If we don’t leave on Oct 31, I wouldn’t bank on Boris being blamed by Leavers; the MPs and lawyers who refuse to let us leave will be seen as the embodiment of the Little Britain character saying ‘Computer Says No’
Dog...homework...
Plus there is one particular leaver who I'm guessing would have a HUGE problem with it.
Media report a load of nonsense as policy Everyone loses their shit over it Government confirm this is not policy Everyone says government in chaos and crisis
The ballad of fake news
It is only not policy because they deliberately do not have a policy. They use "non-papers" to "advance their thoughts". When those thoughts are described as bunkum they say it was never their policy. That much is true.
How can rational people not see this is ridiculous!
Anyway, there will have to be a policy on the issue made public very soon - even if that is a non-policy: a conscious decision not to have any proposals. Pretending that all is going swimmingly behind the scenes has a very limited shelf-life when the next EU summit is in the middle of this month.
These non- papers only exist because the EU will not call negotiations negotiations. Both parties are clearly negotiating but until a formal written proposal is put forward the EU will not call them negotiations. This led to opposition parties to call the Government liars as the EU semantically said there were no negotiations.
Anne Mcelvoy doesn't think there's much wrong with a grope (I paraphrase). Only the young are disturbed by it.
Man up! Women
I thought it was clear I was being sarcastic and I wasn't approving of the dreadful Mcelvoy. After noticing a 'like' from Felix I realise I mustn't have been clear enough.
The EU are a market. They have decided the specification of the products they wish to purchase. If you want to sell to that market, or be included in that market as a partner, your products have to meet that specification. If they don't, you can't access that market. I don't really see what is difficult about that.
Look at the US, for example. They are not really a single market, because different states can have radically different regulations. This adds bureaucracy. Indeed, we will have to deal with MORE bureaucracy outside of the EU. That is because as a member state it moves the burden of bureaucracy away from the producer, business and individuals, and onto the member state.
Portsmouth South is a good example of a seat where "tactical" voting could hand the seat to the Conservatives.
The Electoral Calculus polling average (with changes on GE2017) is: Conservative 32.3 (-11.2) Labour 25.4 (-15.6) Liberal Democrat 19.6 (+12) Brexit Party 12.7 (+12.7)
Applying these changes in support to the GE2017 result in Portsmouth South would give you a result of: Liberal Democrat 29.3 Conservatives 26.4 Labour 25.4 Brexit Party 12.7
Who is best placed to defeat the Tories? Various attempts to encourage people to vote tactically could end up with a result like this (with tactical vote change): Conservative 28.4 (+2) Labour 27.4 (+2) Liberal Democrat 27.3 (-2) Brexit Party 10.7 (-2) Tactical voting for Labour (and between the Leave parties) has handed the seat to the Tories. Tactical voting for the Liberal Democrats would see otherwise.
How can voters be sure which way is the best to vote? I don't know. I do know that using the 2017GE results as a guide, when the national vote has changed so dramatically, will often lead a tactical voter astray.
I strongly suspect that the electoral dynamics of this seat have changed. Following Mike Hancock's win as an SDP candidate at the 1984 by election , this was very muvch a Tory v Alliance then LibDem contest until 2017. Labour was not perceived to be in contention , and many Labour voters supported the LibDems on an anti-Tory tactical basis. Labour's win in 2017 from third place was a shock - and achieved in spite of some continued - if misguided - tactical voting. Had it not been for the latter, Labour's majority would have been more comfortable. As it is, Labour can expect a first term incumbency boost there next time - as well as tactical voters returning home to support an incumbent Labour MP.
As in all seats local issues have the potential overwhelm sensible analysis. The Tory PPC is embroiled in a local energy company scandal.
If we don’t leave on Oct 31, I wouldn’t bank on Boris being blamed by Leavers; the MPs and lawyers who refuse to let us leave will be seen as the embodiment of the Little Britain character saying ‘Computer Says No’
Dog...homework...
Plus there is one particular leaver who I'm guessing would have a HUGE problem with it.
Boris has to hope that Farage doesn't turn on him, and Farage will be one of many blaming Boris - the best Boris can hope for is that he can deflect the blame elsewhere. And I'm struggling to see how Boris can successfully deflect the blame.
If we don’t leave on Oct 31, I wouldn’t bank on Boris being blamed by Leavers; the MPs and lawyers who refuse to let us leave will be seen as the embodiment of the Little Britain character saying ‘Computer Says No’
It all depends on the context of the failure to leave.
If Johnson is seen to have brought a deal back and it is rejected then as long as the Conservatives aren't seen to be the ones requesting the extension then they will be ok.
If Johnson is stupid enough to sign the extension and allow the opposition parties to keep him dangling then I have no sympathy for him.
The extension isn't a good faith mechanism for a final push to find a deal. It is there to buy remainers more time for something to turn up whilst making life as politically difficult as possible.
Resigning the government is the only sensible option in the scenario where a last chance deal has been rejected by parliament.
If we don’t leave on Oct 31, I wouldn’t bank on Boris being blamed by Leavers; the MPs and lawyers who refuse to let us leave will be seen as the embodiment of the Little Britain character saying ‘Computer Says No’
Dog...homework...
Plus there is one particular leaver who I'm guessing would have a HUGE problem with it.
Farage would be wrong to think he could have done anything differently if he were in Boris’ position wouldn’t he?
Cummings may be a sociopath but there’s no doubt he’s very very bright.
I'll have to ask you what evidence you have for that. His record in education, Brexit, constitutional affairs is that of somebody with very limited intellect albeit boundless arrogance.
Nephew of a judge, son-in-law of a baronet, he has the typical arrogance of a member of the establishment elite.
Don’t be pathetic
The Wakefields are among the loveliest most down to earth people you could hope to meet
(Disclosure: I’ve known Jack, Mary’s brother, since I was 3 or 4)
Please tell me that you were being self-aware when you posted that.
I like to think that "Charles" is actually a satirical construct created by an unemployed Marxist living in a bedsit in Croydon.
If we don’t leave on Oct 31, I wouldn’t bank on Boris being blamed by Leavers; the MPs and lawyers who refuse to let us leave will be seen as the embodiment of the Little Britain character saying ‘Computer Says No’
Dog...homework...
Plus there is one particular leaver who I'm guessing would have a HUGE problem with it.
Farage would be wrong to think he could have done anything differently if he were in Boris’ position wouldn’t he?
