politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Some in the Shadow Cabinet want an early election but Corbyn,
Comments
-
I'm fascinated to know what he should have done. While the extension lapses on 31/10/19 that is the date we leave.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
Unless or until he could be certain of an extension isn't 31/10 is the only date he could work to?0 -
Currently looks like Johnson’s promising everything to everyone. Which means that at least half are lies.0
-
I daresay that there would be an attempt by Labour types to say the Nats had again conspired to sustain the evil Tories, but difficult to construct that around what is effectively a VONC (even from themselves) in Her Maj's Most Loyal Opposition.RobD said:
1979, also.Pulpstar said:The Tories and SNP have effectively worked together to cook Labour's goose before - Indyref 1 was a good example.
0 -
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1186636085771886594?s=20eek said:
Because there really isn't enough time for an election unless the EU extends to January 31st.Scott_P said:
And without an election the only game in town is Boris's deal.0 -
-
Ah, of course, so the more important the change the less justification there is for one community to override the other. This means the EU referendum in NI provides some justification for the change in NI's status that Johnson's deal represents, but also that, once in place, the Nationalists can't use the double-majority rules to prevent it being removed.Philip_Thompson said:
GFA means a simple majority can trigger a border poll.Scott_P said:0 -
But let me ask the question again - how does Boris introduce a bill that changes the FTPA to allow an election.Theuniondivvie said:
I daresay that there would be an attempt by Labour types to say the Nats had again conspired to sustain the evil Tories, but difficult to construct that around what is effectively a VONC (even from themselves) in Her Maj's Most Loyal Opposition.RobD said:
1979, also.Pulpstar said:The Tories and SNP have effectively worked together to cook Labour's goose before - Indyref 1 was a good example.
Hint - No changes to the FTPA were mentioned in the Queen's speech.0 -
-
Counterpoint - the EU offer a very long extension that can be shortened to a month that allows either an election or a second referendum.CarlottaVance said:
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1186636085771886594?s=20eek said:
Because there really isn't enough time for an election unless the EU extends to January 31st.Scott_P said:
And without an election the only game in town is Boris's deal.
However the law says that we automatically accept an offer of an extension to January 31st so that's the easiest option.
Boris gets an extension tob January 31st and most then try to get a general election
0 -
Corbyn giving way to Nandy and De Piero. Not exactly piling the pressure on the PM's timetable0
-
-
Does a bill have to be explicitly mentioned in the queens speech? I thought the government was at liberty to table any bill it wants by virtue of this provisoeek said:
But let me ask the question again - how does Boris introduce a bill that changes the FTPA to allow an election.Theuniondivvie said:
I daresay that there would be an attempt by Labour types to say the Nats had again conspired to sustain the evil Tories, but difficult to construct that around what is effectively a VONC (even from themselves) in Her Maj's Most Loyal Opposition.RobD said:
1979, also.Pulpstar said:The Tories and SNP have effectively worked together to cook Labour's goose before - Indyref 1 was a good example.
Hint - No changes to the FTPA were mentioned in the Queen's speech.
Members of the House of Commons.
Estimates for the public services will be laid before you.
My Lords and Members of the House of Commons.
Other measures will be laid before you.1 -
That date is the end of the current EU budget period. It will be a massive pain in the rear-end for the EU to draw up a budget that has us being in, or dropping out at arbitrary times during it. I think that the EU isn't allowed to run a budget deficit, so they will effectively have to draw up two sets of budgets.TheWhiteRabbit said:
In my view, the arbitrary date in question is 31 December 2020Pulpstar said:
The pressure has bought about the bill though.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.0 -
If Corbyn calls a VONC 50% +1 is enougheek said:
But let me ask the question again - how does Boris introduce a bill that changes the FTPA to allow an election.Theuniondivvie said:
I daresay that there would be an attempt by Labour types to say the Nats had again conspired to sustain the evil Tories, but difficult to construct that around what is effectively a VONC (even from themselves) in Her Maj's Most Loyal Opposition.RobD said:
1979, also.Pulpstar said:The Tories and SNP have effectively worked together to cook Labour's goose before - Indyref 1 was a good example.
Hint - No changes to the FTPA were mentioned in the Queen's speech.
If Johnson calls one via FTPA 66% required
If SNP call VONC it is allowable only (I think) if Government make time and I assume 50% +1 required as it is an opposition party VONC ???
One line bill seems convoluted and slow as it will need Lords approval.
0 -
That was Labour being morons all by themselves.Pulpstar said:The Tories and SNP have effectively worked together to cook Labour's goose before - Indyref 1 was a good example.
