politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » CON leadership betting analysis: This is less about Brexit and
Comments
-
Will that MP do anything other than moan? There's always the Tiggers.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
He may well be fighting a losing battle. Congress may (eventually) decide otherwise. Certainly can see the EU doing so.FrancisUrquhart said:
I bet he wouldn't be saying that if he was still an mp.AndyJS said:O/T
"Nick Clegg says Facebook is NOT responsible for things posted on the site and is being asked to self-regulate in a way 'no private company should be expected to do'"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6872989/Nick-Clegg-says-Facebook-NOT-responsible-things-posted-site.html#comments
Still by then he will have millions in the bank and a great suntan (something that is definitely not available in Sheffield).0 -
Spoilt Ballot paper chuck it in the binkle4 said:
Rather reflects the mindset doesn't it? The option you want not available, for whatever reason? Just pretend it is!Benpointer said:Not content with seeing his preferred option lose by 240 votes last week David Davies wanted the chance to see it lose again...
https://twitter.com/DavidTCDavies/status/1112797607682822145
Yes yes, no deal is still law of the land, but yet more reason there's no need to vote on it.0 -
Definitive statemants such as what?Richard_Tyndall said:
You do not know any of that. All you have is anonymous briefings via a paper which is known for its opposition to Brexit and which is saying things you want to be true.HYUFD said:
Based on the AG's advice the Government has not used the royal prerogative to conduct the negotiations and in any case I cannot see the Queen allowing her prerogative to be used to try and override the will of Parliament and her advisers would make that clear to MayRichard_Tyndall said:
I do not know if the ES is quoting Cox accurof VoNC the Government.HYUFD said:
No, it is the AG going entirely er Deal
You have not seen the AG's advice and nor have I. And like so many other occasions in the past when you have made definitive statements on this process which turned out to be rubbish you are in danger of making a fool of yourself once again.
Nor do you apparently understand Royal Prerogative. It has nothing to do with the Queen allowing anything. It is a constitutional arrangement whereby certain functions of Government are reserved for the Executive.
I fail to see what is surprising about Cox's statement, Parliament is sovereign under our constitution and he is simply reflecting that which has been the case since the Civil War and Glorious Revolution.
If anyone does not understand the royal prerogative it is you, in any case the royal prerogative is entirely within the interpretation of the Courts. May only holds office as Head of Her Majesty's government because she supposedly commands the confidence of Parliament to be the Queen's Minister, if she wanted the Queen could dismiss May tomorrow and choose another MP to be PM more likely to command support in the Commons if May tries to defy the will of Parliament. The Head of State in the UK is the Queen, not Theresa May, the royal prerogative and the Executive is thus the Crown with the Cabinet simply acting on behalf of the Crown.
The monarch remains constitutionally empowered to exercise the royal prerogative against the advice of the prime minister or the cabinet if, for example, the monarch felt to exercise it would be to try and explicitly override the will of Parliament. Article 1 of the Bill of Rights also states the "power of suspending the laws or the execution of laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament is illegal"0 -
If fewer than, say, 35 Lab MPs vote against the options of CU or Common Market 2, will they both to bring the WA back for MV3? With the hardliners revealed and a few like Drax reverting, unless in a straight shootout between two final options Lab MPs have no choice but to back the deal what's the point?0
-
Ironically the weakness of Norway - an inability to control immigration - has been partly answered by making the UK, well, a less favourable place to come.Richard_Tyndall said:
No it doesn't. Some of us on here looked in detail at this around the time of the referendum and the UK equivalent commitment if we had a Norway Deal would be something around £3bn a year. It is massively less than now.dots said:
Stats don’t reveal truth when there are two different populations, climates, cultures, economies. Norway certainly has a bit of oil revenue to sweeten public spending and hence their populace’s perceptions. Yet each Norwegian household still pay almost as much into the EU as UK does now? That’s a funny definition of out?Richard_Tyndall said:
That is certainly not what the Norway option means at all.dots said:
Are we allowed to use the word vassalage without being accused of promoting violence?_Anazina_ said:
Indeed. Lots of mad things were said during the referendum campaign. A Norway style Brexit (as promoted by Richard since Day One) respects the result of the referendum, offers economic security and will almost certainly lead to a ‘relief bounce’ in the economy.Richard_Tyndall said:
Indeed. There are rather a lot of us on here. Robert S is another who immediately springs to mind.eek said:
Leave presented a moon on the stick. And many people voted leave but actually don't mind Freedom of Labour - I'm one, I'm sure Richard Tyndall is another....williamglenn said:
I don't see how it can be said to honour the referendum result when it doesn't deliver on the key things the Leave campaign were presenting to people.Gallowgate said:I really hope Common Market 2.0 is agreed. It's clearly the best compromise that honours the referendum result but also conserves the economy. I'd prefer remain but I can live with it. It's really where Britain should have been all along.
I am with @RoyalBlue - time to lay down the swords and compromise.
To put it more technically, we would move to keeping the EU rules, simply giving up political influence over them. That is what you are suggesting?
At some point 99% of the population will say, this is silly, if we are having those rules we might as well have the political influence over them. And we’ll be back to square one?
You are also wrong on the influence that Norway has over policy making as part of the EEA agreement.0 -
Will his votes count as a "Noe" or will the ballot be eliminated ?kle4 said:
Rather reflects the mindset doesn't it? The option you want not available, for whatever reason? Just pretend it is!Benpointer said:Not content with seeing his preferred option lose by 240 votes last week David Davies wanted the chance to see it lose again...
https://twitter.com/DavidTCDavies/status/1112797607682822145
Yes yes, no deal is still law of the land, but yet more reason there's no need to vote on it.0 -
You too born in Hawaii? Where they put pineapple on pizza?TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm not running in 2020.FrancisUrquhart said:
It would be easier if those not running announced....rottenborough said:twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/1112802064281886720
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?0 -
why should it? he's expressed a clear preference against those options?Pulpstar said:
Will his votes count as a "Noe" or will the ballot be eliminated ?kle4 said:
Rather reflects the mindset doesn't it? The option you want not available, for whatever reason? Just pretend it is!Benpointer said:Not content with seeing his preferred option lose by 240 votes last week David Davies wanted the chance to see it lose again...
