politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » CON leadership betting analysis: This is less about Brexit and
Comments
-
Yes. So presumably in such an eventuality the motion would pass?FrancisUrquhart said:
If true, does Mr Bollocks to Brexit get a say?rottenborough said:0 -
Vince Cable says he abstained on the soft Brexit options.0
-
Brake-Lawsarissa 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 wonder whether No10 could propose a series of indicative votes on Wednesday:
Deal
Deal with CM2
Deal with CU
No Deal
Then see how it falls out0 -
That would be odd when two of the options were so close last time.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 -
I would guess though May has cover to ignore it, as the cabinet didn't vote.Black_Rook said:
Yes. So presumably in such an eventuality the motion would pass?FrancisUrquhart said:
If true, does Mr Bollocks to Brexit get a say?rottenborough said:0 -
Too many abstentions still. I'm quite annoyed at the government for playing silly buggers on this. I get it, they didn't want there to be these votes, well tough, suck it up and contribute properly.0
-
"sovereignty"GIN1138 said:
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 -
Because they are including the Norway Fund which is not necessary for Single Market Access. It is effectively the equivalent of our overseas aid and is designed to help improve equality amongst European NationsBenpointer said:
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 -
Brake-Cablespudgfsh said:
Brake-Lawsarissa 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 -
Maybe part of the problem is once again they knew it was not end of the line? With Wednesday also set aside for votes MPs will continue to half arse it, or some of them at any rate.GIN1138 said:
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.
But I'm hopeful something will pass.0 -
But that's the issue, it isn't tenable for the UK to be subordinate to the EU. The economy is too large, a customs union of some kind is a good landing spot in the short term, which is why the backstop makes some kind of sense, but in the long term we will need an independent trade and regulatory policy. Less trade friction can be delivered independently and the advantages of not being subordinate on regulations is fairly self explanatory.FF43 said:
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.
-
May-Brake - Lawspudgfsh said:
Brake-Lawsarissa 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 -
At least seven from my university joined IS, says captured fighter
An Islamic State fighter held in Syria has told the BBC he was one of at least seven students and ex-students from University of Westminster to join IS.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-477727720 -
Head-DeskMarqueeMark said:
Brake-Cablespudgfsh said:
Brake-Lawsarissa 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 -
There's at least another week of this... Nothing will get a positive vote until next Tuesday...kle4 said:
Maybe part of the problem is once again they knew it was not end of the line? With Wednesday also set aside for votes MPs will continue to half arse it, or some of them at any rate.GIN1138 said:
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.
But I'm hopeful something will pass.0 -
0
-
Field-Gardiner
Djanogly-Bone
Cherry-Baker0 -
Fair play, that is easily done these daysTheWhiteRabbit said:
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 -
Still repeating the same old rubbish. I already showed you the link to the Norwegian Government's own figures on how much EU law is incorporated into Norwegian law. I suspect the Norwegian's have a much better handle on this than your secondary and rather dubious sources.dots said:
https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-eu-payments/
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 -
That sounds like an awful episode of Gogglebox.rottenborough said:Think I am going to puke:
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/11128137759907430400 -
Why are the BBC giving them a platform?FrancisUrquhart said:At least seven from my university joined IS, says captured fighter
An Islamic State fighter held in Syria has told the BBC he was one of at least seven students and ex-students from University of Westminster to join IS.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47772772
It isn't news.0 -
Indeed. This is why I posted to the original Norwegian source.Andy_Cooke said:
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 -
Isn't Wednesday supposed to be about legislating to force the government to implement tonight's decision?kle4 said:
Maybe part of the problem is once again they knew it was not end of the line? With Wednesday also set aside for votes MPs will continue to half arse it, or some of them at any rate.GIN1138 said:
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.
But I'm hopeful something will pass.
If no decision is taken tonight then it's time for this farce to end.
Give them one final chance to stop ******* about and vote for May's deal or failing that we No Deal a week on Friday.