He won't care. It will be red meat to him. What do you think he will do? Well done Bozza you did your best oh well I'm off home now.
Johnson's entire career has been dedicated to becoming PM - it's hard to see him departing voluntarily. And since he has never been know to have any principles whatsoever, in either his public or private lives, it seems very unlikely that he will acquire any in the next few weeks. And so a principled resignation is impossible.
I share your view but not as confidently. If Johnson were to sack 'Dom' and hire me instead I would advise him to go the martyr route when the crunch comes. And I still think he might. 30% chance IMO.
I agree he could try that but even then I'm not sure it would wash. Resigning would be seen as an admission of failure and, try as I might, I have not been able to think of a historical example of a tactical government resignation leading to their ultimate triumph.
Sensible left of centre folk need to ask why, after nearly a decade of Tory rule, victory is not assured at the next general election.
Fundamentally it's down to the FPTP voting system.
It certainly is. Without PR many millions of people might as well not bother. As they live in safe seats , which never change.
I live in a safe Conservative seat. Where if you vote Lib Dem or Labour , is just wasted and does not count in reality. The system in England is a f ing disgrace, in a so called modern democracy.
Furthermore it doesn't seem to do what it's supposed to do any more, which is create "stable one-party government" [sic] (RIP 2010)
Exactly. Be good to know your vote counted. Blair should have brought it in as he promised to do. With such a majority in 1997 on 43% of the vote. It would have been seen as a magnanimous,thing to do.
Maybe the Lib Dems could have insisted on it in 2010. If not for national elections at least for English council elections.
One of the biggest strategic mistakes in the LDs coalition negotiations was pushing for voting reform for the Commons - which was always going to meet immense resistance from Con MPs - rather than for local councils and the Lords.
I'm quite sure that Cameron would have waved it through for councils (not least because it would have bulked up Tory local representation in some target seats), and while Lords reform might still have proven harder, if that had become the decisive constitutional point in the talks, it'd probably have been conceded.
The mistake was settling for a referendum on a compromise system no one desperately wanted. Which was simultaneously pushing too far, and not far enough.
They couldn't have pushed any further if they wanted a deal. And pushing less far would also have delivered nothing. The mistake was pushing in the wrong direction.
Sensible left of centre folk need to ask why, after nearly a decade of Tory rule, victory is not assured at the next general election.
Fundamentally it's down to the FPTP voting system.
It certainly is. Without PR many millions of people might as well not bother. As they live in safe seats , which never change.
I live in a safe Conservative seat. Where if you vote Lib Dem or Labour , is just wasted and does not count in reality. The system in England is a f ing disgrace, in a so called modern democracy.
Furthermore it doesn't seem to do what it's supposed to do any more, which is create "stable one-party government" [sic] (RIP 2010)
Exactly. Be good to know your vote counted. Blair should have brought it in as he promised to do. With such a majority in 1997 on 43% of the vote. It would have been seen as a magnanimous,thing to do.
Maybe the Lib Dems could have insisted on it in 2010. If not for national elections at least for English council elections.
One of the biggest strategic mistakes in the LDs coalition negotiations was pushing for voting reform for the Commons - which was always going to meet immense resistance from Con MPs - rather than for local councils and the Lords.
I'm quite sure that Cameron would have waved it through for councils (not least because it would have bulked up Tory local representation in some target seats), and while Lords reform might still have proven harder, if that had become the decisive constitutional point in the talks, it'd probably have been conceded.
The mistake was settling for a referendum on a compromise system no one desperately wanted. Which was simultaneously pushing too far, and not far enough.
At the time it looked like AV might be a compromise that could get through.
But, it’s a good example of how a solution that doesn’t really inspire anyway doesn’t get through - or anywhere close - because both sides are at best half-hearted about it.
If we don’t leave on Oct 31, I wouldn’t bank on Boris being blamed by Leavers; the MPs and lawyers who refuse to let us leave will be seen as the embodiment of the Little Britain character saying ‘Computer Says No’
It all depends on the context of the failure to leave.
If Johnson is seen to have brought a deal back and it is rejected then as long as the Conservatives aren't seen to be the ones requesting the extension then they will be ok.
If Johnson is stupid enough to sign the extension and allow the opposition parties to keep him dangling then I have no sympathy for him.
The extension isn't a good faith mechanism for a final push to find a deal. It is there to buy remainers more time for something to turn up whilst making life as politically difficult as possible.
Resigning the government is the only sensible option in the scenario where a last chance deal has been rejected by parliament.
Re: downthread on Cummings intellect, it’s almost impossible to get a concession from someone who vehemently opposes his actions and his politics that he’s bright because the conclusion has already been reaching, and it’s actually a shooting exercise. Even if I posted a link to his MENSA certificate showing his IQ score the retort would still be that it’s not evidence, and IQ scores aren’t a measure of real intelligence either.
As it happens his educational record, the fact he took over a year off just to read and absorb hundreds of books, his fluency in maths, Russian, his record in successive campaigns (no to NE assembly, business for Britain, No 2 AV and Vote Leave) plus the depth and lateral thinking of his blogposts are evidence enough for me.
That doesn’t mean he’s not capable of acting extremely unwisely, politically, which can come across as crass stupidity to those more savvy. You can be too bright and too ideological where you assume others must logically reach the same conclusions you have.
Two points.
Firstly, taking a year off to read does not betoken intelligence, it betokens wealthy and indulgent parents. The rest of us cannot afford to do that.
Secondly, he is good at the big picture stuff and can put together a small team, inspire loyalty and Get Things Done. But his emphasies (Sun-Tzu, the 1960s NASA administrator) indicate that he is not good at the low-level stuff - logistics, personal relationships, managing large organisations long-term. He is a good revolutionary but a poor administrator.
Ho, hum, back to work...
I'm going to have to modify this: I got my James Webb and my George Mueller mixed up, so he's not as Stuart Pearson as I thought. However, I do think his personal characteristics disqualify him from large organisations.
The decision to go for a complete Revoke policy has presumably done them little harm.
Brexit is binary which is why Labour's stance will fail even though I understand how they've arrived at that position.
Labour need to cater for a lot of Northern Leave seats. Revealing that Labour is a remain party (even if it's really true) opens a whole set of problems they don't need.