"I know", thought Labour morons like Duncan Hothersal, "let's show Conservative party members where all their best potential voters are whilst simultaneously demonising the 40% of our voters who support Indy. This will be a great plan and I will continually insist it was great after we get wiped out"0 -
We aren't going to have a FTA deal sorted and approved by the EU by December 31st 2020 - it's an impossible deadline.OblitusSumMe said:
That date is the end of the current EU budget period. It will be a massive pain in the rear-end for the EU to draw up a budget that has us being in, or dropping out at arbitrary times during it. I think that the EU isn't allowed to run a budget deficit, so they will effectively have to draw up two sets of budgets.TheWhiteRabbit said:
In my view, the arbitrary date in question is 31 December 2020Pulpstar said:
The pressure has bought about the bill though.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.0 -
This was madness of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.0 -
Boris got this deal by conceding to customs checks in the Irish Sea. If you mean that the deadline made him do this, then you may have a point.Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.0 -
Gov't has decided to crack on with Brexit and abandon 31st October. Sensible now we're ostensibly in the end game.0
-
To me it smacks of People Vs Parliament getting priority over actually getting the deal done.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
If the second reading passes reasonably well, the bill deserves the time it needs to get through - at pace, yes, but not at James Dean pace. From the lens of a February election, the deal having been done in mid November, 'Do or Die' will not look to be one of Boris's more serious lies. And, if not, parliament will have done much more to thwart the people than simply rejected a programme motion.
If Boris pulls these bill then, to me, Boris takes ownership of the delay, the purpose of which was for him to throw his toys out of the the pram.0 -
Neither Boris Johnson nor Steve Barclay understand what they’ve signed up to.0
-
It's 50%+1 for a VoNC but minimum 430 seats for an early election under FTPA.philiph said:
If Corbyn calls a VONC 50% +1 is enougheek said:
But let me ask the question again - how does Boris introduce a bill that changes the FTPA to allow an election.Theuniondivvie said:
I daresay that there would be an attempt by Labour types to say the Nats had again conspired to sustain the evil Tories, but difficult to construct that around what is effectively a VONC (even from themselves) in Her Maj's Most Loyal Opposition.RobD said:
1979, also.Pulpstar said:The Tories and SNP have effectively worked together to cook Labour's goose before - Indyref 1 was a good example.
Hint - No changes to the FTPA were mentioned in the Queen's speech.
If Johnson calls one via FTPA 66% required
If SNP call VONC it is allowable only (I think) if Government make time and I assume 50% +1 required as it is an opposition party VONC ???
One line bill seems convoluted and slow as it will need Lords approval.
The requirement is 66% of seats not 66% of voting MPs so the easiest way of avoiding an election being called under the FTPA is for parties who don't an election to have urgent business outside Parliament that day.0 -
If the government allow the SNP to table a VoNC (which passes on a simple majority) then FTPA is circumvented is it not?eek said:
But let me ask the question again - how does Boris introduce a bill that changes the FTPA to allow an election.
Hint - No changes to the FTPA were mentioned in the Queen's speech.0 -
And there's the rub. It's a Parliamentary Democracy.Scott_P said:0 -
Not that awkward, as they agreed to something similar from Theresa May in the spring. We had a short extension to April 12th to see if May could pass her deal and avoid having to run the European elections, and then a longer extension to 31/10 when that wasn't successful.CarlottaVance said:
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1186636085771886594?s=20eek said:
Because there really isn't enough time for an election unless the EU extends to January 31st.Scott_P said:
And without an election the only game in town is Boris's deal.
So one would not be surprised if the EU to agree to the same sort of "short, but.." extension. Have a short extension to November 29th, say, "to provide more time for the legislative process at Westminster", and then agree a longer extension (to June 30th/Dec 31st 2020) if Westminster hasn't ratified by November 22nd (or whenever allows enough time for EU Parliament ratification).0 -
I still think it'll be 5th December (which is viable as long as election is called before 31st October)
Will be the first December election since 1923 if it happens!
0 -
That is quite importantScott_P said:0 -
The document had LEAVE on the cover in big letters. They aren't details people.SouthamObserver said:Neither Boris Johnson nor Steve Barclay understand what they’ve signed up to.
0 -
Johnson gave himself an arbitrary deadline which forced him to give the EU everything it wanted, throw the DUP under a bus and remove the tiny amount of leverage the UK might have had in the forthcoming FTA negotiations. So, in one sense, you are absolutely spot on!Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness e of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.