One way or another this has to end!0 -
Djangoly-Bone wins!williamglenn said:Field-Gardiner
Djanogly-Bone
Cherry-Baker0 -
How did ElectionMaps do when predicting the results last time?rottenborough said:0 -
That's an awful lot of bold assertions with no logic, rationale, or working examples provided.MaxPB said:
But that's the issue, it isn't tenable for the UK to be subordinate to the EU. The economy is too large, a customs union of some kind is a good landing spot in the short term, which is why the backstop makes some kind of sense, but in the long term we will need an independent trade and regulatory policy. Less trade friction can be delivered independently and the advantages of not being subordinate on regulations is fairly self explanatory.FF43 said:
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.
-
I hope both his hands are on the desk...rottenborough said:Think I am going to puke:
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/11128137759907430400 -
Another key extremist at University of Westminster was Abukar's brother Makhzumi. He is serving a seven-year jail term after pleading guilty in 2016 to a million-pound fraud to steal the savings of pensioners.oxfordsimon said:
Why are the BBC giving them a platform?FrancisUrquhart said:At least seven from my university joined IS, says captured fighter
An Islamic State fighter held in Syria has told the BBC he was one of at least seven students and ex-students from University of Westminster to join IS.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47772772
It isn't news.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47772772
Guess who lobbied to get one of this gang out of jail for Christmas?0 -
Less trade friction definitely won't be delivered independently. The the advantages of not being subordinate on regulations isn't actually self explanatory. That's why people standardiseMaxPB said:
But that's the issue, it isn't tenable for the UK to be subordinate to the EU. The economy is too large, a customs union of some kind is a good landing spot in the short term, which is why the backstop makes some kind of sense, but in the long term we will need an independent trade and regulatory policy. Less trade friction can be delivered independently and the advantages of not being subordinate on regulations is fairly self explanatory.FF43 said:
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.
-
At MV3 it hadAndyJS said:
How did ElectionMaps do when predicting the results last time?rottenborough said:
For: 266 (+24)
Against: 368 (-23)
DEFEAT by 102 Votes (-47)
So not great.0 -
Pissup-Brewerysolarflare said:
Head-DeskMarqueeMark said:
Brake-Cablespudgfsh said:
Brake-Lawsarissa 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 -
@Andyjs
Initial Indicative Votes Projection:
Single Market Deal: Pass by 4
Free Trade Agreement: Lose by 30
2nd Ref: Lose by 42
Customs Union Deal: Lose by 82
May's Deal: Lose by 142
No Deal: Lose by 456
Revoke A50: Lose by 506
Indicative Votes Results:
Customs Union: Defeat by 8
2nd Referendum: Defeat by 27
Labour Plan: Defear by 70
Common Market 2.0: Defeat by 95
Revoke A50: Defeat by 109
No Deal: Defeat by 240
Contingent Arrangements: Defeat by 283
EEA/EFTA: Defeat by 3120 -
Surely the reasonable follow up to that would be to say there is clearly significant support for it and put it forward for a proper vote. And I say that as someone who thinks it is a very bad idea. But at the point where it is tied it would be a poor show to just dismiss it.rottenborough said:0 -
Perhaps the rumours are wrong? We only have about another half-a-million years to wait before we find out.kle4 said:
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.