The EU are a market. They have decided the specification of the products they wish to purchase. If you want to sell to that market, or be included in that market as a partner, your products have to meet that specification. If they don't, you can't access that market. I don't really see what is difficult about that.
Look at the US, for example. They are not really a single market, because different states can have radically different regulations. This adds bureaucracy. Indeed, we will have to deal with MORE bureaucracy outside of the EU. That is because as a member state it moves the burden of bureaucracy away from the producer, business and individuals, and onto the member state.
Nothing is difficult about it. Either supply to their spec or don't supply. It's that simple.
Oh well, if only Ireland hadn't been partitioned in 1922...
Brexiteers can’t get enough of partition. They love it so much perhaps we should partition England and stick all the bampots in a wee corner. And in true Trump fashion: get them to pay for the wall.
Sensible left of centre folk need to ask why, after nearly a decade of Tory rule, victory is not assured at the next general election.
Fundamentally it's down to the FPTP voting system.
It certainly is. Without PR many millions of people might as well not bother. As they live in safe seats , which never change.
I live in a safe Conservative seat. Where if you vote Lib Dem or Labour , is just wasted and does not count in reality. The system in England is a f ing disgrace, in a so called modern democracy.
Furthermore it doesn't seem to do what it's supposed to do any more, which is create "stable one-party government" [sic] (RIP 2010)
Exactly. Be good to know your vote counted. Blair should have brought it in as he promised to do. With such a majority in 1997 on 43% of the vote. It would have been seen as a magnanimous,thing to do.
Maybe the Lib Dems could have insisted on it in 2010. If not for national elections at least for English council elections.
One of the biggest strategic mistakes in the LDs coalition negotiations was pushing for voting reform for the Commons - which was always going to meet immense resistance from Con MPs - rather than for local councils and the Lords.
I'm quite sure that Cameron would have waved it through for councils (not least because it would have bulked up Tory local representation in some target seats), and while Lords reform might still have proven harder, if that had become the decisive constitutional point in the talks, it'd probably have been conceded.
The mistake was settling for a referendum on a compromise system no one desperately wanted. Which was simultaneously pushing too far, and not far enough.
At the time it looked like AV might be a compromise that could get through.
But, it’s a good example of how a solution that doesn’t really inspire anyway doesn’t get through - or anywhere close - because both sides are at best half-hearted about it.
If PR were on the ballot, I would have voted "yes".
Just heard Charles Moore's biography of Margaret Thatcher on radio. Hagiography doesn't begin to describe it. The woman is a saint! There is no issue national or international that she wasn't responsible for dealing with. From her meeting in a hotel bedroom with Lech Walensa which removed the Polish Communist Party to teaching Reagan and Bush how to lead.
Does anyone read this rubbish?
John Campbell's Thatcher biographies are the best. His argument that Thatcher's first cabinet was her most effective is very perceptive.
It was her most unpopular cabinet with the public, her least Thatcherite cabinet, and her cabinet which faced unprecedentedly difficult economic challenges.
After the Falklands and the Iron Lady moniker, when she was queen of all she surveyed, more popular, and able to fill her cabinet spots with Thatcherite disciples, Campbell argues she actually achieved less.
This is a bit of a myth (and also a marked contrast with Johnson). Even towards the end of her term, she was still appointing people like Ken Clarke and Malcolm Rifkind to her cabinet. While she certainly tilted it in her favour, she never lost sight of the twin needs to appoint people who could do the jobs (or to dismiss them if it turned out that they couldn't), and for voices from across the Party to be present at the top table.
There’s the myth of Thatcher, and the reality. She was a consummate politician, clever, determined and worked hard. That’s why she was a success.
The thing is after she left office she played up entirely to the myth and influenced lots of followers (far less bright than she was) that it was all true.
Portsmouth South is a good example of a seat where "tactical" voting could hand the seat to the Conservatives.
The Electoral Calculus polling average (with changes on GE2017) is: Conservative 32.3 (-11.2) Labour 25.4 (-15.6) Liberal Democrat 19.6 (+12) Brexit Party 12.7 (+12.7)
Applying these changes in support to the GE2017 result in Portsmouth South would give you a result of: Liberal Democrat 29.3 Conservatives 26.4 Labour 25.4 Brexit Party 12.7
Who is best placed to defeat the Tories? Various attempts to encourage people to vote tactically could end up with a result like this (with tactical vote change): Conservative 28.4 (+2) Labour 27.4 (+2) Liberal Democrat 27.3 (-2) Brexit Party 10.7 (-2) Tactical voting for Labour (and between the Leave parties) has handed the seat to the Tories. Tactical voting for the Liberal Democrats would see otherwise.
How can voters be sure which way is the best to vote? I don't know. I do know that using the 2017GE results as a guide, when the national vote has changed so dramatically, will often lead a tactical voter astray.
I strongly suspect that the electoral dynamics of this seat have changed. Following Mike Hancock's win as an SDP candidate at the 1984 by election , this was very muvch a Tory v Alliance then LibDem contest until 2017. Labour was not perceived to be in contention , and many Labour voters supported the LibDems on an anti-Tory tactical basis. Labour's win in 2017 from third place was a shock - and achieved in spite of some continued - if misguided - tactical voting. Had it not been for the latter, Labour's majority would have been more comfortable. As it is, Labour can expect a first term incumbency boost there next time - as well as tactical voters returning home to support an incumbent Labour MP.
As in all seats local issues have the potential overwhelm sensible analysis. The Tory PPC is embroiled in a local energy company scandal.
The LDs have the majority of local council seats in Portsmouth South. They are running the council and the council leader is standing in this seat. I would expect a swing from Lab to Lib and a fairly close 3 way marginal.
It's a complete no brainer in electoral advantage terms, he'll only avoid it if he values being a pretty much powerless PM with an ego too big to let go of No 10 even for a few months. Oh.
Edit: he'll be VONCed after he extends anyway so no idea why he wouldn't just resign, or (And I think this is riskier still but still superior) deliberately break the law and just face whatever parliament and the courts chuck at him.
Yes indeed. I would like to see him trapped and exposed as a blusterer because it minimizes the chances of a Tory majority at the next GE. So by the same token he ought to be resigning or equivalent in order to avoid this.
I have it at only 30% because to give up the position of PM when you have only just secured it would be uncommonly ballsy. I can see it, because of the electoral logic, but I can more easily and clearly not see it.
It doesn't really need a genius of Cummings level to work out the next steps for Johnson.