https://twitter.com/DavidTCDavies/status/1112797607682822145
Yes yes, no deal is still law of the land, but yet more reason there's no need to vote on it.0 -
I actually have no idea what the solution is or how I feel about it. There is something very wrong, but politicians and technology is always a disaster. Article 11 and 13 being a classic example.rottenborough said:
He may well be fighting a losing battle. Congress may (eventually) decide otherwise. Certainly can see the EU doing so.FrancisUrquhart said:
I bet he wouldn't be saying that if he was still an mp.AndyJS said:O/T
"Nick Clegg says Facebook is NOT responsible for things posted on the site and is being asked to self-regulate in a way 'no private company should be expected to do'"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6872989/Nick-Clegg-says-Facebook-NOT-responsible-things-posted-site.html#comments
Still by then he will have millions in the bank and a great suntan (something that is definitely not available in Sheffield).0 -
My disdain for peasant wagons is purely down toFrancisUrquhart said:
Lol...I think your internet posts might be a bit problematic....remember the trouble mitt Romney got in with his 47% quote. Not sure you disdain for peasant wagons will go down too well.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm not running in 2020.FrancisUrquhart said:
It would be easier if those not running announced....rottenborough said:twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/1112802064281886720
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.0 -
Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.0 -
You should stand for parliament. They need someone decisive.FrancisUrquhart said:
I actually have no idea what the solution is or how I feel about it.rottenborough said:
He may well be fighting a losing battle. Congress may (eventually) decide otherwise. Certainly can see the EU doing so.FrancisUrquhart said:
I bet he wouldn't be saying that if he was still an mp.AndyJS said:O/T
"Nick Clegg says Facebook is NOT responsible for things posted on the site and is being asked to self-regulate in a way 'no private company should be expected to do'"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6872989/Nick-Clegg-says-Facebook-NOT-responsible-things-posted-site.html#comments
Still by then he will have millions in the bank and a great suntan (something that is definitely not available in Sheffield).
0 -
I expect Cox will make the legal position clear himself in a statement to the House in the next few yearsdots said:
No point arguing. If its a matter of the law and obeying it, then it can be answered and cleared up.HYUFD said:
Yes, Cox advises as a lawyer on the law regardless of the politicsTheScreamingEagles said:I'd also remind everyone prior to his advice on the revised Withdrawal Agreement several media organisations said Geoffrey Cox's legal advice to the PM would be very favourable to her.
It was not.
Which MP can we pay to ask the question?0 -
Indeed. As I say for all the cries of disaster and the end of the world as we know it the UK continues to perform well and our relative performance is getting better. Maybe politicians just aren't as important as they like to think.Sean_F said:
Even without stock building, the manufacturing PMI would have been positive.DavidL said:
Agreed. Our political class have failed us utterly.nico67 said:Highest level of stockpiling by UK companies in history by any G7 economy .
Utterly pathetic and tragic that it’s come to this .
On the positive side it did boost production. In the EZ they had the lowest manufacturing PMI since April 2013 and there is a yield inversion in the US which may well be indicative of a recession in the next year or so. Our politics is truly crap but in economic terms we remain a haven of relative stability.0 -
BBC4 is showing a documentary on Morris Dancing. Interesting choice while the votes are being counted.0
-
Well we used to get by without MPs for years at a time. Different era, admittedly.DavidL said:
Indeed. As I say for all the cries of disaster and the end of the world as we know it the UK continues to perform well and our relative performance is getting better. Maybe politicians just aren't as important as they like to think.Sean_F said:
Even without stock building, the manufacturing PMI would have been positive.DavidL said:
Agreed. Our political class have failed us utterly.nico67 said:Highest level of stockpiling by UK companies in history by any G7 economy .
Utterly pathetic and tragic that it’s come to this .
On the positive side it did boost production. In the EZ they had the lowest manufacturing PMI since April 2013 and there is a yield inversion in the US which may well be indicative of a recession in the next year or so. Our politics is truly crap but in economic terms we remain a haven of relative stability.0 -
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.0 -
Revoking is a compromise position?TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.0 -
It's progress in the sense she realised it might be important to look like she has compromised. But I agree, I don't see how what she has done is compromise.oxfordsimon said:
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.0 -
Most MPs are being disingenuous and have been for the past 2 years.oxfordsimon said:
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.0 -
0
-
https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-eu-payments/Richard_Tyndall said:
No it doesn't. Some of us on here looked in detail at this around the time of the referendum and the UK equivalent commitment if we had a Norway Deal would be something around £3bn a year. It is massively less than now.dots said:
Stats don’t reveal truth when there are two different populations, climates, cultures, economies. Norway certainly has a bit of oil revenue to sweeten public spending and hence their populace’s perceptions. Yet each Norwegian household still pay almost as much into the EU as UK does now? That’s a funny definition of out?Richard_Tyndall said:
That is certainly not what the Norway option means at all.dots said:
Are we allowed to use the word vassalage without being accused of promoting violence?_Anazina_ said:
Indeed. Lots of mad things were said during the referendum campaign. A Norway style Brexit (as promoted by Richard since Day One) respects the result of the referendumRichard_Tyndall said:
Indeed. There are rather a lot of us on here. Robert S is another who immediately springs to mind.eek said:
And many people voted leave but actually don't mind Freedom of Labour - I'm one, I'm sure Richard Tyndall is another....williamglenn said:
I don't see how it can be said to honour the referendum result when it doesn't deliver on the key things the Leave campaign were presenting to people.Gallowgate said:
To put it more technically, we would move to keeping the EU rules, simply giving up political influence over them. That is what you are suggesting?
At some point 99% of the population will say, this is silly, if we are having those rules we might as well have the political influence over them. And we’ll be back to square one?
You are also wrong on the influence that Norway has over policy making as part of the EEA agreement.
