Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As the Brexit negotiations reach a critical point the latest Y

1235

Comments

  • As someone in the comments pointed out, Corbyn's low approval rating is actually better than it was before the election in 2017:
    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1184424977048784898

    Worth considering.

    So he could fall further
  • Government tables motion for sitting on saturday

    Are these mps really going to try and stop it

    They are insane

    There are a number of reasonable and self interested grounds for the Commons not to agree to the Super Saturday stunt. You may not agree with them but describing them as " insane " is ludicrous.
    Can’t both things be true? There are sensible reasons to want more time to consider the issues, but many of the MPs are voting against as a simple stunt and won’t do any more considering. A plague on all their houses.
  • Government tables motion for sitting on saturday

    Are these mps really going to try and stop it

    They are insane

    There are a number of reasonable and self interested grounds for the Commons not to agree to the Super Saturday stunt. You may not agree with them but describing them as " insane " is ludicrous.
    Hypocrites is more accurate to be fair
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Gabs2 said:



    Tough as it may be for them, they may be best advised to try and grieve in private rather than embark on legal action and public interviews which are, I suspect, unlikely to succeed. If the facts are not enough to make Mrs Sacoolas do the decent thing, I doubt that media hype or legal action will do so.
    I suspect that she would have only had a fine and driving ban if she had stayed and faced the consequences. A custodial sentence would be quite unlikely.
    You're probably right. And she could then have apologised in private to the family and given them what comfort they might want from telling them what happened. The family don't appear a vengeful sort. Badly done by Mrs Sacoolas.

    Many years ago my husband was knocked down by a hit and run driver. He was left with quite serious head injuries. It was another passing motorist who helped him, the original driver having fled. Our children were very young at the time. Had there not been a Good Samaritan there I dread to think what the outcome would have been. I simply cannot understand the mentality of someone who walks away from something like that rather than face the music. How do they sleep at night?
  • If the Commons votes against holding Super Saturday ( as it should ) then that adds a weekend of campaigning time for the grassroots to crack up their machines.

    Why should it
    The Commons doesn't normally sit on Saturdays and sets its own sitting times. The burden of proof is on the executive which is making the request. I'm sure Rees-Mogg will be upto the job.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,389
    Gabs2 said:

    NYT: Charles Blow on Biden at debate - "Bless his heart. It feels like he’s just hanging on for dear life. At moments, it felt like he vanished, not just because it wasn’t his time to speak but because his aura of invincibility is flickering like a candle in a hurricane. But he yelled in his closing, so there’s that."

    Other columnists also gave him the thumbs down.

    Not looking good for the Dems at the moment.

    I disagree. I think Warren is ideally positioned to win back the critical swing states of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan. A prairie populist with a record of bashing the coastal beacons of Wall Street and Silicon Valley.
    I remain unconvinced.
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469

    As someone in the comments pointed out, Corbyn's low approval rating is actually better than it was before the election in 2017:
    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1184424977048784898

    Worth considering.

    Corbyn's rating is improving rapidly !
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268

    Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything.

    Think Labour rebels are closer to 10.
  • StreeterStreeter Posts: 684

    Government tables motion for sitting on saturday

    Are these mps really going to try and stop it

    They are insane

    What’s the point of debating it before you’ve had time to carefully read and consider it?

    I mean, what’s the rush?
  • eekeek Posts: 28,076
    GIN1138 said:

    Knowing how Bercow loves being the center of attention I think he might side with the government on this one.
    Why? There is a valid reason for delaying things until Monday - it's called giving people enough to read the text.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,210
    rpjs said:

    Is Marmite either Halal or kosher? Would Vegemite work? Prefer Bovril myself.

    Dunno about kosher, but IIRC halal is only concerned with the slaughter of animals providing meat, and there are no other Islamic dietary restrictions other than the prohibition of pork and the consumption of blood.

    So Vegemite by not containing any meet is ipso facto halal.
    Marmite is of course a by-product of brewing and I presume vegemite is too. Not sure if that makes a difference so long as they don't contain alcohol.
  • If the Commons votes against holding Super Saturday ( as it should ) then that adds a weekend of campaigning time for the grassroots to crack up their machines.

    Why should it
    The Commons doesn't normally sit on Saturdays and sets its own sitting times. The burden of proof is on the executive which is making the request. I'm sure Rees-Mogg will be upto the job.
    These are as far removed from normal times as you can get
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469

    Government tables motion for sitting on saturday

    Are these mps really going to try and stop it

    They are insane

    Typical. It's Sabbath.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,151
    edited October 2019
    eek said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Knowing how Bercow loves being the center of attention I think he might side with the government on this one.
    Why? There is a valid reason for delaying things until Monday - it's called giving people enough to read the text.
    You don't think the attention-seeking Speaker Bercow would love to be at the center of a Saturday Sitting before he bows out of the Chair? ;)
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269

    Cyclefree said:

    Mrs Sacoolas could sort this out by doing the decent thing herself, coming back to the UK, speaking to the police and, if action is taken against her, taking her punishment.

    I would be not too surprised if I heard that she had had her US passport taken away from her. I wonder if she has thought about doing just that. I bet she's being closely wacthed to make sure she doesn't try to leave the country, or even get to the UK embassay.
    Well, where she/her husband was working isn't your standard diplomatic-type place, is it?
    Governments don't normally reveal the names of their spies do they?
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,113
    surbiton 19 said: "Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything."

    I just wonder whether, when it comes down to it, more LP MPs will support the deal (if one appears). There will be a lot of internal pressure for them not to but on the other hand the public will see that the government have pulled the stops out to get a deal and would view LP very dimly indeed if they prove to be the obstacle.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268

    Government tables motion for sitting on saturday

    Are these mps really going to try and stop it

    They are insane

    There are a number of reasonable and self interested grounds for the Commons not to agree to the Super Saturday stunt. You may not agree with them but describing them as " insane " is ludicrous.
    Can’t both things be true? There are sensible reasons to want more time to consider the issues, but many of the MPs are voting against as a simple stunt and won’t do any more considering. A plague on all their houses.
    MPs are:
    - Voting against a deal
    - Voting against no dea
    - Voting against an election

    They deserved to be completely pilloried and ostracised from public life.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Cyclefree said:

    Charles said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Gabs2 said:

    The refusal of the US to handover the apparent killer of Harry Dunn or provide redress to the Connors after the disgusting abuse of their infant son shows the United States is no longer a friend to the UK. Nor should they any longer be considered a civilized Western country.