Once you reverse the question and ask what would his opponents NOT want him to do then it is pretty clear I think.
Remainers would prefer to vote down the deal, have Johnson sign the extension and, ideally, keep signing extensions until the lifeblood has been fully drawn from the government.
I'm pretty confident that the least preferable outcome for remainers is either the deal being signed or it being rejected and Boris resigning forcing Corbyn to sign the extension and call an immediate GE.
I may be wrong in this but the vibe I pick up from remainers on here is that they definitely would not choose the 2nd option.
Is this not also in the context of Catalonia, though? They did this to help Spain and UK. Well, now UK is leaving, and the Catalonia issue is less fraught, maybe they're more open to making life easier.
The Catalonia issue is very different. Scottish independence would have been constitutionally valid and with the reluctant blessing of London. Madrid wholly opposes Catalonia even having a vote, and its constitution is pretty tightly against secession. I get the sense that EU attitudes follow the lead of the relevant members, which is why I think they would have been fairly relaxed about Scotland. Simply put, the EU looks after its members' interests.
The Spanish Govt would make sure that an Indy Scotland re-entering the EU would have an absolutely torrid time. To do otherwise would be against their national interest, as they see it. Scotland becoming independent would be a huge boost to Catalan independence in any event. The fact that you see Catalan flags so often at Indy rallies is a sign of the close linkages. The Spanish would make sure Scotland would have to go through every conceivable hoop which would include slashing public spending to meet the EU's debt requirements. If you don't think so, just ask the Greeks (who are a much bigger country and not applying to join.)
If we don’t leave on Oct 31, I wouldn’t bank on Boris being blamed by Leavers; the MPs and lawyers who refuse to let us leave will be seen as the embodiment of the Little Britain character saying ‘Computer Says No’
Dog...homework...
Plus there is one particular leaver who I'm guessing would have a HUGE problem with it.
Farage would be wrong to think he could have done anything differently if he were in Boris’ position wouldn’t he?
He won't care. It will be red meat to him. What do you think he will do? Well done Bozza you did your best oh well I'm off home now.
If Boris comes back with some minor variant of May's deal which then gets rejected by parliament (which it no doubt would be), thus forcing a Benn Act extension, then it seems to me that he will lose current supporters in multiple ways:
- Those who genuinely believe he's trying to get a deal and who support him because they want Brexit done, but in an orderly fashion, will see that he's no more successful than Theresa May was, and all the threats and bluster were just hollow;
- Those like Farage and the ERG 'Spartans' (who actively want No deal but who are currently pretending that they would be prepared to support a 'good' deal, just as they pretended they'd look seriously at Cameron's renegotiation and at May's deal), will come out all guns blazing on the 'this deal is vassalage' nonsense, and they can't do that without blaming Boris.
- And those who don't care about the details but supported Boris because they believed he'd 'get Brexit done' will be let down by the fact that he didn't meet his do-or-die deadline. Why should they continue to support him, just because the big boys pushed him around? It's precisely because they thought he could bully his way through that they supported him in the first place.
It doesn't really need a genius of Cummings level to work out the next steps for Johnson.
Once you reverse the question and ask what would his opponents NOT want him to do then it is pretty clear I think.
Remainers would prefer to vote down the deal, have Johnson sign the extension and, ideally, keep signing extensions until the lifeblood has been fully drawn from the government.
I'm pretty confident that the least preferable outcome for remainers is either the deal being signed or it being rejected and Boris resigning forcing Corbyn to sign the extension and call an immediate GE.
I may be wrong in this but the vibe I pick up from remainers on here is that they definitely would not choose the 2nd option.
I would rather Corbyn got the extension and then called a GE.
I am a Remainer, not a Tory. I do not give a d*mn about Boris and the fate of the Tory party.
On the contrary, the UK is saying ‘look, you’re preparing to accept this anyway, as part of No Deal, so why not accept it as a deal, and all avoid all the other horrors’. It’s perfectly logical
Which other horrors? The border issue has always been the essence of the deal. Without it there's nothing.
The other horrors of no deal. Chaos in the channel etc.
Chaos in the channel is mainly a problem for the British. This is just people asking for everything they want without offering anything in return.
We don't have the military might to impose those sorts of deals anymore.
The royal navy is still classed as a limited global reach force, one level below the maximum ability (held solely by the USA), the only other level 2 blue water navy is France (in decline) with Russia and China approaching this level but not yet there. I.e. the navy is quite capable of dealing with pretty much anything short term
I don't think we have the military might to maintain a naval blockade of the Republic of Ireland.
As a purely theoretical exercise, it would be very easy. If you have a blockade then you have to be prepared to use lethal force to enforce it (which I assume is why, in international law, a blockade is, of itself, defined as an act of war). If people believe you are prepared to enforce it, they will self-exclude. You don't need to sink every ship; just one or two might well have the necessary effect. Obviously, doing so would not be without repercussions.
The optics of the UK starving out a recalcitrant ROI would be pretty special.
On the contrary, the UK is saying ‘look, you’re preparing to accept this anyway, as part of No Deal, so why not accept it as a deal, and all avoid all the other horrors’. It’s perfectly logical
Which other horrors? The border issue has always been the essence of the deal. Without it there's nothing.
The other horrors of no deal. Chaos in the channel etc.
Chaos in the channel is mainly a problem for the British. This is just people asking for everything they want without offering anything in return.
We don't have the military might to impose those sorts of deals anymore.
The royal navy is still classed as a limited global reach force, one level below the maximum ability (held solely by the USA), the only other level 2 blue water navy is France (in decline) with Russia and China approaching this level but not yet there. I.e. the navy is quite capable of dealing with pretty much anything short term
That made me chuckle. I have a friend in the Marines who told me that "the Royal Navy is mostly decorative these days" given all the cuts and the associated shortages it has suffered from.
I'm not in a position to say which is right - I just find it amusing how different the positions are.
The same friend also told me that when the RN sent the warship he was serving on to the South China Sea to complement the American patrols, the Chinese who challenged them "seemed completely baffled as to what we were doing there".
The decision to go for a complete Revoke policy has presumably done them little harm.
I quite like the 3% of people who think the Brexit party is Anti-Brexit. It's like the 2% of UKIP voters who wanted to remain in the EU. The respondants are either trolling, or really don't follow politics (or they understand it too well - after all, if Brexit happens, the Brexit Party are as dead as UKIP).