0 -
Government is probably already aware the extension will be to 31st January.Scott_P said:
Allows time for an election but not a referendum...0 -
It would be great for Labour not to have an official leader in current circumstances, it would be a great excuse to not have an early election. Would be unsporting to have an election while main opposition still choosing its leader. Could be a good way to buy a couple months (not that I do think Corbyn is going anywhere)Richard_Nabavi said:
The trouble is though that it takes too long. Even if Corbyn were to want to resign, he's effectively stuck because Labour can't afford not to have a leader in place in current circumstances. (This is why it really is a bad idea to have party members choose leaders - much better to let MPs alone do it, because they can do it quickly).Anabobazina said:I am wondering whether McD has plans to oust Corbo. These internal rumblings with Milne and Murphy point to something going on.
0 -
IndyRef not going anywhere either.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/poll-scottish-independence-voters-switching-to-support-the-union-1-5030614
Ironically the poll was sponsored by Angus Robertson's pro-Indy outfit.
0 -
I find it hard to believe there would be a Jan election. Anytime in Jan-Mar risks a "beast from the east" style scenario causing issues. Surely if not Dec it has to be Apr?Philip_Thompson said:
Not. Going. To. Happen.northern_monkey said:Regarding the potential date of a GE...
A mate of mine is working for a large metropolitan council on their Brexit arrangements, and is in constant contact with bods in central government. He says the working assumption is a January election. Early January, 8th, 10th, something like that.
Nobody is going to trigger an election before Christmas for a vote after Christmas. That would be madness! If there's an election it will be in December no later than the 19th or it will be triggered in January which means we must have a vote no earlier than February.0 -
In the previous arrangement, the whole U.K. would have been trapped in the backstop until the EU decided to play ball and negotiate a new deal. Now the whole arrangements can be brought down on a whim by the DUP. Which do you think the EU would prefer?SouthamObserver said:
Johnson gave himself an arbitrary deadline which forced him to give the EU everything it wanted, throw the DUP under a bus and remove the tiny amount of leverage the UK might have had in the forthcoming FTA negotiations. So, in one sense, you are absolutely spot on!Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness e of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.0 -
Not a very smart way of getting any African American votes.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1186611272231636992?s=200 -
You are right, objectively speaking it was juvenile and counter-productive. Arbitrary hard deadlines on complex projects increase stress levels but do the opposite to the quality of the ultimate deliverable. Every person who has worked on one in either public or private sector knows this.Richard_Nabavi said:What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.
However this is politics and the 'project' here is not Brexit, as many mistakenly assume, it is the promotion of the interests of Boris Johnson. In that context, the magic date was not a blunder. It had two purposes. (i) To secure the leadership, the adoration of the members, thus power as PM. (ii) To ramp up the 'people vs procrastinating parliament' GE positioning narrative, 'no more dither', 'get it done ffs' etc. It has worked on both counts.
This is not about Brexit. It is about Johnson. IMO one cannot go far wrong if one analyses events through that lens.0 -
Johnson was able to agree a deal with the EU on withdrawal in a few days. I'm sure both the UK government and the EU commission have people in the background drawing up minimalist FTA drafts that would allow a deal with zero tariffs and no quotas to be agreed before the end of Dec 2020 - but might require Johnson to concede a lot on some of the details like fisheries, rules of origin, arbitration, level playing field, other stuff I haven't heard of.eek said:
We aren't going to have a FTA deal sorted and approved by the EU by December 31st 2020 - it's an impossible deadline.OblitusSumMe said:
That date is the end of the current EU budget period. It will be a massive pain in the rear-end for the EU to draw up a budget that has us being in, or dropping out at arbitrary times during it. I think that the EU isn't allowed to run a budget deficit, so they will effectively have to draw up two sets of budgets.TheWhiteRabbit said:
In my view, the arbitrary date in question is 31 December 2020Pulpstar said:
The pressure has bought about the bill though.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.0 -
The EU wanted a Northern ireland only backstop. They agreed a UK-wide one reluctantly. They now have a Northern Ireland front stop. It is arguable that they actually got more than they could have hoped for.RobD said:
In the previous arrangement, the whole U.K. would have been trapped in the backstop until the EU decided to play ball and negotiate a new deal. Now the whole arrangements can be brought down on a whim by the DUP. Which do you think the EU would prefer?SouthamObserver said:
Johnson gave himself an arbitrary deadline which forced him to give the EU everything it wanted, throw the DUP under a bus and remove the tiny amount of leverage the UK might have had in the forthcoming FTA negotiations. So, in one sense, you are absolutely spot on!Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness e of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.
0 -
TMay put in two extension requests did she not? We'd need a whole loop of Benn Bill etc, etc to force Boris to send a second letter.OblitusSumMe said:
Not that awkward, as they agreed to something similar from Theresa May in the spring. We had a short extension to April 12th to see if May could pass her deal and avoid having to run the European elections, and then a longer extension to 31/10 when that wasn't successful.CarlottaVance said:
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1186636085771886594?s=20eek said:
Because there really isn't enough time for an election unless the EU extends to January 31st.Scott_P said:
And without an election the only game in town is Boris's deal.