I can only assume that all these ballots are being translated into Norman French, inscribed upon vellum scrolls and delivered to the palace, where they will be individually proclaimed unto Her Majesty by heralds in full 15th Century ceremonial dress, before the results can be announced in Parliament.0 -
-
Strange. It seemed obvious to me that MV3 would get above 275.TheWhiteRabbit said:
At MV3 it hadAndyJS said:
How did ElectionMaps do when predicting the results last time?rottenborough said:
For: 266 (+24)
Against: 368 (-23)
DEFEAT by 102 Votes (-47)
So not great.0 -
They didn't like the offer of quiche slices?TheScreamingEagles said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxpYW_w5pgo0 -
Mixed bag, but not great?AndyJS said:
How did ElectionMaps do when predicting the results last time?rottenborough said:
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1110602936353214464
0 -
Hence my suggestion, how can you compare society’s benefitting differently in investment home and abroad, the impact on taxation and households, and a general sense of happiness and well being, due to income from oil revenue? What could work fine in one situation with a populace very happy could be regressive in a different culture, different psychology with deindustrial, health and social care deficits stacking up.Richard_Tyndall said:
Because they are including the Norway Fund which is not necessary for Single Market Access. It is effectively the equivalent of our overseas aid and is designed to help improve equality amongst European NationsBenpointer said:
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 -
There's only 4 options tonight, so they could probably have had 4 divisions in less time than this, surely.Black_Rook said:
Perhaps the rumours are wrong? We only have about another half-a-million years to wait before we find out.kle4 said:
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.
I can only assume that all these ballots are being translated into Norman French, inscribed upon vellum scrolls and delivered to the palace, where they will be individually proclaimed unto Her Majesty by heralds in full 15th Century ceremonial dress, before the results can be announced in Parliament.0 -
April 1st.rottenborough said:0 -
Why wouldn't it, if a trade deal with the EU delivers less trade friction for non-EU countries then how does it follow that UK-third country trade deals wouldn't reduce trade friction?FF43 said:
Less trade friction definitely won't be delivered independently. The the advantages of not being subordinate on regulations isn't actually self explanatory. That's why people standardise
As for regulations, having an independent policy gets us a seat at the standardisation table, not having one means accepting whatever the EU dictates. In the short term the latter would be fine, especially since we're starting from an identical base, but in the long term it wouldn't be acceptable for the world's fifth largest economy to be a rule taker.0 -
How crap is Anthony Taylor?0
-
You would have thought, but I was under the impression April 1st had to be done before midday, no?Alistair said:
April 1st.rottenborough said:0 -
Gets me every time. The grandiose language. The seemingly sincere taking of affront at everything. It's so dead on.FrancisUrquhart said:
They didn't like the offer of quiche slices?TheScreamingEagles said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxpYW_w5pgo0 -
That would entail 30 Labour who didn't just abstain but actually vote Nay to vote Aye this time.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.
The idea that's indicative of anything other than Parliament's nonsense is absurd.0 -
Figures were far too high - and made no allowance for Abstentions by Cabinet and other MPs.kle4 said:
Mixed bag, but not great?AndyJS said:
How did ElectionMaps do when predicting the results last time?rottenborough said:
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/11106029363532144640 -
My gut is telling me both CU and CM2.0 will pass tonight, but a confirmatory referendum will lose narrowly.0
-
There's no probably about it, it only takes 10-15 minutes.solarflare said:
There's only 4 options tonight, so they could probably have had 4 divisions in less time than this, surely.Black_Rook said:
Perhaps the rumours are wrong? We only have about another half-a-million years to wait before we find out.kle4 said:
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.
I can only assume that all these ballots are being translated into Norman French, inscribed upon vellum scrolls and delivered to the palace, where they will be individually proclaimed unto Her Majesty by heralds in full 15th Century ceremonial dress, before the results can be announced in Parliament.0 -
Thanks.kle4 said:
Mixed bag, but not great?AndyJS said:
How did ElectionMaps do when predicting the results last time?rottenborough said:
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/11106029363532144640 -
Most ayes: CU 1.34, CM and 2nd referendum 7.20, revoke 70.