And has incorporated 75% of EU law into its own law
a Norway government reportwhich says “Norway has incorporated approximately three-quarters of all EU legislative acts into Norwegian legislation
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/07/20/how-much-do-non-eu-countries-give-up-for-access-to-the-single-market-more-than-brexiteers-will-like/
But by being semi detached member has adopted very large share of EU regulations – without any voice influencing them
Not quite sure that is a good example for brexit, as it’s not entirely honest to say they are out of it in the way a true brexit will allow us to say it0 -
Yeah but she said it on Twitter so it must be true.oxfordsimon said:
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.0 -
I think she means abstaining on the other stuff instead of voting against.RobD said:
Revoking is a compromise position?TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.0 -
I think we have been doing that since 2016. The MPs aren't involved, they simply chat amongst themselves pointlessly and endlessly.kle4 said:
Well we used to get by without MPs for years at a time. Different era, admittedly.DavidL said:
Indeed. As I say for all the cries of disaster and the end of the world as we know it the UK continues to perform well and our relative performance is getting better. Maybe politicians just aren't as important as they like to think.Sean_F said:
Even without stock building, the manufacturing PMI would have been positive.DavidL said:
Agreed. Our political class have failed us utterly.nico67 said:Highest level of stockpiling by UK companies in history by any G7 economy .
Utterly pathetic and tragic that it’s come to this .
On the positive side it did boost production. In the EZ they had the lowest manufacturing PMI since April 2013 and there is a yield inversion in the US which may well be indicative of a recession in the next year or so. Our politics is truly crap but in economic terms we remain a haven of relative stability.0 -
This is probably a really daft question, BUT...
Why are they voting on this Common Market 2.0 thingy? My understanding is that it involves re-joining EFTA. Parliament can't do this unilaterally, it's not within the gift of the EU either, and the actual EFTA members do not appear to want us back. Therefore, is the entire proposition not merely yet another unicorn concept?
MPs might just as well debate the colonisation of Mars as a solution to Brexit, for all the good it will do.0 -
I think abstaining is the compromise. Mind you earlier this morning:RobD said:
Revoking is a compromise position?TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
https://twitter.com/LaylaMoran/status/1112635603240345605?s=190 -
Considering Boles has apparently said people could add in a confirmatory vote later, I'm not sure this position is as secure as she thinks
https://twitter.com/EmmaLewellBuck/status/1112803853894930438?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1112803853894930438&ref_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-47772688
Edit: Got confused, thought Boles was CU for a second, but of course that's Clarke's0 -
I think that in her terms it's a compromise to have abstained on the brexit votes rather then voted against them.kle4 said:
It's progress in the sense she realised it might be important to look like she has compromised. But I agree, I don't see how what she has done is compromise.oxfordsimon said:
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.0 -
Are you having a bubble? Was that meant to be funny?HYUFD said:
I expect Cox will make the legal position clear himself in a statement to the House in the next few yearsdots said:
No point arguing. If its a matter of the law and obeying it, then it can be answered and cleared up.HYUFD said:
Yes, Cox advises as a lawyer on the law regardless of the politicsTheScreamingEagles said:I'd also remind everyone prior to his advice on the revised Withdrawal Agreement several media organisations said Geoffrey Cox's legal advice to the PM would be very favourable to her.
It was not.
Which MP can we pay to ask the question?0 -
The Kyle Walker amendment should be left back0
-
Except that she did the same last week.Ishmael_Z said:
I think that in her terms it's a compromise to have abstained on the brexit votes rather then voted against them.kle4 said:
It's progress in the sense she realised it might be important to look like she has compromised. But I agree, I don't see how what she has done is compromise.oxfordsimon said:
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.0 -
"We shall turn the Red Planet blue! Tories for martian colonization!"Black_Rook said:This is probably a really daft question, BUT...
Why are they voting on this Common Market 2.0 thingy? My understanding is that it involves re-joining EFTA. Parliament can't do this unilaterally, it's not within the gift of the EU either, and the actual EFTA members do not appear to want us back. Therefore, is the entire proposition not merely yet another unicorn concept?
MPs might just as well debate the colonisation of Mars as a solution to Brexit, for all the good it will do.0 -
Emma Thickas-Rhymingslangkle4 said:Considering Boles has apparently said people could add in a confirmatory vote later, I'm not sure this position is as secure as she thinks
https://twitter.com/EmmaLewellBuck/status/1112803853894930438?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1112803853894930438&ref_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-477726880 -
Yes, in her terms. I don't see that it is actually a compromise though.Ishmael_Z said:
I think that in her terms it's a compromise to have abstained on the brexit votes rather then voted against them.kle4 said:
It's progress in the sense she realised it might be important to look like she has compromised. But I agree, I don't see how what she has done is compromise.oxfordsimon said:
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.0 -
Porcine Waste?PeterMannion said:
Emma Thickas-Rhymingslangkle4 said:Considering Boles has apparently said people could add in a confirmatory vote later, I'm not sure this position is as secure as she thinks
https://twitter.com/EmmaLewellBuck/status/1112803853894930438?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1112803853894930438&ref_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-477726880 -
It's a compromise compared to her preferred option of travelling back in time to make sure that the referendum never happens in the first place. She will leave you with your memories of having voted leave. Be grateful!RobD said:
Revoking is a compromise position?TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.0 -
How gracious of her to "compromise" by going for a losers vote or failing that outright revocation.TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
Must have been such a wrench for her...0 -
Not funny at all, a statement of factdots said:
Are you having a bubble? Was that meant to be funny?HYUFD said:
I expect Cox will make the legal position clear himself in a statement to the House in the next few yearsdots said:
No point arguing. If its a matter of the law and obeying it, then it can be answered and cleared up.HYUFD said:
Yes, Cox advises as a lawyer on the law regardless of the politicsTheScreamingEagles said:I'd also remind everyone prior to his advice on the revised Withdrawal Agreement several media organisations said Geoffrey Cox's legal advice to the PM would be very favourable to her.
It was not.
