politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why punters have got it right making a 2019 general election a
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why punters have got it right making a 2019 general election a 45% chance
Following the latest developments in the Commons it is clear that the house as currently constituted is going to be troublesome for the prime minister whoever he or she is for as long as we don’t have a general election.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Just reading that Corbyn will demand a Customs Union. alignment on workers rights, but won't demand F o M, a second referendum, or taking part in Euro elections.
Is that a runner?
But it might be a runner in parliament.
He really wants to leave doesn't he..
https://twitter.com/nickherbertmp/status/1113404170172817408
If people are required to make concessions, they won't then concede the right to campaign against the deal that has been reached.
By elections are available.
Meanwhile:
Petition To Revoke - 6,000,000 signatures
Petition to Leave with No Deal - 10x fewer
This latest manifestation of public feeling doesn't exactly support a position towards the hard Brexit end of the 52%, i.e. SM + CU being at the soft end.
Unlikely, but there will be a big rebellion from both sides. Thangam Debonnaire probably won't want to be a teller for any sort of Brexit for instance.
LOL
A compromise WA-CU+ comes to the house with the alleged support of both parties (ho ho), that would then be amendable.
In that scenario it's going to be fascinating to see what happens to a 2nd Ref amendment. It will be do or die and I could see it garnering support in unusual ways, including from Brexiteers. Of course, were they to take the risk of adding 'No Deal' as one of the options to a 2nd Ref they'd probably land a huge majority. But it's a big gamble. (Because No Deal might win in the country.)
I had thought "CM2.0" was a better outcome than Ken Clarke's "CU" proposal, but I am not so sure now. Will "CU" really tick all the same boxes as May's Deal other than "independent trade policy" - which I think most of us have decided is not really worth the fag of wrecking the economy for.
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1113154561013891072
On the other hand, anything that gets through 285-280 with a stack of abstentions, is never going to work out, just wait till the amendments on the Withdrawal Bill come flying in.
Realistically if you actually want to deliver Brexit, something that May AND Corbyn can sign up to is the only way you can see it through.
Have the delinquent duo reached an exciting cross-party consensus, agreeing to blame one another for failing to agree anything else, yet?
What the hell WAS that?
Overall I think it's a reasonable compromise, and not in practice very different from what Theresa May was trying to do. The lack of ability to enter into our own full-blown FTAs is of little importance IMO; we'd have a lot of difficulty anyway, and nothing we could do would compensate for the loss (in a no-deal scenario) of the mother of all FTAs, with the EU27.
https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669
And as for Labour ...
The real shock is those supporters of his who did no background reading on him, and just imposed their own believes onto him and assume he thinks the same.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/shortcuts/2019/apr/03/how-to-blag-your-way-into-first-class-with-a-standard-train-ticket
We have a big, big problem, and as Sam Gyimah says, we've gone a long way backwards since the Cameron days.
It's being led by a ship of fools — a Conservative Party bloc that is now radical in its obsession with leaving Europe and a Labour Party that has gone Marxist. If the people here can’t force their politicians to compromise with one another and with reality (there’s still a glimmer of hope that this might happen), there is going to be a crackup of the British political system and some serious economic pain. This is scary.
https://nyti.ms/2K1BcIl
https://twitter.com/gimblemusk/status/1113370024348213248
"Because he was clear on those areas [e.g. Europe], he had permission from the base to move to the centre on issues of social policy like health and education, and also on the environment."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvNJ5nUOpDo
Rather 'interesting' numbers here.
Of course, like any party leader, he couldn't ignore a substantial body of opinion in the party, any more than Harold Wilson could ignore the hard left or Maggie the 'wets'.
Deal with no backstop
No Deal
EEA/EFTA Deal
May’s Deal
Remain in EU
Anything involving a customs union.
A CU is an utterly bonkers idea - it locks in all the possible negatives of leaving the EU, whilst foregoing all the positives. It’s the very definition of a vassal state, leaves the EU having every incentive to screw the U.K. over at every opportunity in the future.
He went well beyond not ignoring them.
- Control over immigration
- Leaving the CAP
- Leaving the CFP
- Ending the direct application of EU law to domestic issues outside product regulation
- Leaving the political structures of the EU
- Being free of ever-closer union
- Sending £350m a week to Brussels (yes, I know, I know...)
In other words, you thought 95%+ of what Vote Leave campaigned on wasn't actually anything positive?
1. The WA includes a provision for international arbitration regarding the commitment for implementing a technical solution, so if the EU does not follow through on its treaty commitments, we can walk away anyway.
2. The EU doesn't actually want us to be in the Backstop. Let's not forget that the backstop - as well as the Customs Union - also involves us being in the Single Market for goods (like Switzrtland), but without the free movement or fees. That's not something the EU would want to persist, because - errr... - the Swiss would soon start complaining about their deal.