Betfair still thinks 70% CU passes.0 -
Yanks presumably a few hours behind?FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have thought, but I was under the impression April 1st had to be done before midday, no?Alistair said:
April 1st.rottenborough said:0 -
Don't need to guess, sadlyFrancisUrquhart said:
Another key extremist at University of Westminster was Abukar's brother Makhzumi. He is serving a seven-year jail term after pleading guilty in 2016 to a million-pound fraud to steal the savings of pensioners.oxfordsimon said:
Why are the BBC giving them a platform?FrancisUrquhart said:At least seven from my university joined IS, says captured fighter
An Islamic State fighter held in Syria has told the BBC he was one of at least seven students and ex-students from University of Westminster to join IS.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47772772
It isn't news.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47772772
Guess who lobbied to get one of this gang out of jail for Christmas?0 -
That and the QT sketch...and due to some personal experience*, the "I am significantly richer than yeeeeeewwww" with the guy in the hotel bar.kle4 said:
Gets me every time. The grandiose language. The seemingly sincere taking of affront at everything. It's so dead on.FrancisUrquhart said:
They didn't like the offer of quiche slices?TheScreamingEagles said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxpYW_w5pgo
* its a very good story and has a politician connection, but I don't think I should share on a public forum.0 -
No worries, they'll add that back in to the CU and CM2.0 options - that way the indicative votes can mean even less.Gardenwalker said:My gut is telling me both CU and CM2.0 will pass tonight, but a confirmatory referendum will lose narrowly.
0 -
Good because the confirmatory referendum solves nothing. It's a con trick.Gardenwalker said:My gut is telling me both CU and CM2.0 will pass tonight, but a confirmatory referendum will lose narrowly.
0 -
It was posted 12:25 pm local time I believe.Foxy said:
Yanks presumably a few hours behind?FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have thought, but I was under the impression April 1st had to be done before midday, no?Alistair said:
April 1st.rottenborough said:
The fact it is vaguely believable makes it a good April fool.0 -
The reason that they are doing it this way is to prevent the result of one having an impact on the next. even if they don't announce the votes MPs will be able to work out if certain votes have failed (even if you can't determine if one has passed)kle4 said:
There's no probably about it, it only takes 10-15 minutes.solarflare said:
There's only 4 options tonight, so they could probably have had 4 divisions in less time than this, surely.Black_Rook said:
Perhaps the rumours are wrong? We only have about another half-a-million years to wait before we find out.kle4 said:
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.
I can only assume that all these ballots are being translated into Norman French, inscribed upon vellum scrolls and delivered to the palace, where they will be individually proclaimed unto Her Majesty by heralds in full 15th Century ceremonial dress, before the results can be announced in Parliament.0 -
That would be at least the third rejection of another referendum... unless I am misrememberingMaxPB said:
Good because the confirmatory referendum solves nothing. It's a con trick.Gardenwalker said:My gut is telling me both CU and CM2.0 will pass tonight, but a confirmatory referendum will lose narrowly.
0 -
Last week it wasn't whipped, now if is - plus a charm offensive in the meantime.Philip_Thompson said:
That would entail 30 Labour who didn't just abstain but actually vote Nay to vote Aye this time.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.
The idea that's indicative of anything other than Parliament's nonsense is absurd.
I'm not saying only 12 Labour MPs won't - I'm saying stick a finger in the air and you see that victory is not as unlikely as the current 6/1 suggests0 -
Makes a certain sense, although frankly given they can all vote for however many options as they like it shouldn't make a difference. It's another example of them pissing about over procedure to avoid the real issue, which is them making a decision.spudgfsh said:
The reason that they are doing it this way is to prevent the result of one having an impact on the next. even if they don't announce the votes MPs will be able to work out if certain votes have failed (even if you can't determine if one has passed)kle4 said:
There's no probably about it, it only takes 10-15 minutes.solarflare said:
There's only 4 options tonight, so they could probably have had 4 divisions in less time than this, surely.Black_Rook said:
Perhaps the rumours are wrong? We only have about another half-a-million years to wait before we find out.kle4 said:
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.