    You do realise no nation on the planet would “hand over” a citizen in these circumstances without months of patient diplomatic work? Of course you do.

    We all dislike Trump. We mustn’t let it blind us when the US is actually just acting like we would.
    There is a UK-US Extradition Treaty.
    The individual has/had diplomatic immunity. There’s various bits of complexity around that; but all nations guard that religiously. If it doesn’t matter with us because they trust our legal system, then what about France? What about Mexico? What about Egypt? What about Iran?

    There’s obviously a line in there somewhere, but it’s better not to try and draw it, and to keep consistent for all countries. We’d do the same.

    It’s unimaginable what that family is going through, but it’s not a Trump/US thing.
    The technical debate is that she is now back in the US so no longer has diplomatic immunity (the purpose of which is to prevent undue pressure on diplomats)

    Wouldn't that open up extradition as a route to follow?
    That would depend on the precise terms of the treaty. You will be aware that there was a lot of disquiet at the time it was agreed about its one-sided nature. And if such action was taken the US would no doubt respond by saying that she had immunity. So back to square one.

    Mrs Sacoolas could sort this out by doing the decent thing herself, coming back to the UK, speaking to the police and, if action is taken against her, taking her punishment.
    Raab's letter said that the US considers that diplomatic immunity is "no longer pertinent" which sounds like weasel wording to me.

    The one sided nature of the treaty is to do with the fact that the US authorities don't have to demonstrate a case in the UK, while I believe we have to provide evidential support in the US.

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/foreign-affairs/news/107206/us-woman-wanted-over-crash-death-no-longer-has-diplomatic
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,113
    Gabs2 - I agree.
  • Super Saturday is classic ' security theatre '. Evoking a war time atmosphere to manufacture consent. I don't mind the Government chancing its arm - this is politics - but equally I don't mind the Commons telling it to sod off. All the fun of the fair.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900

    Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything.

    This seems reasonable:
    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1184440535760719872

  • Streeter said:

    Government tables motion for sitting on saturday

    Are these mps really going to try and stop it

    They are insane

    What’s the point of debating it before you’ve had time to carefully read and consider it?

    I mean, what’s the rush?
    The mps want no deal stopped but they are risking no deal as time runs out, the EU refuses an extension of more than a few weeks, and the deal is the only choice left. Revoke is politically impossible
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269

    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Gabs2 said:

    The refusal of the US to handover the apparent killer of Harry Dunn or provide redress to the Connors after the disgusting abuse of their infant son shows the United States is no longer a friend to the UK. Nor should they any longer be considered a civilized Western country.

    You do realise no nation on the planet would “hand over” a citizen in these circumstances without months of patient diplomatic work? Of course you do.

    We all dislike Trump. We mustn’t let it blind us when the US is actually just acting like we would.
    This is a heartbreaking case. Set aside the question of whether the US should waive diplomatic immunity here - assuming that this woman was in fact entitled to it. There are two issues here:-

    1. She apparently told the police that she

    I have to say that I find it hard to understand how Mrs Sacoolas can live with herself. She has been responsible for the death of a young man. She is refusing to face the consequences of that by accepting the necessary punishment (if that is appropriate) or even allowing the police to gather all the facts. She will - presumably - be teaching her children about the importance of behaving with integrity, of understanding that actions have consequences, of learning to face up to your own mistakes, not be a coward etc. And yet in her own life she is setting the most awful example by running away. The Dunns don't want her imprisoned but they do want her to face up to what she has done and accept the consequences. I don't think this is too much to ask.

    But I fear they will not get this.

    Tough as it may be for them, they may be best advised to try and grieve in private rather than embark on legal action and public interviews which are, I suspect, unlikely to succeed. If the facts are not enough to make Mrs Sacoolas do the decent thing, I doubt that media hype or legal action will do so.
    I suspect that she would have only had a fine and driving ban if she had stayed and faced the consequences. A custodial sentence would be quite unlikely.
    Ignoring the fact she ran away, a bit of me says in a foreign country, driving on the wrong side of the road, maybe with bad road conditions; there but for the grace of God....

    But the police reaction suggests more. Still, we can’t know.
    Indeed. It happened to this MP.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/sep/08/uk.conservatives1

    The US's response and that of Mrs Sacoolas has shown arrogance. It must hurt the Dunns immensely.

    For their own sake I hope they find the comfort they need.

  • glwglw Posts: 9,871
    rcs1000 said:

    Now, there are various ways around this. Bitcoin "tumblers" or "mixers" attempt to allow you pay in 1 Bitcoin and then get lots of bits of Bitcoin back from various other people. By doing it in this way, it becomes hard (perhaps impossible) to trace individual users. But most criminals aren't that smart.

    That assumes that the mixers aren't really bad actors, like a lot of the Tor nodes and VPNs. It's actually really bloody difficult to be sure that such anonymizers work, and you only have to be wrong once.

    Not that I have even the tiniest shred of sympathy for those caught in this particular case.
  • Government tables motion for sitting on saturday

    Are these mps really going to try and stop it

    They are insane

    There are a number of reasonable and self interested grounds for the Commons not to agree to the Super Saturday stunt. You may not agree with them but describing them as " insane " is ludicrous.
    Can’t both things be true? There are sensible reasons to want more time to consider the issues, but many of the MPs are voting against as a simple stunt and won’t do any more considering. A plague on all their houses.
    Yes, indeed.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,360

    Nigelb said:

    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    148grss said:

    Nigelb said:

    148grss said:
    Entirely unlike all the reasonable pragmatists over here...

    It's a pretty implausible thread.