Which MP can we pay to ask the question?0 -
The amendment that most accurately reflects Labour tactics:bigjohnowls said:Rob Hastings
Verified account
@robhastings
6h6 hours ago
More
Inspired by Cooper-Boles and Kyle-Wilson, my dad and I have come up with some alternative parliamentary amendments:
Creasy-Bottomley
Pound-Pincher
Cash-Grant
Fysh-Brine
McDonald-Berger
Hands-Onn
Costa-Coffey
Fox-Hunt
David-Bowie
Twist-Turner
Flint-Stone
Stringer-Long(-Bailey)0 -
A White House whistleblower has told Congress that dozens of rejected security clearance applications were overturned by the Trump administration.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-477769640 -
In Boles' own words 'Some have claimed that Norway is opposed to British membership of EEA/Efta. This is not true. A recent headline in Norway’s Nationen newspaper read “Solberg sier britene er velhomne i EFTA.” In the piece, Erna Solberg, the Norwegian Prime Minister, confirmed “if that is what they [UK] really want then we will find a solution in the future.” We would need to negotiate a derogation to the Efta Convention so we could be part of a customs arrangement with the EU. But this is something that could be negotiated by December 2020 as part of our Efta accession.Black_Rook said:This is probably a really daft question, BUT...
Why are they voting on this Common Market 2.0 thingy? My understanding is that it involves re-joining EFTA. Parliament can't do this unilaterally, it's not within the gift of the EU either, and the actual EFTA members do not appear to want us back. Therefore, is the entire proposition not merely yet another unicorn concept?
MPs might just as well debate the colonisation of Mars as a solution to Brexit, for all the good it will do.
Others have claimed that the EU would not want the UK to join Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein in the Efta pillar of the EEA. This is also not true. Michel Barnier has repeatedly offered Norway Plus as the only Brexit deal that guarantees ‘frictionless trade’. It may be that some people in the European Commission, and some politicians in Norway and elsewhere, would prefer to create a new EEA pillar for the UK. But what matters is what the leader of Norway’s government and the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator think, and they are clear: the UK would be welcome to join Norway in the EEA and Efta'
https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2018/12/nick-boles-demolishing-five-myths-about-norway-plus.html
0 -
April foolFoxy said:
I think abstaining is the compromise. Mind you earlier this morning:RobD said:
Revoking is a compromise position?TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
https://twitter.com/LaylaMoran/status/1112635603240345605?s=190 -
I have been delving a bit into customs unions in particular from Anna Jerzewska, Dmitry Grozoubinski, Peter Ungphakorn, David Henig and Sam Lowe who are A grade trade policy experts. They broadly agree on customs unions that;
- Customs Unions are complex. It isn't a case of customs unions good or customs unions bad.
- The UK and the EU have a lot of options in how they draft their customs union and we shouldn't expect it to look like the Turkish one.
- The UK could probably get the EU to insist on its inclusion in every trade agreement the EU makes. The UK has sufficient economic weight to make that attractive to both the EU and the third county. The customs union would have to include agriculture in that case (also needed for the Irish border). The UK would have to accept having the deals is more important than having an independent trade policy.
- The UK would need to follow EU rules.
- All the experts think a customs union should be considered and that a workable customs union is possible.
0 - Customs Unions are complex. It isn't a case of customs unions good or customs unions bad.
-
Robert Smithson often points out that Italy boomed for 40 years when it did not have a functioning government.DavidL said:
Indeed. As I say for all the cries of disaster and the end of the world as we know it the UK continues to perform well and our relative performance is getting better. Maybe politicians just aren't as important as they like to think.Sean_F said:
Even without stock building, the manufacturing PMI would have been positive.DavidL said:
Agreed. Our political class have failed us utterly.nico67 said:Highest level of stockpiling by UK companies in history by any G7 economy .
Utterly pathetic and tragic that it’s come to this .
On the positive side it did boost production. In the EZ they had the lowest manufacturing PMI since April 2013 and there is a yield inversion in the US which may well be indicative of a recession in the next year or so. Our politics is truly crap but in economic terms we remain a haven of relative stability.
0 -
Phew! That would have been a bit of a slap in the face.Ishmael_Z said:
April foolFoxy said:
I think abstaining is the compromise. Mind you earlier this morning:RobD said:
Revoking is a compromise position?TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
https://twitter.com/LaylaMoran/status/1112635603240345605?s=190 -
She has voted same as last week why bother tweetingGIN1138 said:
How gracious of her to "compromise" by going for a losers vote or failing that outright revocation.TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
Must have been such a wrench for her...0 -
Note - EEA payments are based on GDP and Norwegian GDP per capita is nearly double ours. Mental arithmetic implies taht our payments per capita under such a regime would be half our current ones.dots said:
Stats don’t reveal truth when there are two different populations, climates, cultures, economies. Norway certainly has a bit of oil revenue to sweeten public spending and hence their populace’s perceptions. Yet each Norwegian household still pay almost as much into the EU as UK does now? That’s a funny definition of out?Richard_Tyndall said:
That is certainly not what the Norway option means at all.dots said:
Are we allowed to use the word vassalage without being accused of promoting violence?_Anazina_ said:
Indeed. Lots of mad things were said during the referendum campaign. A Norway style Brexit (as promoted by Richard since Day One) respects the result of the referendum, offers economic security and will almost certainly lead to a ‘relief bounce’ in the economy.Richard_Tyndall said:
Indeed. There are rather a lot of us on here. Robert S is another who immediately springs to mind.eek said:
Leave presented a moon on the stick. And many people voted leave but actually don't mind Freedom of Labour - I'm one, I'm sure Richard Tyndall is another....williamglenn said:
I don't see how it can be said to honour the referendum result when it doesn't deliver on the key things the Leave campaign were presenting to people.Gallowgate said:I really hope Common Market 2.0 is agreed. It's clearly the best compromise that honours the referendum result but also conserves the economy. I'd prefer remain but I can live with it. It's really where Britain should have been all along.
I am with @RoyalBlue - time to lay down the swords and compromise.
To put it more technically, we would move to keeping the EU rules, simply giving up political influence over them. That is what you are suggesting?
At some point 99% of the population will say, this is silly, if we are having those rules we might as well have the political influence over them. And we’ll be back to square one?