I can only assume that all these ballots are being translated into Norman French, inscribed upon vellum scrolls and delivered to the palace, where they will be individually proclaimed unto Her Majesty by heralds in full 15th Century ceremonial dress, before the results can be announced in Parliament.0 -
Surely the best April Fool was today's Mirror front page.FrancisUrquhart said:
It was posted 12:25 pm local time I believe.Foxy said:
Yanks presumably a few hours behind?FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have thought, but I was under the impression April 1st had to be done before midday, no?Alistair said:
April 1st.rottenborough said:
The fact it is vaguely believable makes it a good April fool.0 -
The problem is you have now moved on from quoting false figures and making uninformed statements about how EFTA works to debating happiness in Norway - and with someone who lived and worked there for 15 years.dots said:
Hence my suggestion, how can you compare society’s benefitting differently in investment home and abroad, the impact on taxation and households, and a general sense of happiness and well being, due to income from oil revenue? What could work fine in one situation with a populace very happy could be regressive in a different culture, different psychology with deindustrial, health and social care deficits stacking up.
But the basic position is that if we did choose the Norway option we would pay a lot less to the EU for Single Market access and would be subject to perhaps only 30% of the legislation that we currently have to adopt from the EU. All whilst keeping our trade with them.
It is a very attractive proposition for anyone who is not bothered about the freedom of movement issue.0 -
True.oxfordsimon said:
That would be at least the third rejection of another referendum... unless I am misrememberingMaxPB said:
Good because the confirmatory referendum solves nothing. It's a con trick.Gardenwalker said:My gut is telling me both CU and CM2.0 will pass tonight, but a confirmatory referendum will lose narrowly.
Although at this stage everything is now racking up multiple rejections, so does that tell us anything either way.0 -
The image seems like the givaway to me. That cannot be a serious way to hint that you want to run on a centrist platform.FrancisUrquhart said:
It was posted 12:25 pm local time I believe.Foxy said:
Yanks presumably a few hours behind?FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have thought, but I was under the impression April 1st had to be done before midday, no?Alistair said:
April 1st.rottenborough said:
The fact it is vaguely believable makes it a good April fool.0 -
I didn't see it...was it May to set down immediately?Pulpstar said:
Surely the best April Fool was today's Mirror front page.FrancisUrquhart said:
It was posted 12:25 pm local time I believe.Foxy said:
Yanks presumably a few hours behind?FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have thought, but I was under the impression April 1st had to be done before midday, no?Alistair said:
April 1st.rottenborough said:
The fact it is vaguely believable makes it a good April fool.0 -
Paul Waugh suggesting a senior shadow cabinet member broke the whip to vote against Kyle amendment.0
-
Labour "We're ready for government"FrancisUrquhart said:
I didn't see it...was it May to set down immediately?Pulpstar said:
Surely the best April Fool was today's Mirror front page.FrancisUrquhart said:
It was posted 12:25 pm local time I believe.Foxy said:
Yanks presumably a few hours behind?FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have thought, but I was under the impression April 1st had to be done before midday, no?Alistair said:
April 1st.rottenborough said:
The fact it is vaguely believable makes it a good April fool.0 -
Division bell ringing - 10 mins to result0
-
Results in 10 Mins0
-
As I say, April's have to be vaguely believable...that is clearly stuff of la la land.Pulpstar said:
Labour "We're ready for government"FrancisUrquhart said:
I didn't see it...was it May to set down immediately?Pulpstar said:
Surely the best April Fool was today's Mirror front page.FrancisUrquhart said:
It was posted 12:25 pm local time I believe.Foxy said:
Yanks presumably a few hours behind?FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have thought, but I was under the impression April 1st had to be done before midday, no?Alistair said:
April 1st.rottenborough said:
The fact it is vaguely believable makes it a good April fool.0 -
No, in 2011 the police conducted 1.2m stop-and-searches in England and Wales. In 2017 that figure was around 300,000 (see chart) and knife crime has risen accordingly.TheScreamingEagles said:
https://www.economist.com/britain/2018/01/18/can-an-increase-in-stop-and-search-cut-knife-crime0 -
