politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » CON leadership betting analysis: This is less about Brexit and

Tory MP Drax using a point of order to try and retract his vote for the government deal last week

Calls for the PM's immediate resignation.

Nice line from Pesto:

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1112723382179639296

...they may end up with the kind of Brexit that would might well be identified as Remain in a police line up"

isam said:

There should be a second referendum

Mays deal vs carry on negotiating

Hah

IanB2 said:

Tory MP Drax using a point of order to try and retract his vote for the government deal last week

What a loser. No doubt it wasn't an easy choice but there is at least dignity even in a u turn, and he doesn't even want that.

Pulpstar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigelb said:

Do the DUP really only desire No Deal ?
(Or remain.)

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1112709271878283265

Looks very like it

Any outcome other than those two contains the backstop. If you're opposed to the backstop then you're opposed to CU, CM2.0, May's deal on it's own, Labour's alternative plan or anything else for that matter.

No, because CM2.0 achieves permanent alignment of the whole of the UK. No need for the backstop, ie an NI-only alignment.

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1112725287983300608

the idiots arent going to get anything, apart from Corbyn as PM.

kle4 said:

IanB2 said:

Tory MP Drax using a point of order to try and retract his vote for the government deal last week

What a loser. No doubt it wasn't an easy choice but there is at least dignity even in a u turn, and he doesn't even want that.

It's very much like the Death of Stalin, where members of the Politburo start putting their hands up in favour of motion, before pulling them down again when they worry it might be unpopular.

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

_Anazina_ said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.

Well, as has been discussed before 48% cited Remain and a chunk of the 52% that voted Leave support free movement. Ergo, it's a fair compromise that respects the result of the referendum. MPs need to move on.

Does that count those who voted Remain in spite of freedom of movement?

Sure but if you voted remain in spite of FoM concerns then you weighed up that leaving would be more hassle than the FoM was. Enough leavers to make the difference wouldn't be overly concerned about immigration either. Ergo you get to over 50%.

Yes, precisely.

Sounds a bit like the govt are trying to engineer a situation where something other than referendum/revoke passes, which they can then put up against May's deal on Wednesday.

_Anazina_ said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

_Anazina_ said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.

Well, as has been discussed before 48% cited Remain and a chunk of the 52% that voted Leave support free movement. Ergo, it's a fair compromise that respects the result of the referendum. MPs need to move on.

Does that count those who voted Remain in spite of freedom of movement?

Sure but if you voted remain in spite of FoM concerns then you weighed up that leaving would be more hassle than the FoM was. Enough leavers to make the difference wouldn't be overly concerned about immigration either. Ergo you get to over 50%.

Yes, precisely.

I suppose there were no half measures, you either had to vote for it or against it!

Snell's amendment (deleting Wednesday) not taken. Leadsom to respond - government opposing the Letwin process.

Andy_Cooke said:

Sean_F said:

Benpointer said:

Sean_F said:

williamglenn said:

Sean_F said:

If something like CM2 passes, but opposition in the Conservative Party is so intense that the government can't accept it, then I think the government has no choice but to go into Opposition.

Or a Deal/Remain referendum. Brexiteers could acquiesce because it's better for them than an enforced Soft Brexit, and it poses a strategic problem for Labour.

Almost no one in the Conservative Party supports it.

Well that's scuppered that then. It's about time the country realised it should stop trying to put its interests before those of the Conservative Party!

My point is that there aren't enough votes for it, if scarcely any Conservative supports it.

It would need the DUP to abstain and 9 Tories to switch from "against" to "for" (to add to the existing 8 Tories who voted "for" last time)

But, then there are about 40 senior ministers opposed to it.

Slackbladder said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1112725287983300608

the idiots arent going to get anything, apart from Corbyn as PM.

Deselected, maybe.

Andrew said:

_Anazina_ said:

It will come as no surprise that the low-life Trumpton cheats at golf.

The only surprise is that he kept the lie that small - surely he shoots 16 under par regularly? Sets course records?

They say he holds the record for the most GIR at the Augusta National, but he doesn't like to mention it.