    This bit is just hilarious:
    https://twitter.com/KarlreMarks/status/1181911675743674368
    Did you know that some academic literally once claimed that the Israel Palestine conflict was due to a lack of iron and could be solved by making people in the region eat Marmite, and the important people considered it for a while because when some old white dude says something authoritatively you have to pretend it's important?
    How do we know he wasn't taking the piss ?
    More importantly, how do we know he wasn’t right?
    Why does the map include Switzerland but not Norway?
    Because there has never been conflict in Norway, whereas Switzerland...
    Never been conflict in Norway......... I refer you to 1940, and the battles without which Churchill might well not have become PM.

    To say nothing of the battle of Rastarkalv in 955.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Gabs2 said:

    The refusal of the US to handover the apparent killer of Harry Dunn or provide redress to the Connors after the disgusting abuse of their infant son shows the United States is no longer a friend to the UK. Nor should they any longer be considered a civilized Western country.

    You do realise no nation on the planet would “hand over” a citizen in these circumstances without months of patient diplomatic work? Of course you do.

    We all dislike Trump. We mustn’t let it blind us when the US is actually just acting like we would.
    There is a UK-US Extradition Treaty.
    The individual has/had diplomatic immunity. There’s various bits of complexity around that; but all nations guard that religiously. If it doesn’t matter with us because they trust our legal system, then what about France? What about Mexico? What about Egypt? What about Iran?

    There’s obviously a line in there somewhere, but it’s better not to try and draw it, and to keep consistent for all countries. We’d do the same.

    It’s unimaginable what that family is going through, but it’s not a Trump/US thing.
    The technical debate is that she is now back in the US so no longer has diplomatic immunity (the purpose of which is to prevent undue pressure on diplomats)

    Wouldn't that open up extradition as a route to follow?
    I don’t claim to be an expert, but if that logic held true, wouldn’t it work for all diplomats everywhere accused of crimes? To take a trivial example, all of our diplomats in DC who refuse to pay for parking at the airport should, on that logic, expect a bill when they get home.

    It feels like a complex area where you have to have absolutes or the whole system falls over.
    Sure - they get a bill and they ignore it.

    The absolute is to prevent harassment when they are in the country where they are acting as diplomats. Once they are out of the country there is harassment risk therefore they should be subject to extradition as normal. (IANAL...)
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,113
    Re John Rentoul: yes, good chance it will pass - which is why remainer alliance MPs are now resorting to trying to cancel Saturday sitting so MPs don`t have the chance to vote on it.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,871
    RobD said:

    So now they want less time to debate it? :)
    If there's one thing that has amazed me by what has happened over the last few weeks, it's the way that some Remainers have effectively made the case for Boris steamrolling Brexit through.
  • Super Saturday is classic ' security theatre '. Evoking a war time atmosphere to manufacture consent. I don't mind the Government chancing its arm - this is politics - but equally I don't mind the Commons telling it to sod off. All the fun of the fair.

    There is no fun in any of this and it needs a deal fast
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,753
    Andrew said:

    Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything.

    This seems reasonable:
    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1184440535760719872

    15 Lab is high when you get down to it. Nick P first identified Kinnock's gang but then seemed to row back on that which leaves us back at 5-6. Could still pass, that said, but I don't see Lab giving Boris hero status no matter people might say "but you wrecked a deal".
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,853
    Gabs2 said:

    Government tables motion for sitting on saturday

    Are these mps really going to try and stop it

    They are insane

    There are a number of reasonable and self interested grounds for the Commons not to agree to the Super Saturday stunt. You may not agree with them but describing them as " insane " is ludicrous.
    Can’t both things be true? There are sensible reasons to want more time to consider the issues, but many of the MPs are voting against as a simple stunt and won’t do any more considering. A plague on all their houses.
    MPs are:
    - Voting against a deal
    - Voting against no dea
    - Voting against an election

    They deserved to be completely pilloried and ostracised from public life.
    Businesses want some certainty, the likes of @Yellow_Submarine are as bad as the ERG.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    edited October 2019
    Stocky said:

    Re John Rentoul: yes, good chance it will pass - which is why remainer alliance MPs are now resorting to trying to cancel Saturday sitting so MPs don`t have the chance to vote on it.

    Not so sure myself - just posted the Rentoul tweet as a sort of baseline for others to work off.

    Will the DUP really allow an Irish Sea customs border? Also dubious the number of Lab votes will get into double figures.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    Stocky said:

    surbiton 19 said: "Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything."

    I just wonder whether, when it comes down to it, more LP MPs will support the deal (if one appears). There will be a lot of internal pressure for them not to but on the other hand the public will see that the government have pulled the stops out to get a deal and would view LP very dimly indeed if they prove to be the obstacle.

    If the deal goes down I think Labour get absolutely hammered in election. They won't be able to repeat the 2017 trick of making it about something other than Brexit. They will have forced a surrender act to supposedly get a deal, then voted down that deal. That hurts you not just among Leavers but also moderate Remainers who think the referendum should be honoured. And most Labour seats are in the North and Midlands which are mostly Leave and where Remainers tend to be more moderate. On the other side, the Lib Dems are clearly much more trusted than Corbyn to be genuinely true Remain, rather than play a 7/10 token effort like Corbyn will do again.

    Plus they will be facing Johnson and Swinson, who are far more charismatic leaders than their predecessors.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,210
    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    148grss said:

    Nigelb said:

    148grss said:
    Entirely unlike all the reasonable pragmatists over here...

    It's a pretty implausible thread.

    This bit is just hilarious:
    https://twitter.com/KarlreMarks/status/1181911675743674368
    Did you know that some academic literally once claimed that the Israel Palestine conflict was due to a lack of iron and could be solved by making people in the region eat Marmite, and the important people considered it for a while because when some old white dude says something authoritatively you have to pretend it's important?
    How do we know he wasn't taking the piss ?
    More importantly, how do we know he wasn’t right?
    Why does the map include Switzerland but not Norway?
    Because there has never been conflict in Norway, whereas Switzerland...
    Never been conflict in Norway......... I refer you to 1940, and the battles without which Churchill might well not have become PM.

    To say nothing of the battle of Rastarkalv in 955.