It doesn't really need a genius of Cummings level to work out the next steps for Johnson.
Once you reverse the question and ask what would his opponents NOT want him to do then it is pretty clear I think.
Remainers would prefer to vote down the deal, have Johnson sign the extension and, ideally, keep signing extensions until the lifeblood has been fully drawn from the government.
I'm pretty confident that the least preferable outcome for remainers is either the deal being signed or it being rejected and Boris resigning forcing Corbyn to sign the extension and call an immediate GE.
I may be wrong in this but the vibe I pick up from remainers on here is that they definitely would not choose the 2nd option.
I would rather Corbyn got the extension and then called a GE.
I am a Remainer, not a Tory. I do not give a d*mn about Boris and the fate of the Tory party.
To really destroy the Tory party - Corbyn needs to ensure it is Boris not him who asks for the extension.
And (I know I repeat myself but) I don't see how Boris resigns - he can try to but he remains PM until someone else is appointed and in late October why would anyone willingly help Boris out of his mess.
It's in all party's (bar the Tory) interests to keep Boris in No 10 until he has gone cap in hand to the EU and we have an extension beyond October 31st.
Militarily a blockade of ROI is well within the UK’s capabilities.
But, it’d be politically catastrophic.
Without US help?
Oh yes, there are sufficient minesweepers, frigates, Type 45 destroyers and RAF squadrons to prevent all major shipping from getting anywhere near Eire (assuming it’s just Eire that the UK is up against militarily and just civilian shipping otherwise).
However, as soon as other NATO powers got involved, game over, so it’d obviously be a non-starter.
If we don’t leave on Oct 31, I wouldn’t bank on Boris being blamed by Leavers; the MPs and lawyers who refuse to let us leave will be seen as the embodiment of the Little Britain character saying ‘Computer Says No’
Dog...homework...
Plus there is one particular leaver who I'm guessing would have a HUGE problem with it.
Farage would be wrong to think he could have done anything differently if he were in Boris’ position wouldn’t he?
He won't care. It will be red meat to him. What do you think he will do? Well done Bozza you did your best oh well I'm off home now.
If Boris comes back with some minor variant of May's deal which then gets rejected by parliament (which it no doubt would be), thus forcing a Benn Act extension, then it seems to me that he will lose current supporters in multiple ways:
- Those who genuinely believe he's trying to get a deal and who support him because they want Brexit done, but in an orderly fashion, will see that he's no more successful than Theresa May was, and all the threats and bluster were just hollow;
- Those like Farage and the ERG 'Spartans' (who actively want No deal but who are currently pretending that they would be prepared to support a 'good' deal, just as they pretended they'd look seriously at Cameron's renegotiation and at May's deal), will come out all guns blazing on the 'this deal is vassalage' nonsense, and they can't do that without blaming Boris.
- And those who don't care about the details but supported Boris because they believed he'd 'get Brexit done' will be let down by the fact that he didn't meet his do-or-die deadline. Why should they continue to support him, just because the big boys pushed him around? It's precisely because they thought he could bully his way through that they supported him in the first place.
If parliament refuse to pass another agreement with the EU, Boris won’t be blamed. He will only lose the support of leavers, in my opinion, if he agrees to an extension
If we don’t leave on Oct 31, I wouldn’t bank on Boris being blamed by Leavers; the MPs and lawyers who refuse to let us leave will be seen as the embodiment of the Little Britain character saying ‘Computer Says No’
Dog...homework...
Plus there is one particular leaver who I'm guessing would have a HUGE problem with it.
Farage would be wrong to think he could have done anything differently if he were in Boris’ position wouldn’t he?
He won't care. It will be red meat to him. What do you think he will do? Well done Bozza you did your best oh well I'm off home now.
If Boris comes back with some minor variant of May's deal which then gets rejected by parliament (which it no doubt would be), thus forcing a Benn Act extension, then it seems to me that he will lose current supporters in multiple ways:
- Those who genuinely believe he's trying to get a deal and who support him because they want Brexit done, but in an orderly fashion, will see that he's no more successful than Theresa May was, and all the threats and bluster were just hollow;
- Those like Farage and the ERG 'Spartans' (who actively want No deal but who are currently pretending that they would be prepared to support a 'good' deal, just as they pretended they'd look seriously at Cameron's renegotiation and at May's deal), will come out all guns blazing on the 'this deal is vassalage' nonsense, and they can't do that without blaming Boris.
- And those who don't care about the details but supported Boris because they believed he'd 'get Brexit done' will be let down by the fact that he didn't meet his do-or-die deadline. Why should they continue to support him, just because the big boys pushed him around? It's precisely because they thought he could bully his way through that they supported him in the first place.
If parliament refuse to pass another agreement with the EU, Boris won’t be blamed. He will only lose the support of leavers, in my opinion, if he agrees to an extension
There isn't another agreement with the EU - it's May's deal regurgitated for the 4th time.
And Boris needs the ERG to vote for it - which won't be the case.
The decision to go for a complete Revoke policy has presumably done them little harm.
I quite like the 3% of people who think the Brexit party is Anti-Brexit. It's like the 2% of UKIP voters who wanted to remain in the EU. The respondants are either trolling, or really don't follow politics (or they understand it too well - after all, if Brexit happens, the Brexit Party are as dead as UKIP).
To really destroy the Tory party - Corbyn needs to ensure it is Boris not him who asks for the extension.
And (I know I repeat myself but) I don't see how Boris resigns - he can try to but he remains PM until someone else is appointed and in late October why would anyone willingly help Boris out of his mess.
It's in all party's (bar the Tory) interests to keep Boris in No 10 until he has gone cap in hand to the EU and we have an extension beyond October 31st.
I'm happy to be corrected in my understanding of the resignation process but once Boris resigns and recommends Corbyn it is game over.
Unless Corbyn refuses which, whilst possible, would be a little odd looking.
It doesn't really need a genius of Cummings level to work out the next steps for Johnson.
Once you reverse the question and ask what would his opponents NOT want him to do then it is pretty clear I think.
Remainers would prefer to vote down the deal, have Johnson sign the extension and, ideally, keep signing extensions until the lifeblood has been fully drawn from the government.
I'm pretty confident that the least preferable outcome for remainers is either the deal being signed or it being rejected and Boris resigning forcing Corbyn to sign the extension and call an immediate GE.