Sean_F said:

kle4 said:

IanB2 said:

Tory MP Drax using a point of order to try and retract his vote for the government deal last week

What a loser. No doubt it wasn't an easy choice but there is at least dignity even in a u turn, and he doesn't even want that.

It's very much like the Death of Stalin, where members of the Politburo start putting their hands up in favour of motion, before pulling them down again when they worry it might be unpopular.

Saw that movie for the first time a few weeks ago, very good indeed. Pretty believable really.

Richard Drax at 15:34:47.

https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/14b23cd1-9472-44ba-9742-dd2deec361d1

From the CM 2.0 website

Doesn’t the Common Market 2.0 arrangement prevent the UK from securing its own trade deals?

To avoid a hard border in Ireland the UK would enter a comprehensive customs arrangement with the EU. When the UK and the EU agree new systems and procedures which remove the need for customs checks at the Irish border, the UK will be free to sign trade deals with third parties or become a party to Efta's existing free trade agreements.

Also known as "The backstop"

Pulpstar said:

From the CM 2.0 website

Doesn’t the Common Market 2.0 arrangement prevent the UK from securing its own trade deals?

To avoid a hard border in Ireland the UK would enter a comprehensive customs arrangement with the EU. When the UK and the EU agree new systems and procedures which remove the need for customs checks at the Irish border, the UK will be free to sign trade deals with third parties or become a party to Efta's existing free trade agreements.

Also known as "The backstop"

At this point let's just call the backstop the rearhalt solution and see if they pass it. Claim it's the name of an old mp who came up with the idea years ago.

nico67 said:

Another Tory MP comes out in support for a Peoples Vote .

Surprisingly Huw Merriman .

He was in favour before.

Clarke calls out the government for breaking its own promise to hold indicative votes, without which Letwin wouldn't have been necessary. Leadsom dodges the point and returns to defending the government's deal.

FF43 said:

Streeter said:

Pulpstar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigelb said:

Do the DUP really only desire No Deal ?
(Or remain.)

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1112709271878283265

Looks very like it

Any outcome other than those two contains the backstop. If you're opposed to the backstop then you're opposed to CU, CM2.0, May's deal on it's own, Labour's alternative plan or anything else for that matter.

No, because CM2.0 achieves permanent alignment of the whole of the UK. No need for the backstop, ie an NI-only alignment.

I think that's vague.CM2.0 on my reading has the Mayesque form of words of temporary customs arrangements until a permanent UK - EU trade deal can sealed.

I seem to be unusual on this board in expecting the UK to be a deep customs union with the EU. As long as we don't go No Deal, we will never leave it.

Plenty can change in the years ahead. Say Northern Ireland voted to join the Republic, with a permanent Customs Union we'd remain locked into perhaps a Turkey situation. With the CM 2.0 or May's plan we could at that point truly have a Norway relationship.

The Hillsborough jury at Preston Crown Court cannot reach unanimous verdicts and has been told to consider majority verdicts.

Judge Sir Peter Openshaw has told the six men and six women he will accept majority verdicts of at least 10-2.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-47777593

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

matt said:

Cyclefree said:

GIN1138 said:

AmpfieldAndy said:

Out of that lot Raab has the best chance I think as he's got the fewest enemies... Although the Murdoch press will support Hunt for what that's worth these days...

Raab is a lightweight and a moron. He couldn't hack it as Brexit secretary. Yeah: May undermined him. So what? He should have been a damn sight tougher. If he can't deal with that, he doesn't have the balls needed to be leader or PM.

Frankly, no-one in the Cabinet particularly impresses. The Tories are split, are messing up the country and need to go away into a darkened corner and grow up before bothering the rest of us.

His academic record suggests otherwise to the accusation of being a moron. His employment record before before becoming an MP pushes strongly back against your accusation. Something to do with Westminster perhaps.

He did not understand about the importance of the Dover-Calais route to our trade. I don't give two hoots about his academic record. I have spent over three decades dealing with people with fantastic academic records who are as stupid as fuck. Being good at whatever he was doing before he became an MP says nothing about his achievements as an MP and there and in Cabinet he has not distinguished himself. He looks - and is - out of his depth.