    And the Swedish invasion of 1814
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    TOPPING said:

    Andrew said:

    Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything.

    This seems reasonable:
    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1184440535760719872

    15 Lab is high when you get down to it. Nick P first identified Kinnock's gang but then seemed to row back on that which leaves us back at 5-6. Could still pass, that said, but I don't see Lab giving Boris hero status no matter people might say "but you wrecked a deal".
    Boris will be a hero to Leavers whether he succeeds or fails. Labour's best shot is taking Brexit off the table and waiting for a suitable long period afterwards to force an election at a time of their own choosing.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,753
    Gabs2 said:

    Stocky said:

    surbiton 19 said: "Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything."

    I just wonder whether, when it comes down to it, more LP MPs will support the deal (if one appears). There will be a lot of internal pressure for them not to but on the other hand the public will see that the government have pulled the stops out to get a deal and would view LP very dimly indeed if they prove to be the obstacle.

    If the deal goes down I think Labour get absolutely hammered in election. They won't be able to repeat the 2017 trick of making it about something other than Brexit. They will have forced a surrender act to supposedly get a deal, then voted down that deal. That hurts you not just among Leavers but also moderate Remainers who think the referendum should be honoured. And most Labour seats are in the North and Midlands which are mostly Leave and where Remainers tend to be more moderate. On the other side, the Lib Dems are clearly much more trusted than Corbyn to be genuinely true Remain, rather than play a 7/10 token effort like Corbyn will do again.

    Plus they will be facing Johnson and Swinson, who are far more charismatic leaders than their predecessors.
    Interesting. I think that Lab will be criticised more for propping up Boris than for voting down the deal. If I could imagine the boot being on the other foot (oh and in normal times, obvs) I would be seriously displeased if the Cons voted with Lab for anything. Then again we're far from in normal times. Then again...
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Charles said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Gabs2 said:

    The refusal of the US to handover the apparent killer of Harry Dunn or provide redress to the Connors after the disgusting abuse of their infant son shows the United States is no longer a friend to the UK. Nor should they any longer be considered a civilized Western country.

    You do realise no nation on the planet would “hand over” a citizen in these circumstances without months of patient diplomatic work? Of course you do.

    We all dislike Trump. We mustn’t let it blind us when the US is actually just acting like we would.
    There is a UK-US Extradition Treaty.
    The individual has/had diplomatic immunity. There’s various bits of complexity around that; but all nations guard that religiously. If it doesn’t matter with us because they trust our legal system, then what about France? What about Mexico? What about Egypt? What about Iran?

    There’s obviously a line in there somewhere, but it’s better not to try and draw it, and to keep consistent for all countries. We’d do the same.

    It’s unimaginable what that family is going through, but it’s not a Trump/US thing.
    How about that stunt in the White House?
    Oh that’s inexcusable and shows Trump is an arse. I assumed that was priced in and was talking about the underlying issue and the advice he’s getting.

    Edit - It also really does emphasise he thinks like a reality tv star. Probably something we can learn from that in predicting future behaviour. I mean “well guess what, we’ve brought her here tonight to apologise” is unbelievably crass and naive.
    Why in God's name did Mrs S agree to it? I think far more criticism should be made of her than Trump in this case. Any decent person would have said no to such a circus.
    I agree. Though, was she ordered to? He husband was a “diplomat”, does she work for the US Gvt too?
    There are some orders you refuse to obey. Out of plain human decency, frankly. This should have been one of them, if in fact there was an "order".
    I've some sympathy for her leaving.

    She was scared, no doubt advised by the embassy and lawyers to leave and did what she was told.

    But once she had the time to get home and reflect on the situation she should have done what you said.

    (I'll see what my wife can find out from her friends at the 'embassy'..)
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    Also, just throwing it out there: Rentoul numbers but with only 5 Lab + Lamb = 319.

    But O'Mara doesn't turn up, so it's a tie and …. deciding vote Mr J Bercow.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    eek said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Knowing how Bercow loves being the center of attention I think he might side with the government on this one.
    Why? There is a valid reason for delaying things until Monday - it's called giving people enough to read the text.
    But Bercow is a big believer in parliament having extra debating time. You are not suggesting he is a hypocrite are you?
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,695
    edited October 2019
    All this non information is hurting my brain. If as is being rumoured Boris has made concessions as described then this should not get any support from either ERG or the DUP. However at worse they actually seem just lukewarm or split. That either means Boris is not conceding that much or they have lost the will to fight.

    On votes surely even with the DUP and Tory rebels Boris has a majority of -1. If he has done a deal many of those rebels will still support him, but several have now just gone for good surely, so he is relying on several Labour rebels. Surely that means even the best deal is going to be tight.

    Am I missing anything?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited October 2019
    TOPPING said:

    Andrew said:

    Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything.

    This seems reasonable:
    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1184440535760719872

    15 Lab is high when you get down to it. Nick P first identified Kinnock's gang but then seemed to row back on that which leaves us back at 5-6. Could still pass, that said, but I don't see Lab giving Boris hero status no matter people might say "but you wrecked a deal".
    Yes, that was my thought. 20 out of 28 'Spartans' might be an over-estimate as well, although it's hard to be sure. Overall I'd expect it to be closer than John Rentoul suggests. No chance if the DUP don't play ball, of course.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    The centre of Leeds currently has rival pro-Hong Kong and pro-Beijing demonstrations, which is a little disconcerting.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,736
    TOPPING said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Stocky said:

    surbiton 19 said: "Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything."

    I just wonder whether, when it comes down to it, more LP MPs will support the deal (if one appears). There will be a lot of internal pressure for them not to but on the other hand the public will see that the government have pulled the stops out to get a deal and would view LP very dimly indeed if they prove to be the obstacle.

    If the deal goes down I think Labour get absolutely hammered in election. They won't be able to repeat the 2017 trick of making it about something other than Brexit. They will have forced a surrender act to supposedly get a deal, then voted down that deal. That hurts you not just among Leavers but also moderate Remainers who think the referendum should be honoured. And most Labour seats are in the North and Midlands which are mostly Leave and where Remainers tend to be more moderate. On the other side, the Lib Dems are clearly much more trusted than Corbyn to be genuinely true Remain, rather than play a 7/10 token effort like Corbyn will do again.