Also - exempt from the majority of EU rules, and with a role in shaping the legislation that is applicable.0 -
To show off and virtue signal like all our other waste of space MPs?bigjohnowls said:
She has voted same as last week why bother tweetingGIN1138 said:
How gracious of her to "compromise" by going for a losers vote or failing that outright revocation.TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
Must have been such a wrench for her...0 -
Dennis Skinner
no x 4 methinks0 -
Can we bring historical MPs into it.Pro_Rata said:
The amendment that most accurately reflects Labour tactics:bigjohnowls said:Rob Hastings
Verified account
@robhastings
6h6 hours ago
More
Inspired by Cooper-Boles and Kyle-Wilson, my dad and I have come up with some alternative parliamentary amendments:
Creasy-Bottomley
Pound-Pincher
Cash-Grant
Fysh-Brine
McDonald-Berger
Hands-Onn
Costa-Coffey
Fox-Hunt
David-Bowie
Twist-Turner
Flint-Stone
Stringer-Long(-Bailey)
An amendment that can be supported across the House, has no unicorns and that the EU will readily accessible to:
Rudd-Dalyell0 -
What are "peasant wagons?"TheScreamingEagles said:
My disdain for peasant wagons is purely down toFrancisUrquhart said:
Lol...I think your internet posts might be a bit problematic....remember the trouble mitt Romney got in with his 47% quote. Not sure you disdain for peasant wagons will go down too well.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm not running in 2020.FrancisUrquhart said:
It would be easier if those not running announced....rottenborough said:twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/1112802064281886720
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.0 -
No it hasn't. That is simply wrong. The vast majority of EU law does not apply to EFTA members because it only pertains to the Single Market. The actual amount of EU legislation incorporated into Norwegian law is less than 30% according to the Norwegian Government.dots said:https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-eu-payments/
And has incorporated 75% of EU law into its own law
a Norway government reportwhich says “Norway has incorporated approximately three-quarters of all EU legislative acts into Norwegian legislation
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/07/20/how-much-do-non-eu-countries-give-up-for-access-to-the-single-market-more-than-brexiteers-will-like/
But by being semi detached member has adopted very large share of EU regulations – without any voice influencing them
Not quite sure that is a good example for brexit, as it’s not entirely honest to say they are out of it in the way a true brexit will allow us to say it
https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/5d3982d042a2472eb1b20639cd8b2341/no/pdfs/nou201220120002000dddpdfs.pdf#page=795
And the Norwegians are involved in every stage of the development of new EEA legislation up to the final vote. The idea that they are just blindly taking laws from the EU is bullshit.
On the question of money, Norway pays around 300 million Euros a year to the EU for Single Market and programme access. The amount paid is based on GDP and with our larger GDP that amount would be around £3 billion.0 -
Virtue signalling is all she has done since arriving in WestminsterGIN1138 said:
To show off and virtue signal like all our other waste of space MPs?bigjohnowls said:
She has voted same as last week why bother tweetingGIN1138 said:
How gracious of her to "compromise" by going for a losers vote or failing that outright revocation.TheWhiteRabbit said:Layla Moran
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
Must have been such a wrench for her...0 -
Buses.Sean_F said:
What are "peasant wagons?"TheScreamingEagles said:
My disdain for peasant wagons is purely down toFrancisUrquhart said:
Lol...I think your internet posts might be a bit problematic....remember the trouble mitt Romney got in with his 47% quote. Not sure you disdain for peasant wagons will go down too well.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm not running in 2020.FrancisUrquhart said:
It would be easier if those not running announced....rottenborough said:twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/1112802064281886720
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.0 -
Those big vehicles that Jezza is always banging on about at PMQs.Sean_F said:
What are "peasant wagons?"TheScreamingEagles said:
My disdain for peasant wagons is purely down toFrancisUrquhart said:
Lol...I think your internet posts might be a bit problematic....remember the trouble mitt Romney got in with his 47% quote. Not sure you disdain for peasant wagons will go down too well.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm not running in 2020.FrancisUrquhart said:
It would be easier if those not running announced....rottenborough said:twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/1112802064281886720
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.0 -
Presume as MP for South Shields she has both eyes on her chances of retaining the very Leavery seat at the (imminent) GE.kle4 said:Considering Boles has apparently said people could add in a confirmatory vote later, I'm not sure this position is as secure as she thinks
https://twitter.com/EmmaLewellBuck/status/1112803853894930438?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1112803853894930438&ref_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-47772688
Edit: Got confused, thought Boles was CU for a second, but of course that's Clarke's0 -
And those Norwegian payments you are mentioning include the Norway fund which is not necessary for single market access.Andy_Cooke said:
Note - EEA payments are based on GDP and Norwegian GDP per capita is nearly double ours. Mental arithmetic implies taht our payments per capita under such a regime would be half our current ones.dots said:
Stats don’t reveal truth when there are two different populations, climates, cultures, economies. Norway certainly has a bit of oil revenue to sweeten public spending and hence their populace’s perceptions. Yet each Norwegian household still pay almost as much into the EU as UK does now? That’s a funny definition of out?Richard_Tyndall said:
That is certainly not what the Norway option means at all.dots said:
Are we allowed to use the word vassalage without being accused of promoting violence?_Anazina_ said:
Indeed. Lots of mad things were said during the referendum campaign. A Norway style Brexit (as promoted by Richard since Day One) respects the result of the referendum, offers economic security and will almost certainly lead to a ‘relief bounce’ in the economy.Richard_Tyndall said:
Indeed. There are rather a lot of us on here. Robert S is another who immediately springs to mind.eek said:
Leave presented a moon on the stick. And many people voted leave but actually don't mind Freedom of Labour - I'm one, I'm sure Richard Tyndall is another....williamglenn said:
I don't see how it can be said to honour the referendum result when it doesn't deliver on the key things the Leave campaign were presenting to people.Gallowgate said:I really hope Common Market 2.0 is agreed. It's clearly the best compromise that honours the referendum result but also conserves the economy. I'd prefer remain but I can live with it. It's really where Britain should have been all along.