Not exactly what he said about Dover-Calais

He said he didn’t realise it was “quite as significant” as it was.

That’s a relative statement rather than the absolute one you report

I don't think there is a contradiction. But in any case it hardly helps his case, does it? Not quite as significant as what, exactly? Our exports from the port of Liverpool perhaps? Or Maryport? For God's sake, the first thing a Brexit secretary should have done is got a briefing on our trade and what routes it uses. He might even have thought to get such a briefing before he became a Brexiteer and started campaigning for us to leave.

In the context it sounded like (made up numbers for illustration) he thought it was 70% of trade and it turned out to be 80%

And it was a reference to before being appointed vs after it

Goodness knows that’s there’s enough to criticise the government for without making stuff up

That we are still talking about it - and that it is about the only thing anyone knows about Raab - is ample demonstration of his utter ineffectiveness as a politician.

TGOHF said:

IanB2 said:

TGOHF said:

IanB2 said:

Tory MP Drax using a point of order to try and retract his vote for the government deal last week

Calls for the PM's immediate resignation.

#fake news

Go watch Parliament TV

https://twitter.com/BBCPhilipSim/status/1112726843331874816

The Bond villain in Moonraker is more convincing.

kle4 said:

Pulpstar said:

From the CM 2.0 website

Doesn’t the Common Market 2.0 arrangement prevent the UK from securing its own trade deals?

To avoid a hard border in Ireland the UK would enter a comprehensive customs arrangement with the EU. When the UK and the EU agree new systems and procedures which remove the need for customs checks at the Irish border, the UK will be free to sign trade deals with third parties or become a party to Efta's existing free trade agreements.

Also known as "The backstop"

At this point let's just call the backstop the rearhalt solution and see if they pass it. Claim it's the name of an old mp who came up with the idea years ago.

Mervyn King wanted to move the Irish border to the sea back in 2017. They could call it the Merv Swerve.

_Anazina_ said:

Sean_F said:

If I were an MP, I'd vote for CM2, not because it's my favoured option, but because it's one that I could tolerate.

Good for you – me too.

Sadly, too few MPs are as sensible.

I think it will lose narrowly. But, I don't know.

Losing narrowly doesnt kill it. Losing by hundreds doesnt thesedays!

kle4 said:

_Anazina_ said:

Sean_F said:

If I were an MP, I'd vote for CM2, not because it's my favoured option, but because it's one that I could tolerate.

Good for you – me too.

Sadly, too few MPs are as sensible.

I think it will lose narrowly. But, I don't know.

Losing narrowly doesnt kill it. Losing by hundreds doesnt thesedays!

Ha! Very true!

tpfkar said:

Bob__Sykes said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris Bryant has just said he will vote for common market 2 but he thinks it is an unicorn because there will be a legally binding negotiating mandate for the HMG, as no one can bind any future government in negotiations

If that is true, common market 2 is an attempt to pull the wool over people's eyes

This is what I was getting at earlier. If, as I believe (but do correct me pls), CM2.0 means "pass the WA but with some verbiage tagged on to the PD to say we will go for a CM2.0 model", then it seems to me that all it achieves is to get TM's deal through and let whoever is in government until "the future deal" is nailed down try to negotiate something paying lip service to that PD, and then get it through the Commons at some point during 2020?

Thus unblocking the current impasse at least, and an EU departure date in May?

Can't you legislate to make single market + customs union a negotiating objective?

A bit like the 0.7% of international aid target and preventing new grammar schools from opening. It's one thing making the decision to do it, but once it's in legislation it's a heck of an effort to reverse it. If there's a majority willing to do so then it'll happen, but it means it can't be reversed on a whim - I'd have thought this would be exactly the way to go here?

Hmm, yes, well put.

More to the point, it shows the will of Parliament and as you imply gives a sense of direction.

Pulpstar said:

FF43 said:

Streeter said:

Pulpstar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigelb said:

Do the DUP really only desire No Deal ?
(Or remain.)