    Plus they will be facing Johnson and Swinson, who are far more charismatic leaders than their predecessors.
    Interesting. I think that Lab will be criticised more for propping up Boris than for voting down the deal. If I could imagine the boot being on the other foot (oh and in normal times, obvs) I would be seriously displeased if the Cons voted with Lab for anything. Then again we're far from in normal times. Then again...
    If Johnson gets a deal and can hold his own party together behind it, he will be in a position to go into an election promising a resolution to Brexit (or at least to the first stage of it). A Labour win or another hung parliament wouldn't do that.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    Charles said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Charles said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Gabs2 said:

    The individual has/had diplomatic immunity. There’s various bits of complexity around that; but all nations guard that religiously. If it doesn’t matter with us because they trust our legal system, then what about France? What about Mexico? What about Egypt? What about Iran?

    There’s obviously a line in there somewhere, but it’s better not to try and draw it, and to keep consistent for all countries. We’d do the same.

    It’s unimaginable what that family is going through, but it’s not a Trump/US thing.
    How about that stunt in the White House?
    Oh that’s inexcusable and shows Trump is an arse. I assumed that was priced in and was talking about the underlying issue and the advice he’s getting.

    Edit - It also really does emphasise he thinks like a reality tv star. Probably something we can learn from that in predicting future behaviour. I mean “well guess what, we’ve brought her here tonight to apologise” is unbelievably crass and naive.
    Why in God's name did Mrs S agree to it? I think far more criticism should be made of her than Trump in this case. Any decent person would have said no to such a circus.
    I agree. Though, was she ordered to? He husband was a “diplomat”, does she work for the US Gvt too?
    There are some orders you refuse to obey. Out of plain human decency, frankly. This should have been one of them, if in fact there was an "order".
    I've some sympathy for her leaving.

    She was scared, no doubt advised by the embassy and lawyers to leave and did what she was told.

    But once she had the time to get home and reflect on the situation she should have done what you said.

    (I'll see what my wife can find out from her friends at the 'embassy'..)
    If she'd stayed this would never have become a story. Now her name will be associated with this. I wouldn't like to be her explaining to my children why I ran away after having been responsible - however inadvertently - for another child's death.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,473

    rpjs said:

    Is Marmite either Halal or kosher? Would Vegemite work? Prefer Bovril myself.

    Dunno about kosher, but IIRC halal is only concerned with the slaughter of animals providing meat, and there are no other Islamic dietary restrictions other than the prohibition of pork and the consumption of blood.

    So Vegemite by not containing any meet is ipso facto halal.
    Marmite is of course a by-product of brewing and I presume vegemite is too. Not sure if that makes a difference so long as they don't contain alcohol.
    The issue with Marmite is that it used to be produced on the same production line as Bovril so could get non kosher contamination. I think that is resolved now.

    https://m.jpost.com/Diaspora/Kosher-Marmite-to-reappear-in-Britain-406405
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    TOPPING said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Stocky said:

    surbiton 19 said: "Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything."

    I just wonder whether, when it comes down to it, more LP MPs will support the deal (if one appears). There will be a lot of internal pressure for them not to but on the other hand the public will see that the government have pulled the stops out to get a deal and would view LP very dimly indeed if they prove to be the obstacle.

    If the deal goes down I think Labour get absolutely hammered in election. They won't be able to repeat the 2017 trick of making it about something other than Brexit. They will have forced a surrender act to supposedly get a deal, then voted down that deal. That hurts you not just among Leavers but also moderate Remainers who think the referendum should be honoured. And most Labour seats are in the North and Midlands which are mostly Leave and where Remainers tend to be more moderate. On the other side, the Lib Dems are clearly much more trusted than Corbyn to be genuinely true Remain, rather than play a 7/10 token effort like Corbyn will do again.

    Plus they will be facing Johnson and Swinson, who are far more charismatic leaders than their predecessors.
    Interesting. I think that Lab will be criticised more for propping up Boris than for voting down the deal. If I could imagine the boot being on the other foot (oh and in normal times, obvs) I would be seriously displeased if the Cons voted with Lab for anything. Then again we're far from in normal times. Then again...
    "Labour" don't need to prop him up. Corbyn just needs to let 15-20 backbench MPs in highly Leave seats vote for it and only get mild punishment. They might even boost their electoral chances by "standing up" to the leadership for their constituents. Corbyn can then spend the next three years saying the NHS is at risk.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,695

    The centre of Leeds currently has rival pro-Hong Kong and pro-Beijing demonstrations, which is a little disconcerting.

    Are they lost?
  • kjh said:

    All this non information is hurting my brain. If as is being rumoured Boris has made concessions as described then this should not get any support from either ERG or the DUP. However at worse they actually seem just lukewarm or split. That either means Boris is not conceding that much or they have lost the will to fight.

    On votes surely even with the DUP and Tory rebels Boris has a majority of -1. If he has done a deal many of those rebels will still support him, but several have now just gone for good surely, so he is relying on several Labour rebels. Surely that means even the best deal is going to be tight.

    Am I missing anything?

    He needs an EU “this is your last chance” line from all the big hitters. Not sure if the incentive is there for them to give him that though.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,753
    Gabs2 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Stocky said:

    surbiton 19 said: "Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything."

    I just wonder whether, when it comes down to it, more LP MPs will support the deal (if one appears). There will be a lot of internal pressure for them not to but on the other hand the public will see that the government have pulled the stops out to get a deal and would view LP very dimly indeed if they prove to be the obstacle.

    If the deal goes down I think Labour get absolutely hammered in election. They won't be able to repeat the 2017 trick of making it about something other than Brexit. They will have forced a surrender act to supposedly get a deal, then voted down that deal. That hurts you not just among Leavers but also moderate Remainers who think the referendum should be honoured. And most Labour seats are in the North and Midlands which are mostly Leave and where Remainers tend to be more moderate. On the other side, the Lib Dems are clearly much more trusted than Corbyn to be genuinely true Remain, rather than play a 7/10 token effort like Corbyn will do again.