I am with @RoyalBlue - time to lay down the swords and compromise.
To put it more technically, we would move to keeping the EU rules, simply giving up political influence over them. That is what you are suggesting?
At some point 99% of the population will say, this is silly, if we are having those rules we might as well have the political influence over them. And we’ll be back to square one?
Also - exempt from the majority of EU rules, and with a role in shaping the legislation that is applicable.0 -
Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (306)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.0 -
I do understand that, but there have been suggestions in recent days that May will seek to pit her Deal against the preferred option that emerges from Letwin's process.anothernick said:
The choice could not be framed in that way. The HoC votes for or against a proposal, to make a forced choice between two proposals would require a procedural motion to be passed to put such a choice before the House and such a procedural motion is unlikely to be carried.justin124 said:If it comes to a final choice between Common Market 2.0 /Customs Union or May's deal, how would the likes of Clarke and Boles be likely to vote given that hitherto both have supported May on the MV votes?
0 -
Driving through city centres would be easier without them.TheScreamingEagles said:
Buses.Sean_F said:
What are "peasant wagons?"TheScreamingEagles said:
My disdain for peasant wagons is purely down toFrancisUrquhart said:
Lol...I think your internet posts might be a bit problematic....remember the trouble mitt Romney got in with his 47% quote. Not sure you disdain for peasant wagons will go down too well.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm not running in 2020.FrancisUrquhart said:
It would be easier if those not running announced....rottenborough said:twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/1112802064281886720
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.0 -
Still looks like CU passes and nothing else does.0
-
Why does Fullfact say Norway pays £740m per year?Richard_Tyndall said:
No it hasn't. That is simply wrong. The vast majority of EU law does not apply to EFTA members because it only pertains to the Single Market. The actual amount of EU legislation incorporated into Norwegian law is less than 30% according to the Norwegian Government.dots said:https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-eu-payments/
And has incorporated 75% of EU law into its own law
a Norway government reportwhich says “Norway has incorporated approximately three-quarters of all EU legislative acts into Norwegian legislation
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/07/20/how-much-do-non-eu-countries-give-up-for-access-to-the-single-market-more-than-brexiteers-will-like/
But by being semi detached member has adopted very large share of EU regulations – without any voice influencing them
Not quite sure that is a good example for brexit, as it’s not entirely honest to say they are out of it in the way a true brexit will allow us to say it
https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/5d3982d042a2472eb1b20639cd8b2341/no/pdfs/nou201220120002000dddpdfs.pdf#page=795
And the Norwegians are involved in every stage of the development of new EEA legislation up to the final vote. The idea that they are just blindly taking laws from the EU is bullshit.
On the question of money, Norway pays around 300 million Euros a year to the EU for Single Market and programme access. The amount paid is based on GDP and with our larger GDP that amount would be around £3 billion.0 -
Again, that's all theory and it isn't tenable for the UK to be in a customs union (even if the EU agree to reciprocity on trade with non-EU partners) in the long term. The UK economy is simply too big not to have an independent trade and regulatory policy. It would be a good place to land for 5-7 years but beyond that we'd need to develop our own trade policy and independent regulatory standards, especially for the services sector where our markets are far more developed than the EU.FF43 said:I have been delving a bit into customs unions in particular from Anna Jerzewska, Dmitry Grozoubinski, Peter Ungphakorn, David Henig and Sam Lowe who are A grade trade policy experts. They broadly agree on customs unions that;
- Customs Unions are complex. It isn't a case of customs unions good or customs unions bad.
- The UK and the EU have a lot of options in how they draft their customs union and we shouldn't expect it to look like the Turkish one.
- The UK could probably get the EU to insist on its inclusion in every trade agreement the EU makes. The UK has sufficient economic weight to make that attractive to both the EU and the third county. The customs union would have to include agriculture in that case (also needed for the Irish border). The UK would have to accept having the deals is more important than having an independent trade policy.
- The UK would need to follow EU rules.
- All the experts think a customs union should be considered and that a workable customs union is possible.
0 - Customs Unions are complex. It isn't a case of customs unions good or customs unions bad.
-
Ok, deal, and what was all the frigging fuss about?TheWhiteRabbit said:Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.0 -
35 SNP not 45TheWhiteRabbit said:Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.0 -
Wilson WILSON - As in CastawayPro_Rata said:
Can we bring historical MPs into it.Pro_Rata said:
The amendment that most accurately reflects Labour tactics:bigjohnowls said:Rob Hastings
Verified account
@robhastings
6h6 hours ago
More
Inspired by Cooper-Boles and Kyle-Wilson, my dad and I have come up with some alternative parliamentary amendments:
Creasy-Bottomley
Pound-Pincher
Cash-Grant
Fysh-Brine
McDonald-Berger
Hands-Onn
Costa-Coffey
Fox-Hunt
David-Bowie
Twist-Turner
Flint-Stone
Stringer-Long(-Bailey)
An amendment that can be supported across the House, has no unicorns and that the EU will readily accessible to:
Rudd-Dalyell0 -
Time for bed too much Cider0
-
solarflare said:
35 SNP not 45TheWhiteRabbit said:Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
I don't know what you mean. You saw nothing...solarflare said:
35 SNP not 45TheWhiteRabbit said:Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.0 -
Just watching the Laura K doc on Brexit (BBC 2). A scene where T May arrives and gets miked up for interview.
How on earth did someone this socially awkward, shy, and frankly, almost heartbreakingly lost in other people's company, become PM?
Indeed, why would they want to. Her every day must be a living hell of anxiety.
I mean, she presumably knows Laura pretty well given her decade or two of party activism at the highest levels?
Genuinely jaw dropping.