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1112709271878283265

Looks very like it

Any outcome other than those two contains the backstop. If you're opposed to the backstop then you're opposed to CU, CM2.0, May's deal on it's own, Labour's alternative plan or anything else for that matter.

No, because CM2.0 achieves permanent alignment of the whole of the UK. No need for the backstop, ie an NI-only alignment.

I think that's vague.CM2.0 on my reading has the Mayesque form of words of temporary customs arrangements until a permanent UK - EU trade deal can sealed.

I seem to be unusual on this board in expecting the UK to be a deep customs union with the EU. As long as we don't go No Deal, we will never leave it.

Plenty can change in the years ahead. Say Northern Ireland voted to join the Republic, with a permanent Customs Union we'd remain locked into perhaps a Turkey situation. With the CM 2.0 or May's plan we could at that point truly have a Norway relationship.

The EU won't change on the backstop. Given that there are only three possibilities for leaving: TM's deal - in which the backstop is a dilemma, crashing out, in which the backstop does not exist but quite possibly a domestic and international crisis does instead, or a deal in which the backstop is absorbed into the wider soft arrangement of Norway+/CU. Given that it has taken us 45 years to get here, the third options are perfectly sensible places for now though not necessarily in the long term the last word. It has the merit of not being opposed (I think) by the DUP, fulfilling the referendum mandate, having the approval of Kenneth Clarke and being more or less acceptable to most opinions among business. Go for it.

kle4 said:

TGOHF said:

IanB2 said:

TGOHF said:

IanB2 said:

Tory MP Drax using a point of order to try and retract his vote for the government deal last week

Calls for the PM's immediate resignation.

#fake news

Go watch Parliament TV

https://twitter.com/BBCPhilipSim/status/1112726843331874816

Someone is obviously trying too hard with kind of talk. Embarrassed at himself he is trying to make it someone else's fault I would guess.

It's his fault we havent left the EU already - when is his resignation?

Just astonished by his self importance and lack of ability to count numbers

ERG are mad as march hares

Pulpstar said:

FF43 said:

Streeter said:

Pulpstar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigelb said:

Do the DUP really only desire No Deal ?
(Or remain.)

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1112709271878283265

Looks very like it

Any outcome other than those two contains the backstop. If you're opposed to the backstop then you're opposed to CU, CM2.0, May's deal on it's own, Labour's alternative plan or anything else for that matter.

No, because CM2.0 achieves permanent alignment of the whole of the UK. No need for the backstop, ie an NI-only alignment.

I think that's vague.CM2.0 on my reading has the Mayesque form of words of temporary customs arrangements until a permanent UK - EU trade deal can sealed.

I seem to be unusual on this board in expecting the UK to be a deep customs union with the EU. As long as we don't go No Deal, we will never leave it.

Plenty can change in the years ahead. Say Northern Ireland voted to join the Republic, with a permanent Customs Union we'd remain locked into perhaps a Turkey situation. With the CM 2.0 or May's plan we could at that point truly have a Norway relationship.

The EU could disappear, which is not out of bounds of possibility. But you need some assumptions in your planning that are based on the situation as it is. My confidence that we will stay or end up in a deep customs union, despite the political headwinds, is because ultimately business and economic advantage will trump politics.

I also expect the easy option that delivers results will seem preferable. Trade deals are hard work. Much as we might like to blame Liam Fox, he just sits in a big office. He has an army of well paid officials to do the work. That they have only managed to get 8 of the 69 deals needed and they are much worse than the EU arrangements they replace, simply reflects the mountain to climb. The EU is the most effective trade negotiator in the world. It has built up its portfolio of deals over decades. At a certain point, we are likely to say, why don't we piggyback off the arrangements in place?

Waffly filibustering from Brexiters Cash and Jenkin.

FF43 said:

Pulpstar said:

FF43 said:

Streeter said:

Pulpstar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigelb said:

Do the DUP really only desire No Deal ?
(Or remain.)

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1112709271878283265

Looks very like it

Any outcome other than those two contains the backstop. If you're opposed to the backstop then you're opposed to CU, CM2.0, May's deal on it's own, Labour's alternative plan or anything else for that matter.