I may be wrong in this but the vibe I pick up from remainers on here is that they definitely would not choose the 2nd option.
I would rather Corbyn got the extension and then called a GE.
I am a Remainer, not a Tory. I do not give a d*mn about Boris and the fate of the Tory party.
The Tory Party ceased to exist when Boris expelled the Remainer MPs.
I agree he could try that but even then I'm not sure it would wash. Resigning would be seen as an admission of failure and, try as I might, I have not been able to think of a historical example of a tactical government resignation leading to their ultimate triumph.
Salvini in Italy is trying something similar. Kindred spirit perhaps. Or perhaps not.
I am not googling it. Last time I googled one of @Dura_Ace 's bon mots (the one about Afghan dancers) I had to clear down my search history. Since it's Windows 10 I don't know how to turn Cortana off, so I'm not handing it in to maintenance until I work out how to clear stuff down. I think CCleaner might not suffice...
To really destroy the Tory party - Corbyn needs to ensure it is Boris not him who asks for the extension.
And (I know I repeat myself but) I don't see how Boris resigns - he can try to but he remains PM until someone else is appointed and in late October why would anyone willingly help Boris out of his mess.
It's in all party's (bar the Tory) interests to keep Boris in No 10 until he has gone cap in hand to the EU and we have an extension beyond October 31st.
I'm happy to be corrected in my understanding of the resignation process but once Boris resigns and recommends Corbyn it is game over.
Unless Corbyn refuses which, whilst possible, would be a little odd looking.
He has to have the confidence of the House to be PM. They can choose not to give it to him.
It doesn't really need a genius of Cummings level to work out the next steps for Johnson.
Once you reverse the question and ask what would his opponents NOT want him to do then it is pretty clear I think.
Remainers would prefer to vote down the deal, have Johnson sign the extension and, ideally, keep signing extensions until the lifeblood has been fully drawn from the government.
I'm pretty confident that the least preferable outcome for remainers is either the deal being signed or it being rejected and Boris resigning forcing Corbyn to sign the extension and call an immediate GE.
I may be wrong in this but the vibe I pick up from remainers on here is that they definitely would not choose the 2nd option.
I would rather Corbyn got the extension and then called a GE.
I am a Remainer, not a Tory. I do not give a d*mn about Boris and the fate of the Tory party.
Neither do I but as a Leaver I see a very clear path from Corbyn signing the extension to a majority Tory government that completes the Brexit process.
It doesn't really need a genius of Cummings level to work out the next steps for Johnson.
Once you reverse the question and ask what would his opponents NOT want him to do then it is pretty clear I think.
Remainers would prefer to vote down the deal, have Johnson sign the extension and, ideally, keep signing extensions until the lifeblood has been fully drawn from the government.
I'm pretty confident that the least preferable outcome for remainers is either the deal being signed or it being rejected and Boris resigning forcing Corbyn to sign the extension and call an immediate GE.
I may be wrong in this but the vibe I pick up from remainers on here is that they definitely would not choose the 2nd option.
I would rather Corbyn got the extension and then called a GE.
I am a Remainer, not a Tory. I do not give a d*mn about Boris and the fate of the Tory party.
To really destroy the Tory party - Corbyn needs to ensure it is Boris not him who asks for the extension.
And (I know I repeat myself but) I don't see how Boris resigns - he can try to but he remains PM until someone else is appointed and in late October why would anyone willingly help Boris out of his mess.
It's in all party's (bar the Tory) interests to keep Boris in No 10 until he has gone cap in hand to the EU and we have an extension beyond October 31st.
Boris will refuse under any circumstances at all to ask for the extension, as Lord Sumption said a civil servant will send the letter if necessary.
Corbyn meanwhile will continue to leak Remsiners to the LDs and Leavers to the Tories and the Brexit Party
To really destroy the Tory party - Corbyn needs to ensure it is Boris not him who asks for the extension.
And (I know I repeat myself but) I don't see how Boris resigns - he can try to but he remains PM until someone else is appointed and in late October why would anyone willingly help Boris out of his mess.
It's in all party's (bar the Tory) interests to keep Boris in No 10 until he has gone cap in hand to the EU and we have an extension beyond October 31st.
I'm happy to be corrected in my understanding of the resignation process but once Boris resigns and recommends Corbyn it is game over.
Unless Corbyn refuses which, whilst possible, would be a little odd looking.
Yup, Boris certainly has that option. But doing that kind of undermines the Tory messaging about Corbyn being a menace who must be kept from power at all costs lest he give Britain's nuclear deterrent to Hamas or whatever.
Militarily a blockade of ROI is well within the UK’s capabilities.
But, it’d be politically catastrophic.
Without US help?
Oh yes, there are sufficient minesweepers, frigates, Type 45 destroyers and RAF squadrons to prevent all major shipping from getting anywhere near Eire (assuming it’s just Eire that the UK is up against militarily and just civilian shipping otherwise).
However, as soon as other NATO powers got involved, game over, so it’d obviously be a non-starter.
They would be involved by default. A blockade on Ireland would be an attempt to break up the single market. France would just ignore it.
To really destroy the Tory party - Corbyn needs to ensure it is Boris not him who asks for the extension.
And (I know I repeat myself but) I don't see how Boris resigns - he can try to but he remains PM until someone else is appointed and in late October why would anyone willingly help Boris out of his mess.
It's in all party's (bar the Tory) interests to keep Boris in No 10 until he has gone cap in hand to the EU and we have an extension beyond October 31st.
I'm happy to be corrected in my understanding of the resignation process but once Boris resigns and recommends Corbyn it is game over.
Unless Corbyn refuses which, whilst possible, would be a little odd looking.
He has to have the confidence of the House to be PM. They can choose not to give it to him.
That's not right, the confidence of the House isn't tested until he's already Prime Minister.
To really destroy the Tory party - Corbyn needs to ensure it is Boris not him who asks for the extension.
And (I know I repeat myself but) I don't see how Boris resigns - he can try to but he remains PM until someone else is appointed and in late October why would anyone willingly help Boris out of his mess.
It's in all party's (bar the Tory) interests to keep Boris in No 10 until he has gone cap in hand to the EU and we have an extension beyond October 31st.
I'm happy to be corrected in my understanding of the resignation process but once Boris resigns and recommends Corbyn it is game over.
Unless Corbyn refuses which, whilst possible, would be a little odd looking.