0 -
You're right. These aren't the droids I'm looking forTheWhiteRabbit said:solarflare said:
35 SNP not 45TheWhiteRabbit said:Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
I don't know what you mean. You saw nothing...solarflare said:
35 SNP not 45TheWhiteRabbit said:Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.0 -
How many SNP mps ?TheWhiteRabbit said:Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.0 -
Unless you are a bus driver.Sean_F said:
Driving through city centres would be easier without them.TheScreamingEagles said:
Buses.Sean_F said:
What are "peasant wagons?"TheScreamingEagles said:
My disdain for peasant wagons is purely down toFrancisUrquhart said:
Lol...I think your internet posts might be a bit problematic....remember the trouble mitt Romney got in with his 47% quote. Not sure you disdain for peasant wagons will go down too well.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm not running in 2020.FrancisUrquhart said:
It would be easier if those not running announced....rottenborough said:twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/1112802064281886720
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.0 -
Rees-Mogg's mask slips: "If people talk about me being silly rather than what Downing Street wants them to talk about, that's fine."0
-
You're seeing things Big_G, I definitely did not forget GE 2017 happenedBig_G_NorthWales said:
How many SNP mps ?TheWhiteRabbit said:Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.0 -
https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-eu-payments/Andy_Cooke said:
Note - EEA payments are based on GDP and Norwegian GDP per capita is nearly double ours. Mental arithmetic implies taht our payments per capita under such a regime would be half our current ones.dots said:
Stats don’t reveal truth when there are two different populations, climates, cultures, economies. Norway certainly has a bit of oil revenue to sweeten public spending and hence their populace’s perceptions. Yet each Norwegian household still pay almost as much into the EU as UK does now? That’s a funny definition of out?Richard_Tyndall said:
That is certainly not what the Norway option means at all.dots said:
we would move to keeping the EU rules, simply giving up political influence over them. That is what you are suggesting?_Anazina_ said:Richard_Tyndall said:
Indeed. There are rather a lot of us on here. Robert S is another who immediately springs to mind.eek said:
Leave presented a moon on the stick. And many people voted leave but actually don't mind Freedom of Labour - I'm one, I'm sure Richard Tyndall is another....williamglenn said:
I don't see how it can be said to honour the referendum result when it doesn't deliver on the key things the Leave campaign were presenting to people.Gallowgate said:I really hope Common Market 2.0 is agreed. It's clearly the best compromise that honours the referendum result
At some point 99% of the population will say, this is silly, if we are having those rules we might as well have the political influence over them. And we’ll be back to square one?
Also - exempt from the majority of EU rules, and with a role in shaping the legislation that is applicable.
And 75% of laws dreamt up by EU for Norway to incorporate into theirs.
a Norway government reportwhich says “Norway has incorporated approximately three-quarters of all EU legislative acts into Norwegian legislation
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/07/20/how-much-do-non-eu-countries-give-up-for-access-to-the-single-market-more-than-brexiteers-will-like/
But by being semi detached member has adopted very large share of EU regulations – without any voice influencing them
Norway option. The truth?
No. What is the benefit of their oil per head compared to ours? It has to be part of the equation if you think a political set up is working fine somewhere.0 -
Cherry-Stonebigjohnowls said:Rob Hastings
Verified account
@robhastings
6h6 hours ago
More
Inspired by Cooper-Boles and Kyle-Wilson, my dad and I have come up with some alternative parliamentary amendments:
Creasy-Bottomley
Pound-Pincher
Cash-Grant
Fysh-Brine
McDonald-Berger
Hands-Onn
Costa-Coffey
Fox-Hunt
David-Bowie
Twist-Turner
Flint-Stone
Lynch-Law
Field-Gray
Wood-Turner
You may have hit on a way to make Parliament interesting!0 -
Poundshop Gordon Brown....rottenborough said:Just watching the Laura K doc on Brexit (BBC 2). A scene where T May arrives and gets miked up for interview.
How on earth did someone this socially awkward, shy, and frankly, almost heartbreakingly lost in other people's company, become PM?
Indeed, why would they want to. Her every day must be a living hell of anxiety.
I mean, she presumably knows Laura pretty well given her decade or two of party activism at the highest levels?
Genuinely jaw dropping.0 -
Customs unions don't apply to services. It's not all or nothing on trade policy as it applies to customs unions either. We can tap into the EU and get a set of arrangements that deliver much less friction in our trade overall, but at the cost of doing what we are toldMaxPB said:
Again, that's all theory and it isn't tenable for the UK to be in a customs union (even if the EU agree to reciprocity on trade with non-EU partners) in the long term. The UK economy is simply too big not to have an independent trade and regulatory policy. It would be a good place to land for 5-7 years but beyond that we'd need to develop our own trade policy and independent regulatory standards, especially for the services sector where our markets are far more developed than the EU.FF43 said:I have been delving a bit into customs unions in particular from Anna Jerzewska, Dmitry Grozoubinski, Peter Ungphakorn, David Henig and Sam Lowe who are A grade trade policy experts. They broadly agree on customs unions that;
- Customs Unions are complex. It isn't a case of customs unions good or customs unions bad.
- The UK and the EU have a lot of options in how they draft their customs union and we shouldn't expect it to look like the Turkish one.
- The UK could probably get the EU to insist on its inclusion in every trade agreement the EU makes. The UK has sufficient economic weight to make that attractive to both the EU and the third county. The customs union would have to include agriculture in that case (also needed for the Irish border). The UK would have to accept having the deals is more important than having an independent trade policy.
- The UK would need to follow EU rules.
- All the experts think a customs union should be considered and that a workable customs union is possible.
0 - Customs Unions are complex. It isn't a case of customs unions good or customs unions bad.
-
Sky result expected about 10.150
-
That report cites 69.7% of directives and 17.5% of regulations for a total of 28.1% of the EU acquis (page 795 of the report cited in Full Fact).dots said:
https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-eu-payments/Richard_Tyndall said:
No it doesn't. Some of us on here looked in detail at this around the time of the referendum and the UK equivalent commitment if we had a Norway Deal would be something around £3bn a year. It is massively less than now.dots said:
Stats don’t reveal truth when there are two different populations, climates, cultures, economies. Norway certainly has a bit of oil revenue to sweeten public spending and hence their populace’s perceptions. Yet each Norwegian household still pay almost as much into the EU as UK does now? That’s a funny definition of out?Richard_Tyndall said:
That is certainly not what the Norway option means at all.dots said:
Are we allowed to use the word vassalage without being accused of promoting violence?