No, because CM2.0 achieves permanent alignment of the whole of the UK. No need for the backstop, ie an NI-only alignment.

I think that's vague.CM2.0 on my reading has the Mayesque form of words of temporary customs arrangements until a permanent UK - EU trade deal can sealed.

I seem to be unusual on this board in expecting the UK to be a deep customs union with the EU. As long as we don't go No Deal, we will never leave it.

Plenty can change in the years ahead. Say Northern Ireland voted to join the Republic, with a permanent Customs Union we'd remain locked into perhaps a Turkey situation. With the CM 2.0 or May's plan we could at that point truly have a Norway relationship.

The EU could disappear, which is not out of bounds of possibility. But you some assumptions in your planning based on the situation as it is. My confidence that we will stay or end up in a deep customs union despite the political headwinds is because ultimately business and economic advantage will trump politics.

And that the easy option that delivers results will seem preferable. Trade deals are hard work. Much as we might like to blame Liam Fox, he just sits in a big office. He has an army of well paid officials to do the work. That they have only managed to get 8 of the 69 deals needed and they are much worse than the EU arrangements they replace simply reflects the mountain to climb. The EU is the most effective trade negotiator in the world. It has built up its portfolio of deals over decades. At a certain point, we are likely to say, why don't we piggyback off the arrangements in place?

I thought they were mainly like-for-like replacements of existing deals?

Pulpstar said:

FF43 said:

Streeter said:

Pulpstar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigelb said:

Do the DUP really only desire No Deal ?
(Or remain.)

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1112709271878283265

Looks very like it

Any outcome other than those two contains the backstop. If you're opposed to the backstop then you're opposed to CU, CM2.0, May's deal on it's own, Labour's alternative plan or anything else for that matter.

No, because CM2.0 achieves permanent alignment of the whole of the UK. No need for the backstop, ie an NI-only alignment.

I think that's vague.CM2.0 on my reading has the Mayesque form of words of temporary customs arrangements until a permanent UK - EU trade deal can sealed.

I seem to be unusual on this board in expecting the UK to be a deep customs union with the EU. As long as we don't go No Deal, we will never leave it.

Plenty can change in the years ahead. Say Northern Ireland voted to join the Republic, with a permanent Customs Union we'd remain locked into perhaps a Turkey situation. With the CM 2.0 or May's plan we could at that point truly have a Norway relationship.

There's permanent and indefinite. There's not going to be any political problem with Great Britain withdrawing from a customs union if it wants to at some point in the future.

anothernick said:

Andrew said:

anothernick said:

How could that be done procedurally? Votes are always y/n to a proposition, you could only force a choice between two propositions by a procedural vote and this is not likely to carry.

Indeed - but say Wednesday May's deal fails, then today's winner gets put up, a relieved Commons passes it. Assuming it's CM2.0, that requires the current WA, plus some verbiage added to the PD.

But the "verbiage" would be very important and would need to be pored over by all sides and MPs would want to be happy that the EU were genuinely signed up to it. It's hard to imagine that being achieved by next week, which means that a delay would be required.

What will CM2.0 cost the UK? I'd quite like to know that, before I was being asked to sign up to it.....

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

matt said:

Cyclefree said:

GIN1138 said:

AmpfieldAndy said:

Out of that lot Raab has the best chance I think as he's got the fewest enemies... Although the Murdoch press will support Hunt for what that's worth these days...

Raab is a lightweight and a moron. He couldn't hack it as Brexit secretary. Yeah: May undermined him. So what? He should have been a damn sight tougher. If he can't deal with that, he doesn't have the balls needed to be leader or PM.

Frankly, no-one in the Cabinet particularly impresses. The Tories are split, are messing up the country and need to go away into a darkened corner and grow up before bothering the rest of us.

His academic record suggests otherwise to the accusation of being a moron. His employment record before before becoming an MP pushes strongly back against your accusation. Something to do with Westminster perhaps.