    Plus they will be facing Johnson and Swinson, who are far more charismatic leaders than their predecessors.
    Interesting. I think that Lab will be criticised more for propping up Boris than for voting down the deal. If I could imagine the boot being on the other foot (oh and in normal times, obvs) I would be seriously displeased if the Cons voted with Lab for anything. Then again we're far from in normal times. Then again...
    "Labour" don't need to prop him up. Corbyn just needs to let 15-20 backbench MPs in highly Leave seats vote for it and only get mild punishment. They might even boost their electoral chances by "standing up" to the leadership for their constituents. Corbyn can then spend the next three years saying the NHS is at risk.
    Yes that is true.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Not clear what’s going to come out of the negotiations.

    Hard to imagine it’s the legal text so likely to be just an agreement of the outline to a deal.

    This would would not nullify the Benn Act .
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,473

    The centre of Leeds currently has rival pro-Hong Kong and pro-Beijing demonstrations, which is a little disconcerting.

    Mind you, in Leicester the Kashmir conflict has flared up amongst my colleagues, and from another colleague, Erdogan is right to bash the Kurds.

    It makes Brexit seem so parochial.
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
    Gabs2 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Stocky said:

    surbiton 19 said: "Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything."

    I just wonder whether, when it comes down to it, more LP MPs will support the deal (if one appears). There will be a lot of internal pressure for them not to but on the other hand the public will see that the government have pulled the stops out to get a deal and would view LP very dimly indeed if they prove to be the obstacle.

    If the deal goes down I think Labour get absolutely hammered in election. They won't be able to repeat the 2017 trick of making it about something other than Brexit. They will have forced a surrender act to supposedly get a deal, then voted down that deal. That hurts you not just among Leavers but also moderate Remainers who think the referendum should be honoured. And most Labour seats are in the North and Midlands which are mostly Leave and where Remainers tend to be more moderate. On the other side, the Lib Dems are clearly much more trusted than Corbyn to be genuinely true Remain, rather than play a 7/10 token effort like Corbyn will do again.

    Plus they will be facing Johnson and Swinson, who are far more charismatic leaders than their predecessors.
    Interesting. I think that Lab will be criticised more for propping up Boris than for voting down the deal. If I could imagine the boot being on the other foot (oh and in normal times, obvs) I would be seriously displeased if the Cons voted with Lab for anything. Then again we're far from in normal times. Then again...
    "Labour" don't need to prop him up. Corbyn just needs to let 15-20 backbench MPs in highly Leave seats vote for it and only get mild punishment. They might even boost their electoral chances by "standing up" to the leadership for their constituents. Corbyn can then spend the next three years saying the NHS is at risk.
    Believe me, the current mood in the Labour Party is such that anyone voting with Johnson will be expelled from the Party. It doesn't matter for people like Hoey and Mann, who are Tories anyway. The rest will toe the line, or else.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    nico67 said:

    Not clear what’s going to come out of the negotiations.

    Hard to imagine it’s the legal text so likely to be just an agreement of the outline to a deal.

    This would would not nullify the Benn Act .

    Exactly. So an extension would need to be requested anyway. That Act is very specific about what has to be agreed and voted on to obviate the need for an extension request.

    MPs should be given the full legal text and all the relevant information about the deal before a vote. Legislation passed in haste without proper scrutiny is not a good idea, however much people want to let off steam about stunts and MPs being hypocrites etc.
  • nico67 said:

    Not clear what’s going to come out of the negotiations.

    Hard to imagine it’s the legal text so likely to be just an agreement of the outline to a deal.

    This would would not nullify the Benn Act .

    You’re probably right, but on these “last minute deal” things you often have lots of time to draft up stuff while the principals argue/consider. If the EU and UK back room teams have been working together and really want something, then there might be a text. If that text mostly consists of level playing field deletions, and a very few customs/consent provisions then it might be legally cleared and releasable.

    But you’re probably right.
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469

    rpjs said:

    Is Marmite either Halal or kosher? Would Vegemite work? Prefer Bovril myself.

    Dunno about kosher, but IIRC halal is only concerned with the slaughter of animals providing meat, and there are no other Islamic dietary restrictions other than the prohibition of pork and the consumption of blood.

    So Vegemite by not containing any meet is ipso facto halal.
    Marmite is of course a by-product of brewing and I presume vegemite is too. Not sure if that makes a difference so long as they don't contain alcohol.
    Doesn't Vinegar ? Muslims consume vinegar [ sirqa ] by the gallons.
  • Charles said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Charles said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Gabs2 said:

    The refusal of the US to handover the apparent killer of Harry Dunn or provide redress to the Connors after the disgusting abuse of their infant son shows the United States is no longer a friend to the UK. Nor should they any longer be considered a civilized Western country.

    You do realise no nation on the planet would “hand over” a citizen in these circumstances without months of patient diplomatic work? Of course you do.

    We all dislike Trump. We mustn’t let it blind us when the US is actually just acting like we would.
    There is a UK-US Extradition Treaty.
    The individual has/had diplomatic immunity. There’s various bits of complexity around that; but all nations guard that religiously. If it doesn’t matter with us because they trust our legal system, then what about France? What about Mexico? What about Egypt? What about Iran?

    There’s obviously a line in there somewhere, but it’s better not to try and draw it, and to keep consistent for all countries. We’d do the same.

    It’s unimaginable what that family is going through, but it’s not a Trump/US thing.
    The technical debate is that she is now back in the US so no longer has diplomatic immunity (the purpose of which is to prevent undue pressure on diplomats)

    Wouldn't that open up extradition as a route to follow?
    That would depend on the precise terms of the treaty. You will be aware that there was a lot of disquiet at the time it was agreed about its one-sided nature. And if such action was taken the US would no doubt respond by saying that she had immunity. So back to square one.