To put it more technically, we would move to keeping the EU rules, simply giving up political influence over them. That is what you are suggesting?
At some point 99% of the population will say, this is silly, if we are having those rules we might as well have the political influence over them. And we’ll be back to square one?
You are also wrong on the influence that Norway has over policy making as part of the EEA agreement.
And has incorporated 75% of EU law into its own law
a Norway government reportwhich says “Norway has incorporated approximately three-quarters of all EU legislative acts into Norwegian legislation
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/07/20/how-much-do-non-eu-countries-give-up-for-access-to-the-single-market-more-than-brexiteers-will-like/
But by being semi detached member has adopted very large share of EU regulations – without any voice influencing them
Not quite sure that is a good example for brexit, as it’s not entirely honest to say they are out of it in the way a true brexit will allow us to say it
Those who want to spin it in a certain way cite the first number and round it up to 75%.
(Seriously, am I the only person who actually reads cited links and reports?)0 -
I'm thinking of the Bluddy-Nora amendmentsarissa said:
Cherry-Stonebigjohnowls said:Rob Hastings
Verified account
@robhastings
6h6 hours ago
More
Inspired by Cooper-Boles and Kyle-Wilson, my dad and I have come up with some alternative parliamentary amendments:
Creasy-Bottomley
Pound-Pincher
Cash-Grant
Fysh-Brine
McDonald-Berger
Hands-Onn
Costa-Coffey
Fox-Hunt
David-Bowie
Twist-Turner
Flint-Stone
Lynch-Law
Field-Gray
Wood-Turner
You may have hit on a way to make Parliament interesting!0 -
Shame TMay did.TheWhiteRabbit said:
You're seeing things Big_G, I definitely did not forget GE 2017 happenedBig_G_NorthWales said:
How many SNP mps ?TheWhiteRabbit said:Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.0 -
I'll always maintin she only ran for the leadership to try and secure her place as Home Secretary in a Boris government.rottenborough said:Just watching the Laura K doc on Brexit (BBC 2). A scene where T May arrives and gets miked up for interview.
How on earth did someone this socially awkward, shy, and frankly, almost heartbreakingly lost in other people's company, become PM?
Indeed, why would they want to. Her every day must be a living hell of anxiety.
I mean, she presumably knows Laura pretty well given her decade or two of party activism at the highest levels?
Genuinely jaw dropping.
She'd had her run-ins with Boris and at that time all the talk was that Boris and Gove would keep Osborne on as CofE. So she was facing enemies all around her and probably thought she was for the chop (or certainly a serious demotion) unless she had a decent run in the leadership election.
But then Boris and Gove blew each other up and she was the last man (woman) standing.0 -
I am left feeling rather sad. Her sense of duty must be off the scale.FrancisUrquhart said:
Poundshop Gordon Brown....rottenborough said:Just watching the Laura K doc on Brexit (BBC 2). A scene where T May arrives and gets miked up for interview.
How on earth did someone this socially awkward, shy, and frankly, almost heartbreakingly lost in other people's company, become PM?
Indeed, why would they want to. Her every day must be a living hell of anxiety.
I mean, she presumably knows Laura pretty well given her decade or two of party activism at the highest levels?
Genuinely jaw dropping.0 -
SNP only have 35!TheWhiteRabbit said:Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (306)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.0 -
Why later than last week even though they had fewer options to vote on?Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky result expected about 10.15
0 -
Some light relief from Brexit, coverage from Newport West via Wales Online.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/newport-west-brexit-by-election-16043663?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
0 -
Cox-Shukersarissa said:
Cherry-Stonebigjohnowls said:Rob Hastings
Verified account
@robhastings
6h6 hours ago
More
Inspired by Cooper-Boles and Kyle-Wilson, my dad and I have come up with some alternative parliamentary amendments:
Creasy-Bottomley
Pound-Pincher
Cash-Grant
Fysh-Brine
McDonald-Berger
Hands-Onn
Costa-Coffey
Fox-Hunt
David-Bowie
Twist-Turner
Flint-Stone
Lynch-Law
Field-Gray
Wood-Turner
You may have hit on a way to make Parliament interesting!0 -
-
I have no idea what you are talking about. There are 35 snps in the HOCTheWhiteRabbit said:
You're seeing things Big_G, I definitely did not forget GE 2017 happenedBig_G_NorthWales said:
How many SNP mps ?TheWhiteRabbit said:Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.0 -
Apparently we still have to wait another hour for this ridiculously slow vote count to be completed, but rumour has it (according to the BBC) that the outcome is going to be No No No No.
At this rate it really is going to come down to a Revoke vs No Deal ballot on April 11th.0 -
If true, does Mr Bollocks to Brexit get a say?rottenborough said:0 -
Haha. Fun stuff.rottenborough said:
In all seriousness, I would have thought the best case scenario for the government tonight would be, short of nothing receiving more ayes than nays at all, then at least the WA should still have the second highest number of ayes, so a tie on CU at 274 would work out for them.0 -
I made a mistake in my original post, which I have now corrected.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have no idea what you are talking about. There are 35 snps in the HOCTheWhiteRabbit said:
You're seeing things Big_G, I definitely did not forget GE 2017 happenedBig_G_NorthWales said:
How many SNP mps ?TheWhiteRabbit said:Common Market 2.0 last week was:
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
0 -
I do not knowGIN1138 said:
Why later than last week even though they had fewer options to vote on?Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky result expected about 10.15
0 -
How could Common Market 2.0 fail with the SNP and Lab whipping for it?Black_Rook said:Apparently we still have to wait another hour for this ridiculously slow vote count to be completed, but rumour has it (according to the BBC) that the outcome is going to be No No No No.
At this rate it really is going to come down to a Revoke vs No Deal ballot on April 11th.0 -
If true then enough is enough. Prorogue parliament and end this farce.Black_Rook said:Apparently we still have to wait another hour for this ridiculously slow vote count to be completed, but rumour has it (according to the BBC) that the outcome is going to be No No No No.
0