He did not understand about the importance of the Dover-Calais route to our trade. I don't give two hoots about his academic record. I have spent over three decades dealing with people with fantastic academic records who are as stupid as fuck. Being good at whatever he was doing before he became an MP says nothing about his achievements as an MP and there and in Cabinet he has not distinguished himself. He looks - and is - out of his depth.

Not exactly what he said about Dover-Calais

He said he didn’t realise it was “quite as significant” as it was.

That’s a relative statement rather than the absolute one you report

I don't think there is a contradiction. But in any case it hardly helps his case, does it? Not quite as significant as what, exactly? Our exports from the port of Liverpool perhaps? Or Maryport? For God's sake, the first thing a Brexit secretary should have done is got a briefing on our trade and what routes it uses. He might even have thought to get such a briefing before he became a Brexiteer and started campaigning for us to leave.

In the context it sounded like (made up numbers for illustration) he thought it was 70% of trade and it turned out to be 80%

And it was a reference to before being appointed vs after it

Goodness knows that’s there’s enough to criticise the government for without making stuff up

I am not making anything up. He did not bother to properly brief himself on something he apparently cares deeply about. That makes him both stupid and frivolous. Not up to the job, as one C Attlee said of a minister he sacked.

AndyJS said:

O/T

"Liberals today, instead of defending open markets, promote existing cartels and new monopolies. As a result, more than a decade after the financial crash, the banking behemoths that rule global finance are still ‘too big to fail’. Our everyday economy is dominated by the Frightful Five – Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft and Alphabet, the parent company of Google. By controlling access to information, these tech monopolies restrict not just economic competition but also free speech. Their plutocratic power undermines both open markets and democratic debate."

https://unherd.com/2019/04/can-we-tame-democracys-demons

I thought a good explanation of the issue I heard recently was that capitalism works when everybody can get equal access to information about the market, from which you can judge price and inefficiency.

The big tech companies not have the best resources to process the information, they also control the flow of information, and in doing they have the "perfect" information vs the rest who only see an imperfect delayed snapshot.

In order to gain a better insight, companies have to do a deal with all of these big 5, in return for sharing with them, so they can't lose.

On a "social" level, watching the two higher up from twitter on JRE podcast the other week was a pretty enlightening just how in a bubble they are.

isam said:

There should be a second referendum

Mays deal vs carry on negotiating

I prefer May's deal Vs a Remain/No Deal referendum

anothernick said:

Andrew said:

anothernick said:

How could that be done procedurally? Votes are always y/n to a proposition, you could only force a choice between two propositions by a procedural vote and this is not likely to carry.

Indeed - but say Wednesday May's deal fails, then today's winner gets put up, a relieved Commons passes it. Assuming it's CM2.0, that requires the current WA, plus some verbiage added to the PD.

But the "verbiage" would be very important and would need to be pored over by all sides and MPs would want to be happy that the EU were genuinely signed up to it. It's hard to imagine that being achieved by next week, which means that a delay would be required.

It could form the proposal that needs to be in play by 12 April in order to achieve a further extension to 22 May.

rcs1000 said:

isam said:

There should be a second referendum

Mays deal vs carry on negotiating

I prefer May's deal Vs a Remain/No Deal referendum

Voting to remain before we implemented the vote to leave would be asking for civil unrest.

If we had voted Remain in 2016, would the Commons got a vote on Cameron's deal? And if they had and had voted it down, what then?

RobD said:

FF43 said:

Pulpstar said:

FF43 said:

Streeter said:

Pulpstar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigelb said:

Do the DUP really only desire No Deal ?
(Or remain.)

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1112709271878283265

Looks very like it

Any outcome other than those two contains the backstop. If you're opposed to the backstop then you're opposed to CU, CM2.0, May's deal on it's own, Labour's alternative plan or anything else for that matter.

No, because CM2.0 achieves permanent alignment of the whole of the UK. No need for the backstop, ie an NI-only alignment.

I think that's vague.CM2.0 on my reading has the Mayesque form of words of temporary customs arrangements until a permanent UK - EU trade deal can sealed.

I seem to be unusual on this board in expecting the UK to be a deep customs union with the EU. As long as we don't go No Deal, we will never leave it.

