreamingEagles said:
Bill Cash et al stood on a manifesto pledge to ratify the Maastricht Treaty.Mortimer said:
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:
They repeatedly ignored that manifesto commitment until John Major had to make it a confidence matter.
You are reaping what you sowed.0 -
G may be designed to be informed by the numbers signing the petitions:Benpointer said:
Leave with No Deal <600,000 after ?5 months
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/229963
Revoke >6,000,000 after 2 weeks.0 -
Of course fox hunting and social care and May’s inability to say anything except “strong and stable” didn’t cost any votes did they ? Of course it was all Brexit, on which Labour also campaigned on a Leave ticket.TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:0 -
I was at school with a Marree, and worked with a VarreeTheuniondivvie said:In theory the 'Mh' should always be 'V' in Gaelic, though a lot of Mhairis seem to go for Marree.
0 -
Because it affects me today.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yet you moan about what the EC became in 1993.Mortimer said:
I was 5 in 1992...TheScreamingEagles said:
Bill Cash et al stood on a manifesto pledge to ratify the Maastricht Treaty.Mortimer said:
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:
They repeatedly ignored that manifesto commitment until John Major had to make it a confidence matter.
You are reaping what you sowed.
I’m pointing out that I didn’t sow anything. The fools who didn’t listen to Maggie about getting consent for Maastricht sowed everything.0 -
A real coalition of chaosMortimer said:
Not a coalition. Lol.TOPPING said:
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.Mortimer said:
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:0 -
Less destruction than NOT being in the/a customs union however. We can't compare with membership of the European Union. Every Brexit outcome represents a downgrade. Staying in the customs union means a smaller downgrade overall.Richard_Tyndall said:
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
Good explainer here: https://twitter.com/SamuelMarcLowe/status/1112292385705390081-1 -
Yes. This BRA needs to end._Anazina_ said:
No deal ain’t happening.geoffw said:Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.0 -
Bill Cash sowed the rebellions of today.Mortimer said:
Because it affects me today.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yet you moan about what the EC became in 1993.Mortimer said:
I was 5 in 1992...TheScreamingEagles said:
Bill Cash et al stood on a manifesto pledge to ratify the Maastricht Treaty.Mortimer said:
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:
They repeatedly ignored that manifesto commitment until John Major had to make it a confidence matter.
You are reaping what you sowed.
I’m pointing out that I didn’t sow anything. The fools who didn’t listen to Maggie about getting consent for Maastricht sowed everything.0 -
“..spotty schoolboy spod...” is a bit harsh - even of Nick Timothy._Anazina_ said:
The one drawn up by a bunch of spotty schoolboy spods at Central Office that was rejected by the electorate? That one?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:0 -
It is asymmetric if it is "a" customs union. Unless we have the accompanying FTAs. Otherwise we have to let goods in tariff free but our goods are subject to tariffs.MaxPB said:
Why would they in "a" customs union they have access to our market anyway. The only way this works is if we're in "the" customs unionTOPPING said:
Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.Richard_Tyndall said:
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.IanB2 said:The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
Go Liam.0 -
kle4 said:
LOLviewcode said:
Don't say that. The MPs will add it as Option H...Ishmael_Z said:
...you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed...TOPPING said:
I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.Ishmael_Z said:
The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there._Anazina_ said:
No deal ain’t happening.geoffw said:Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377
I have heard that gravity is nothing but a marxist/bourgeois concept delete as applicable., and so should be defeated. 0 -
No need. The current MPs already lack gravity.viewcode said:
Don't say that. The MPs will add it as Option H...Ishmael_Z said:
...you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed...TOPPING said:
I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.Ishmael_Z said:
The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there._Anazina_ said:
No deal ain’t happening.geoffw said:Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-477563770 -
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.Mortimer said:
Not a coalition. Lol.TOPPING said:
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.Mortimer said:
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.TheScreamingEagles said:
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?Mortimer said:
Did he read the 2017 manifesto?williamglenn said:0