The other reason they are taking their time is probably because they don't was a repeat of the corrections they had to make on friday in announcing the previous voteskle4 said:
Makes a certain sense, although frankly given they can all vote for however many options as they like it shouldn't make a difference. It's another example of them pissing about over procedure to avoid the real issue, which is them making a decision.spudgfsh said:
The reason that they are doing it this way is to prevent the result of one having an impact on the next. even if they don't announce the votes MPs will be able to work out if certain votes have failed (even if you can't determine if one has passed)0 -
Is the difference here *section 60* searches? I assume there are a range of police powers?HYUFD said:
No, in 2011 the police conducted 1.2m stop-and-searches in England and Wales. In 2017 that figure was around 300,000 (see chart) and knife crime has risen accordingly.TheScreamingEagles said:
https://www.economist.com/britain/2018/01/18/can-an-increase-in-stop-and-search-cut-knife-crime0 -
CU Yes 1.6-1.8. Drifting.0
-
CU prices on the move, not so sure to pass.0
-
My 16yo daughter surprised me tonight by sitting down and watching some of the debate in parliament on TV. After 10 minutes she turned to me and said - "I think about half of those MPs are too scared of the voters and the other half are not scared enough. I just can't tell which are which." That is now making my brain hurt.0
-
So what happens if parliament rejects all the options again?0
-
MV4/WAV2?MaxPB said:So what happens if parliament rejects all the options again?
0 -
Smart girl.ExiledInScotland said:My 16yo daughter surprised me tonight by sitting down and watching some of the debate in parliament on TV. After 10 minutes she turned to me and said - "I think about half of those MPs are too scared of the voters and the other half are not scared enough. I just can't tell which are which." That is now making my brain hurt.
0 -
Letwin and Bercow make some other shit upMaxPB said:So what happens if parliament rejects all the options again?
0 -
I am surprised somebody hasn't been done by now, as clearly on these votes some people with insider info are trading on that.stjohn said:CU Yes 1.6-1.8. Drifting.
0 -
The customs union would definitely deliver much less trade friction with the EU, which makes up about half our trade. Depending on agreement with the third country it should either reduce trade friction on things like cumulative rules of origin or be neutral, with friction being reduced across the board. It is telling that the few deals that have been rolled over by the DExEU are significantly worse than the EU arrangements they replace.MaxPB said:
Why wouldn't it, if a trade deal with the EU delivers less trade friction for non-EU countries then how does it follow that UK-third country trade deals wouldn't reduce trade friction?FF43 said:
Less trade friction definitely won't be delivered independently. The the advantages of not being subordinate on regulations isn't actually self explanatory. That's why people standardise
As for regulations, having an independent policy gets us a seat at the standardisation table, not having one means accepting whatever the EU dictates. In the short term the latter would be fine, especially since we're starting from an identical base, but in the long term it wouldn't be acceptable for the world's fifth largest economy to be a rule taker.
Your products are only compliant with local standards if the other party says they are. Only the EU and to an extent the US have the power and inclination to impose standards in that way. We are going to have to follow those standards anyway so we might as well formalise it.
0 -
A very perceptive young ladyExiledInScotland said:My 16yo daughter surprised me tonight by sitting down and watching some of the debate in parliament on TV. After 10 minutes she turned to me and said - "I think about half of those MPs are too scared of the voters and the other half are not scared enough. I just can't tell which are which." That is now making my brain hurt.
0 -
Until a minute ago CM2.0 drifted all the way to 8. We shall see.FrancisUrquhart said:
I am surprised somebody hasn't been done by now, as clearly on these votes some people with insider info are trading on that.stjohn said:CU Yes 1.6-1.8. Drifting.
0 -
Fantastic quote. And yes, a very smart girl.MaxPB said:
Smart girl.ExiledInScotland said:My 16yo daughter surprised me tonight by sitting down and watching some of the debate in parliament on TV. After 10 minutes she turned to me and said - "I think about half of those MPs are too scared of the voters and the other half are not scared enough. I just can't tell which are which." That is now making my brain hurt.