    Mrs Sacoolas could sort this out by doing the decent thing herself, coming back to the UK, speaking to the police and, if action is taken against her, taking her punishment.
    Raab's letter said that the US considers that diplomatic immunity is "no longer pertinent" which sounds like weasel wording to me.

    The one sided nature of the treaty is to do with the fact that the US authorities don't have to demonstrate a case in the UK, while I believe we have to provide evidential support in the US.

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/foreign-affairs/news/107206/us-woman-wanted-over-crash-death-no-longer-has-diplomatic
    The US approach is considerably undermined by the behavior of the Georgia government in relation to a similar incident in 1997. Georgia did the decent thing. The USA did not.

    Special relationship my arse.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502

    nico67 said:

    Not clear what’s going to come out of the negotiations.

    Hard to imagine it’s the legal text so likely to be just an agreement of the outline to a deal.

    This would would not nullify the Benn Act .

    You’re probably right, but on these “last minute deal” things you often have lots of time to draft up stuff while the principals argue/consider. If the EU and UK back room teams have been working together and really want something, then there might be a text. If that text mostly consists of level playing field deletions, and a very few customs/consent provisions then it might be legally cleared and releasable.

    But you’re probably right.
    You can have for example detail about how customs might work but the legal detail missing . If you look at Mays WA the text just around NI was over 150 pages long full of legal jargon .

    It’s hard to imagine they could have this ready .

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,344

    rpjs said:

    Is Marmite either Halal or kosher? Would Vegemite work? Prefer Bovril myself.

    Dunno about kosher, but IIRC halal is only concerned with the slaughter of animals providing meat, and there are no other Islamic dietary restrictions other than the prohibition of pork and the consumption of blood.

    So Vegemite by not containing any meet is ipso facto halal.
    Marmite is of course a by-product of brewing and I presume vegemite is too. Not sure if that makes a difference so long as they don't contain alcohol.
    Doesn't Vinegar ? Muslims consume vinegar [ sirqa ] by the gallons.
    Don't tell him, Pike!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,802
    Scott_P said:
    I wonder what the reaction would have been had Leavers suggested a tweak to the GFA?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    kjh said:

    All this non information is hurting my brain. If as is being rumoured Boris has made concessions as described then this should not get any support from either ERG or the DUP. However at worse they actually seem just lukewarm or split. That either means Boris is not conceding that much or they have lost the will to fight.

    On votes surely even with the DUP and Tory rebels Boris has a majority of -1. If he has done a deal many of those rebels will still support him, but several have now just gone for good surely, so he is relying on several Labour rebels. Surely that means even the best deal is going to be tight.

    Am I missing anything?

    are you defining the "Tory rebels" as the ERG or the ex-whip Tories?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    edited October 2019
    If anyone’s interested George Peretz QC has a good twitter thread on what is and isn’t acceptable in terms of triggering the Benn Act .
  • With the Tories now up to 15% ahead in the polls the incentive for the EU to delay is much diminished.

    That is the true significance of recent opinion polls.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    edited October 2019
    Nicely nutshelled on the Beeb forum -

    "So Boris’s big master plan is to accept something the EU offered us 2 years ago and to bribe the DUP into accepting it. Genius."

    Except not quite true, is it. His 'master plan' was in fact about one thing and one thing only. Becoming PM.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    nico67 said:

    Not clear what’s going to come out of the negotiations.

    Hard to imagine it’s the legal text so likely to be just an agreement of the outline to a deal.

    This would would not nullify the Benn Act .

    The political agreement includes a 3 week extension to tidy up the legal text which makes the Benn act irrelevant and any letter easily ignored by the EU (although doesn't the UK effectively have to accept any date the EU puts forward?)

    Boris gets round his 31/10 promise by having an agreement in the legal text that we will leave "as of 31/10" so everything is backdated (although I don't think people will really care if there is a deal and it's just a paperwork exercise at that point).
  • RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    I wonder what the reaction would have been had Leavers suggested a tweak to the GFA?
    Not good unless they were Irish, and if you can't work that one out, well.....duh!
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Scott_P said:
    and that's exactly the right way to tackle the consent issue
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    TOPPING said:

    Andrew said:

    Has anybody actually done the numbers ? ALL Con's , ALL DUP are 1 short. Plus a few Labour MPs [ I reckon Tory types like Mann, Hoey ]. Max 5. So a few Spartans and a few Rebels can ruin everything.

    This seems reasonable:
    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1184440535760719872

    15 Lab is high when you get down to it. Nick P first identified Kinnock's gang but then seemed to row back on that which leaves us back at 5-6. Could still pass, that said, but I don't see Lab giving Boris hero status no matter people might say "but you wrecked a deal".
    Good point. The missing bit of the jigsaw is the rock solid argument the 15 Labour leavers can take back to their local parties to justify why they saved Boris Johnson's bacon.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,700
    Mr. Meeks, who's winning?
  • The centre of Leeds currently has rival pro-Hong Kong and pro-Beijing demonstrations, which is a little disconcerting.

    I wonder whetehr the "pro-Beijing" demonstrators are paid or threatened to be there. Maybe both!
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Charles said:

    nico67 said:

    Not clear what’s going to come out of the negotiations.

    Hard to imagine it’s the legal text so likely to be just an agreement of the outline to a deal.

    This would would not nullify the Benn Act .

    The political agreement includes a 3 week extension to tidy up the legal text which makes the Benn act irrelevant and any letter easily ignored by the EU (although doesn't the UK effectively have to accept any date the EU puts forward?)

    Boris gets round his 31/10 promise by having an agreement in the legal text that we will leave "as of 31/10" so everything is backdated (although I don't think people will really care if there is a deal and it's just a paperwork exercise at that point).
    Does it ? Johnson has said again the UK is leaving on the 31 st October. His obsession with this date is now becoming unhinged . Does anyone really care if a deal is done and it takes a bit longer to leave .
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,344
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    I wonder what the reaction would have been had Leavers suggested a tweak to the GFA?
    The GFA is Holy Writ (except when it it is a pile of poo.....)
  • If Andy Bruce is right, then the deal will be agreed. Issues involving VAT won't scupper it, although they might delay it because of the need to pin down the details.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,344
    R4: Alistair Burt will vote for the Boris Deal.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,113
    Do you think Boris should now consider restoring the whip to those of the 21 who want it back?
  • RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    I wonder what the reaction would have been had Leavers suggested a tweak to the GFA?
    The GFA is Holy Writ (except when it it is a pile of poo.....)
    bit like Leaver's obsession with Brexit 😂 😂 😂
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,344

    If Andy Bruce is right, then the deal will be agreed. Issues involving VAT won't scupper it, although they might delay it because of the need to pin down the details.