Plenty can change in the years ahead. Say Northern Ireland voted to join the Republic, with a permanent Customs Union we'd remain locked into perhaps a Turkey situation. With the CM 2.0 or May's plan we could at that point truly have a Norway relationship.

The EU could disappear, which is not out of bounds of possibility. But you some assumptions in your planning based on the situation as it is. My confidence that we will stay or end up in a deep customs union despite the political headwinds is because ultimately business and economic advantage will trump politics.

And that the easy option that delivers results will seem preferable. Trade deals are hard work. Much as we might like to blame Liam Fox, he just sits in a big office. He has an army of well paid officials to do the work. That they have only managed to get 8 of the 69 deals needed and they are much worse than the EU arrangements they replace simply reflects the mountain to climb. The EU is the most effective trade negotiator in the world. It has built up its portfolio of deals over decades. At a certain point, we are likely to say, why don't we piggyback off the arrangements in place?

I thought they were mainly like-for-like replacements of existing deals?

The Swiss Deal, which is the only big one, covers temporary arrangements while the UK is in transition and a potentially permanent arrangement for No Deal, which is the interesting bit. This doesn't cover rules of origin, so a car with 40% UK content and 40% EU content will incur tariffs when it could be exported without onerous paperwork or duty before. The deal only recognises three out of twelve mutual recognition agreements - the three retained agreements favour Swiss exporters to the UK.

MarqueeMark said:

What will CM2.0 cost the UK? I'd quite like to know that, before I was being asked to sign up to it.....

Single market access is going to be expensive, no question. The HoC library estimated Norway-style access at 75% of our current net payments, so 7bn per year or so? Might be a bit more for whatever dog's breakfast CM2.0 would evolve into, but surely not much.

williamglenn said:

isam said:

rcs1000 said:

isam said:

There should be a second referendum

Mays deal vs carry on negotiating

I prefer May's deal Vs a Remain/No Deal referendum

Voting to remain before we implemented the vote to leave would be asking for civil unrest.

How can you democratically justify leaving against the will of the people at the time we leave?

Haha who says its against the will of the people?!

isam said:

williamglenn said:

isam said:

rcs1000 said:

isam said:

There should be a second referendum

Mays deal vs carry on negotiating

I prefer May's deal Vs a Remain/No Deal referendum

Voting to remain before we implemented the vote to leave would be asking for civil unrest.

How can you democratically justify leaving against the will of the people at the time we leave?

Haha who says its against the will of the people?!

You'd have to ask them.

isam said:

williamglenn said:

isam said:

rcs1000 said:

isam said:

There should be a second referendum

Mays deal vs carry on negotiating

I prefer May's deal Vs a Remain/No Deal referendum

Voting to remain before we implemented the vote to leave would be asking for civil unrest.

How can you democratically justify leaving against the will of the people at the time we leave?

Haha who says its against the will of the people?!

It's unclear whether more of the public favour or oppose a second referendum, and depends very much how the question is worded.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

How long do the ERG need to keep talking to run this out of time

The order paper concludes the business motion debate at 6pm. Hopefully they will give up before then; this is a pitiful display from the Tory right.

isam said:

williamglenn said:

isam said:

williamglenn said:

isam said:

rcs1000 said:

isam said:

There should be a second referendum

Mays deal vs carry on negotiating

I prefer May's deal Vs a Remain/No Deal referendum

Voting to remain before we implemented the vote to leave would be asking for civil unrest.

How can you democratically justify leaving against the will of the people at the time we leave?

Haha who says its against the will of the people?!

That's why we need to have a confirmatory referendum.

Yeah yeah

So everytime the establishment lose, they just do nothing for 3 years then ask again? I don't think I like that precedent. We voted Leave, so we should leave.

The Leave campaign always said it would be a slow process, and many of them said a second referendum would be a good idea.

Dominic Cummings: As a matter of democratic accountability, given the enormous importance of so many issues that would be decided in an Article 50 renegotiation – a far, far bigger deal than a normal election – it seems right to give people a vote on it.

https://dominiccummings.com/2015/06/23/on-the-referendum-6-exit-plans-and-a-second-referendum/