0 -
Let’s skip to the bottom line. We can trade facts to the point a brexit preference becomes abstract. like enjoying time spent with an Eskimo society it works very well, let’s copy them. But there are two killer facts undermining your preference. Norway is a Nordic country of 5 million people. The success or attractiveness of the Norway model is bogus because it is being underwritten by a wealth UK does not have.Richard_Tyndall said:
The problem is you have now moved on from quoting false figures and making uninformed statements about how EFTA works to debating happiness in Norway - and with someone who lived and worked there for 15 years.dots said:
Hence my suggestion, how can you compare society’s benefitting differently in investment home and abroad, the impact on taxation and households, and a general sense of happiness and well being, due to income from oil revenue? What could work fine in one situation with a populace very happy could be regressive in a different culture, different psychology with deindustrial, health and social care deficits stacking up.
But the basic position is that if we did choose the Norway option we would pay a lot less to the EU for Single Market access and would be subject to perhaps only 30% of the legislation that we currently have to adopt from the EU. All whilst keeping our trade with them.
It is a very attractive proposition for anyone who is not bothered about the freedom of movement issue.0 -
Wow. She needs to apply for internship at a major newspaper immediately!!ExiledInScotland said:My 16yo daughter surprised me tonight by sitting down and watching some of the debate in parliament on TV. After 10 minutes she turned to me and said - "I think about half of those MPs are too scared of the voters and the other half are not scared enough. I just can't tell which are which." That is now making my brain hurt.
0 -
Yup.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Is the difference here *section 60* searches? I assume there are a range of police powers?HYUFD said:
No, in 2011 the police conducted 1.2m stop-and-searches in England and Wales. In 2017 that figure was around 300,000 (see chart) and knife crime has risen accordingly.TheScreamingEagles said:
https://www.economist.com/britain/2018/01/18/can-an-increase-in-stop-and-search-cut-knife-crime
Comes down to the authorisation required and whether may a crime occur not will occur.
Plus the stat the HYUFD is using is for England and Wales, the C4 stat is for the Met only.0 -
It shouldn’t.Black_Rook said:
Yes. So presumably in such an eventuality the motion would pass?FrancisUrquhart said:
If true, does Mr Bollocks to Brexit get a say?rottenborough said:
The Speaker should maintain the status quo (“the house is not convinced”)
But I am sure that Bercow will “innovate”0 -
Yes that will be the difference. Section 60 is one amongst several powers. Most stop and searches will be Section 1 PACE.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Is the difference here *section 60* searches? I assume there are a range of police powers?HYUFD said:
No, in 2011 the police conducted 1.2m stop-and-searches in England and Wales. In 2017 that figure was around 300,000 (see chart) and knife crime has risen accordingly.TheScreamingEagles said:
https://www.economist.com/britain/2018/01/18/can-an-increase-in-stop-and-search-cut-knife-crime
0 -
A giant marshmallow man attacks Parliament....MaxPB said:So what happens if parliament rejects all the options again?
If we're lucky.0 -
But who are we gonna call?MarqueeMark said:
A giant marshmallow man attacks Parliament....MaxPB said:So what happens if parliament rejects all the options again?
If we're lucky.0 -
Seeing as these votes don't lead to any legislation perhaps he'll just declare it a draw.Charles said:
It shouldn’t.Black_Rook said:
Yes. So presumably in such an eventuality the motion would pass?FrancisUrquhart said:
If true, does Mr Bollocks to Brexit get a say?rottenborough said:
The Speaker should maintain the status quo (“the house is not convinced”)
But I am sure that Bercow will “innovate”0 -
Giant hot chocolate...man?FrancisUrquhart said:
But who are we gonna call?MarqueeMark said:
A giant marshmallow man attacks Parliament....MaxPB said:So what happens if parliament rejects all the options again?
If we're lucky.0 -
Here we go0