    Surely that can be delegated to a Committee of Clever Blokes Who Give a Fuck?
  • Stocky said:

    Do you think Boris should now consider restoring the whip to those of the 21 who want it back?

    He will be begging them no doubt. I hope they savour it and make him grovel.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    With the Tories now up to 15% ahead in the polls the incentive for the EU to delay is much diminished.

    That is the true significance of recent opinion polls.

    But a lead as small as 2% might give them quite a bit of incentive.
  • If Andy Bruce is right, then the deal will be agreed. Issues involving VAT won't scupper it, although they might delay it because of the need to pin down the details.

    Surely that can be delegated to a Committee of Clever Blokes Who Give a Fuck?
    Yes, I'd have thought so.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,210
    Foxy said:

    rpjs said:

    Is Marmite either Halal or kosher? Would Vegemite work? Prefer Bovril myself.

    Dunno about kosher, but IIRC halal is only concerned with the slaughter of animals providing meat, and there are no other Islamic dietary restrictions other than the prohibition of pork and the consumption of blood.

    So Vegemite by not containing any meet is ipso facto halal.
    Marmite is of course a by-product of brewing and I presume vegemite is too. Not sure if that makes a difference so long as they don't contain alcohol.
    The issue with Marmite is that it used to be produced on the same production line as Bovril so could get non kosher contamination. I think that is resolved now.

    https://m.jpost.com/Diaspora/Kosher-Marmite-to-reappear-in-Britain-406405
    This is what Unilever reckons https://www.marmite.co.uk/faq.html
  • kinabalu said:

    Nicely nutshelled on the Beeb forum -

    "So Boris’s big master plan is to accept something the EU offered us 2 years ago and to bribe the DUP into accepting it. Genius."

    Except not quite true, is it. His 'master plan' was in fact about one thing and one thing only. Becoming PM.

    ..and shagging as many blonds as he persuade along the way
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,306
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7580491/Donald-Trump-asked-parents-Harry-Dunn-meet-sons-Boris-Johnson-asked-to.html

    Donald Trump says he invited parents of Harry Dunn to meet their son's killer Anne Sacoolas at the White House 'only because Boris Johnson asked him to'
  • If Andy Bruce is right, then the deal will be agreed. Issues involving VAT won't scupper it, although they might delay it because of the need to pin down the details.

    I am surprised there are VAT issues given there is slready a VAT border between NI and Ireland.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited October 2019
    Gandhi was a racist asshole who needs to be shunned, and his statues destroyed.

    Apparently.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/students-call-to-block-manchester-gandhi-statue-because-hes-racist-a4262711.html
  • kinabalu said:

    Nicely nutshelled on the Beeb forum -

    "So Boris’s big master plan is to accept something the EU offered us 2 years ago and to bribe the DUP into accepting it. Genius."

    Except not quite true, is it. His 'master plan' was in fact about one thing and one thing only. Becoming PM.

    ..and shagging as many blonds as he persuade along the way
    On the face of it I would suggest that is a genius plan. :wink:
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Looks like the Stormont lock will be an opt out not opt in for EU alignment to continue , likely to mean the backstop isn’t going anywhere.

    The DUP wanted to basically have a veto and an opt in scenario .
  • If Andy Bruce is right, then the deal will be agreed. Issues involving VAT won't scupper it, although they might delay it because of the need to pin down the details.

    I am surprised there are VAT issues given there is slready a VAT border between NI and Ireland.
    Presumably it's something to do with the fact that the UK will be outside the EU VAT rules.
  • TGOHF2TGOHF2 Posts: 584

    If Andy Bruce is right, then the deal will be agreed. Issues involving VAT won't scupper it, although they might delay it because of the need to pin down the details.

    I am surprised there are VAT issues given there is slready a VAT border between NI and Ireland.
    https://twitter.com/douglascarswell/status/1184510435581681664?s=21
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited October 2019
    I wonder if Nick Timothy has finally got round to admitting that an election in 2017 "was a bit of a boo-boo".

    How different this all could have been.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited October 2019
    (Almost) completely off topic: sometimes the government does get things right. The operation to get the Thomas Cook holidaymakers home seems to have been very well handled. Another thing which seems very good is the on-line passport renewal service. I applied on Monday, having taken a photo in a digital photo booth. The application process was spectacularly simple, I sent off the old passport Monday afternoon, I got a text confirming they'd received it on Tuesday morning, I got another text confirming everything was in order this morning, and I've just had confirmation that the new passport has been despatched. Pretty slick!

    The only slight problemette seems to be that the software which verifies whether your photo complies with the rules seems to be a bit picky. In my case it said that the outline of my head wasn't distinct, but that's because I have near-white hair and the photo has to be against a light background. But you can override the software and submit the photo anyway, which seemed to work fine.

    (I didn't submit the photo of my avatar, obv.)
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,316
    TGOHF2 said:

    If Andy Bruce is right, then the deal will be agreed. Issues involving VAT won't scupper it, although they might delay it because of the need to pin down the details.

    I am surprised there are VAT issues given there is slready a VAT border between NI and Ireland.
    https://twitter.com/douglascarswell/status/1184510435581681664?s=21
    does this mean multi nat onliners cant play the bought in luxemburg wheeze ?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    OMG apparently the DUP are going back to no 10 tonight for more talks .

  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,802

    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    I wonder what the reaction would have been had Leavers suggested a tweak to the GFA?
    Not good unless they were Irish, and if you can't work that one out, well.....duh!
    Northern Irish, surely? :p
This discussion has been closed.