He has to have the confidence of the House to be PM. They can choose not to give it to him.
That's not right, the confidence of the House isn't tested until he's already Prime Minister.
Yes but the palace would need to be convinced that he had a realistic chance of winning a confidence vote before Her Maj would appoint him.
To really destroy the Tory party - Corbyn needs to ensure it is Boris not him who asks for the extension.
And (I know I repeat myself but) I don't see how Boris resigns - he can try to but he remains PM until someone else is appointed and in late October why would anyone willingly help Boris out of his mess.
It's in all party's (bar the Tory) interests to keep Boris in No 10 until he has gone cap in hand to the EU and we have an extension beyond October 31st.
I'm happy to be corrected in my understanding of the resignation process but once Boris resigns and recommends Corbyn it is game over.
Unless Corbyn refuses which, whilst possible, would be a little odd looking.
He has to have the confidence of the House to be PM. They can choose not to give it to him.
That's not right, the confidence of the House isn't tested until he's already Prime Minister.
The enduring stupidity of Donald Trump... https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/trump-learn-mistakes-ukraine-foreign-intereference/599101/ By the end of the day on July 24, the day that Mueller testified to two House committees, it was clear there was no appetite for impeachment among Democratic leaders. If there was ever a moment for the White House to declare victory and move on, this was it. Instead, Trump called Zelensky the next day, and pressured him to investigate both the hacking and the Bidens. A few weeks later, according to The New York Times, he pushed Australia’s prime minister for information he hoped would discredit the Mueller probe....
The decision to go for a complete Revoke policy has presumably done them little harm.
Brexit is binary which is why Labour's stance will fail even though I understand how they've arrived at that position.
Labour need to cater for a lot of Northern Leave seats. Revealing that Labour is a remain party (even if it's really true) opens a whole set of problems they don't need.
That may be true but to the extent that it is, Labour's completely failing there too. The last YouGov I saw had Labour on 9% with Leave voters; the most recent Opinium has them on 15%.
It would be slightly ironic if the Corbyn project failed because for the first time in his life, he'd adopted a position far more moderate than the bulk of the population.
Yes but the palace would need to be convinced that he had a realistic chance of winning a confidence vote before Her Maj would appoint him.
I think it's very hard to see the Queen refusing since it's impossible to know for sure until you try, the leader of the opposition is the conventional choice, and it's the outgoing PM's recommendation.
It doesn't really need a genius of Cummings level to work out the next steps for Johnson.
Once you reverse the question and ask what would his opponents NOT want him to do then it is pretty clear I think.
Remainers would prefer to vote down the deal, have Johnson sign the extension and, ideally, keep signing extensions until the lifeblood has been fully drawn from the government.
I'm pretty confident that the least preferable outcome for remainers is either the deal being signed or it being rejected and Boris resigning forcing Corbyn to sign the extension and call an immediate GE.
I may be wrong in this but the vibe I pick up from remainers on here is that they definitely would not choose the 2nd option.
I would rather Corbyn got the extension and then called a GE.
I am a Remainer, not a Tory. I do not give a d*mn about Boris and the fate of the Tory party.
To really destroy the Tory party - Corbyn needs to ensure it is Boris not him who asks for the extension.
And (I know I repeat myself but) I don't see how Boris resigns - he can try to but he remains PM until someone else is appointed and in late October why would anyone willingly help Boris out of his mess.
It's in all party's (bar the Tory) interests to keep Boris in No 10 until he has gone cap in hand to the EU and we have an extension beyond October 31st.
Boris will refuse under any circumstances at all to ask for the extension, as Lord Sumption said a civil servant will send the letter if necessary.
Corbyn meanwhile will continue to leak Remsiners to the LDs and Leavers to the Tories and the Brexit Party
Labour is essentially going to be left as a collection of BAME voters plus hard left types and a structurally declining of traditional WWC voters who are "Labour till they die"
It doesn't really need a genius of Cummings level to work out the next steps for Johnson.
Once you reverse the question and ask what would his opponents NOT want him to do then it is pretty clear I think.
Remainers would prefer to vote down the deal, have Johnson sign the extension and, ideally, keep signing extensions until the lifeblood has been fully drawn from the government.
I'm pretty confident that the least preferable outcome for remainers is either the deal being signed or it being rejected and Boris resigning forcing Corbyn to sign the extension and call an immediate GE.
I may be wrong in this but the vibe I pick up from remainers on here is that they definitely would not choose the 2nd option.
I would rather Corbyn got the extension and then called a GE.
I am a Remainer, not a Tory. I do not give a d*mn about Boris and the fate of the Tory party.
To really destroy the Tory party - Corbyn needs to ensure it is Boris not him who asks for the extension.
And (I know I repeat myself but) I don't see how Boris resigns - he can try to but he remains PM until someone else is appointed and in late October why would anyone willingly help Boris out of his mess.
It's in all party's (bar the Tory) interests to keep Boris in No 10 until he has gone cap in hand to the EU and we have an extension beyond October 31st.
Boris will refuse under any circumstances at all to ask for the extension, as Lord Sumption said a civil servant will send the letter if necessary.
Corbyn meanwhile will continue to leak Remsiners to the LDs and Leavers to the Tories and the Brexit Party
Labour is essentially going to be left as a collection of BAME voters plus hard left types and a structurally declining of traditional WWC voters who are "Labour till they die"
Labour till they die is now Labour till they're not It's a collapsing party
That made me chuckle. I have a friend in the Marines who told me that "the Royal Navy is mostly decorative these days" given all the cuts and the associated shortages it has suffered from.
I'm not in a position to say which is right - I just find it amusing how different the positions are.
The same friend also told me that when the RN sent the warship he was serving on to the South China Sea to complement the American patrols, the Chinese who challenged them "seemed completely baffled as to what we were doing there".
Neither the RN (17 escort hulls) or the Marine National (21 escort hulls) are capable of two simultaneous blue water deployments.
The RN couldn't even scare up a full carrier group for the QNLZ Pacific deployment in 2021. They are relying on the French and Dutch to make up the numbers.
Cameron made 7% of the RN redundant in 2010 and it was the ones that left tended to be highly experienced and qualified. As a fighting force it never recovered from that and probably never will.
Yes but the palace would need to be convinced that he had a realistic chance of winning a confidence vote before Her Maj would appoint him.
I think it's very hard to see the Queen refusing since it's impossible to know for sure until you try, the leader of the opposition is the conventional choice, and it's the outgoing PM's recommendation.
It would depend on the circumstances. The palace would certainly listen to the outgoing PM, but in cases where there was doubt they'd make discreet enquiries as to whether the advice was likely to be correct. Bear in mind that this wouldn't happen in a vacuum, there would be plenty of information on what the other parties were thinking.
Comments
Plus there is one particular leaver who I'm guessing would have a HUGE problem with it.
Look at the US, for example. They are not really a single market, because different states can have radically different regulations. This adds bureaucracy. Indeed, we will have to deal with MORE bureaucracy outside of the EU. That is because as a member state it moves the burden of bureaucracy away from the producer, business and individuals, and onto the member state.
Barf
https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/business/defunct-portsmouth-city-council-owned-victory-energy-spent-nearly-100-000-on-portsmouth-fc-sponsorship-deal-1-9090589
Excellent last two paras, NPXMP.
If Johnson is seen to have brought a deal back and it is rejected then as long as the Conservatives aren't seen to be the ones requesting the extension then they will be ok.
If Johnson is stupid enough to sign the extension and allow the opposition parties to keep him dangling then I have no sympathy for him.
The extension isn't a good faith mechanism for a final push to find a deal. It is there to buy remainers more time for something to turn up whilst making life as politically difficult as possible.
Resigning the government is the only sensible option in the scenario where a last chance deal has been rejected by parliament.
But, it’s a good example of how a solution that doesn’t really inspire anyway doesn’t get through - or anywhere close - because both sides are at best half-hearted about it.
https://twitter.com/ODN/status/1178962307302481921
There’s the myth of Thatcher, and the reality. She was a consummate politician, clever, determined and worked hard. That’s why she was a success.
The thing is after she left office she played up entirely to the myth and influenced lots of followers (far less bright than she was) that it was all true.
I have it at only 30% because to give up the position of PM when you have only just secured it would be uncommonly ballsy. I can see it, because of the electoral logic, but I can more easily and clearly not see it.
Once you reverse the question and ask what would his opponents NOT want him to do then it is pretty clear I think.
Remainers would prefer to vote down the deal, have Johnson sign the extension and, ideally, keep signing extensions until the lifeblood has been fully drawn from the government.
I'm pretty confident that the least preferable outcome for remainers is either the deal being signed or it being rejected and Boris resigning forcing Corbyn to sign the extension and call an immediate GE.
I may be wrong in this but the vibe I pick up from remainers on here is that they definitely would not choose the 2nd option.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1178989254309011456
The Spanish would make sure Scotland would have to go through every conceivable hoop which would include slashing public spending to meet the EU's debt requirements. If you don't think so, just ask the Greeks (who are a much bigger country and not applying to join.)
- Those who genuinely believe he's trying to get a deal and who support him because they want Brexit done, but in an orderly fashion, will see that he's no more successful than Theresa May was, and all the threats and bluster were just hollow;
- Those like Farage and the ERG 'Spartans' (who actively want No deal but who are currently pretending that they would be prepared to support a 'good' deal, just as they pretended they'd look seriously at Cameron's renegotiation and at May's deal), will come out all guns blazing on the 'this deal is vassalage' nonsense, and they can't do that without blaming Boris.
- And those who don't care about the details but supported Boris because they believed he'd 'get Brexit done' will be let down by the fact that he didn't meet his do-or-die deadline. Why should they continue to support him, just because the big boys pushed him around? It's precisely because they thought he could bully his way through that they supported him in the first place.
Not sure how many of the cabinet will "rediscover their principles" just before BoZo crashes and burns...
The final destination for the government is the same it is just the speed of the journey and who pays the cost of the ticket.
But, it’d be politically catastrophic.
I am a Remainer, not a Tory. I do not give a d*mn about Boris and the fate of the Tory party.
I'm not in a position to say which is right - I just find it amusing how different the positions are.
The same friend also told me that when the RN sent the warship he was serving on to the South China Sea to complement the American patrols, the Chinese who challenged them "seemed completely baffled as to what we were doing there".
And (I know I repeat myself but) I don't see how Boris resigns - he can try to but he remains PM until someone else is appointed and in late October why would anyone willingly help Boris out of his mess.
It's in all party's (bar the Tory) interests to keep Boris in No 10 until he has gone cap in hand to the EU and we have an extension beyond October 31st.
The sort that - along with lots of fruit and veg - adds years to your life.
However, as soon as other NATO powers got involved, game over, so it’d obviously be a non-starter.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7520649/Woman-makes-1-3MILLION-auctioning-virginity-London-politician.html?ico=pushly-notifcation-small
And Boris needs the ERG to vote for it - which won't be the case.
Unless Corbyn refuses which, whilst possible, would be a little odd looking.
Once again shrieking before the details emerge.
What we have are TWO Brexit Parties:
Brexit Party (Farage)
Brexit Party (Johnson)
Corbyn meanwhile will continue to leak Remsiners to the LDs and Leavers to the Tories and the Brexit Party
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/evening-standard-comment-here-s-no-10-s-plan-will-the-pm-take-the-plunge-we-salute-the-met-s-hero-a4250996.html
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/evening-standard-comment-conservatives-plan-election-for-all-the-wrong-reasons-the-beauty-of-trees-a4250126.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/01/us/politics/Pete-Buttigieg-fundraising.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/trump-learn-mistakes-ukraine-foreign-intereference/599101/
By the end of the day on July 24, the day that Mueller testified to two House committees, it was clear there was no appetite for impeachment among Democratic leaders. If there was ever a moment for the White House to declare victory and move on, this was it. Instead, Trump called Zelensky the next day, and pressured him to investigate both the hacking and the Bidens. A few weeks later, according to The New York Times, he pushed Australia’s prime minister for information he hoped would discredit the Mueller probe....
It would be slightly ironic if the Corbyn project failed because for the first time in his life, he'd adopted a position far more moderate than the bulk of the population.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/oct/01/harland-and-wolff-saved-from-closure-in-6m-rescue-deal
Labour till they're not
It's a collapsing party
The RN couldn't even scare up a full carrier group for the QNLZ Pacific deployment in 2021. They are relying on the French and Dutch to make up the numbers.
Cameron made 7% of the RN redundant in 2010 and it was the ones that left tended to be highly experienced and qualified. As a fighting force it never recovered from that and probably never will.