So one would not be surprised if the EU to agree to the same sort of "short, but.." extension. Have a short extension to November 29th, say, "to provide more time for the legislative process at Westminster", and then agree a longer extension (to June 30th/Dec 31st 2020) if Westminster hasn't ratified by November 22nd (or whenever allows enough time for EU Parliament ratification).
Perhaps the EU framing it as a single extension until 31/1, with an explicit and heavily emphasised break point on, say, 14/11 (time pressure, but not stupid time pressure) would do.
Never mind the UK govt can break off extension anyway as soon as they have a deal, the UK government is conveniently ignoring that and so the EU need to, metaphorically, write it on the side of a bus.0 -
The DUP can't do that it requires the support of Stormont as a whole so unless the DUP gets Stormont up and going and then wins 51% of the seats the DUP can't do anything.RobD said:
In the previous arrangement, the whole U.K. would have been trapped in the backstop until the EU decided to play ball and negotiate a new deal. Now the whole arrangements can be brought down on a whim by the DUP. Which do you think the EU would prefer?SouthamObserver said:
Johnson gave himself an arbitrary deadline which forced him to give the EU everything it wanted, throw the DUP under a bus and remove the tiny amount of leverage the UK might have had in the forthcoming FTA negotiations. So, in one sense, you are absolutely spot on!Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness e of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.
Neither of those items are likely to occur.0 -
Exactly. There is an in-built majority for the WA status quo in Northern Ireland.eek said:
The DUP can't do that it requires the support of Stormont as a whole so unless the DUP gets Stormont up and going and then wins 51% of the seats the DUP can't do anything.RobD said:
In the previous arrangement, the whole U.K. would have been trapped in the backstop until the EU decided to play ball and negotiate a new deal. Now the whole arrangements can be brought down on a whim by the DUP. Which do you think the EU would prefer?SouthamObserver said:
Johnson gave himself an arbitrary deadline which forced him to give the EU everything it wanted, throw the DUP under a bus and remove the tiny amount of leverage the UK might have had in the forthcoming FTA negotiations. So, in one sense, you are absolutely spot on!Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness e of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.
Neither of those items are likely to occur.
0 -
The distinction is more about the exit mechanism. Both would have come into force at the end of the transition without a FTA, so the timing isn’t different.SouthamObserver said:
The EU wanted a Northern ireland only backstop. They agreed a UK-wide one reluctantly. They now have a Northern Ireland front stop. It is arguable that they actually got more than they could have hoped for.RobD said:
In the previous arrangement, the whole U.K. would have been trapped in the backstop until the EU decided to play ball and negotiate a new deal. Now the whole arrangements can be brought down on a whim by the DUP. Which do you think the EU would prefer?SouthamObserver said:
Johnson gave himself an arbitrary deadline which forced him to give the EU everything it wanted, throw the DUP under a bus and remove the tiny amount of leverage the UK might have had in the forthcoming FTA negotiations. So, in one sense, you are absolutely spot on!Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness e of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.0 -
It also has to get through every EU country and every region where countries delegate such matters.OblitusSumMe said:
Johnson was able to agree a deal with the EU on withdrawal in a few days. I'm sure both the UK government and the EU commission have people in the background drawing up minimalist FTA drafts that would allow a deal with zero tariffs and no quotas to be agreed before the end of Dec 2020 - but might require Johnson to concede a lot on some of the details like fisheries, rules of origin, arbitration, level playing field, other stuff I haven't heard of.eek said:
We aren't going to have a FTA deal sorted and approved by the EU by December 31st 2020 - it's an impossible deadline.OblitusSumMe said:
That date is the end of the current EU budget period. It will be a massive pain in the rear-end for the EU to draw up a budget that has us being in, or dropping out at arbitrary times during it. I think that the EU isn't allowed to run a budget deficit, so they will effectively have to draw up two sets of budgets.TheWhiteRabbit said:
In my view, the arbitrary date in question is 31 December 2020Pulpstar said:
The pressure has bought about the bill though.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
Unless Boris gives up everything and anything it won't be sorted in time.0 -
Paristonda said: "Would be unsporting to have an election while main opposition still choosing its leader. Could be a good way to buy a couple months "
That`s a very good point0 -
https://twitter.com/EmmaHardyMP/status/1186640362036707329?s=20
3 years for a kitchen seems a bit excessive. Even Mrs Urquhart managed it in less time than that.2 -
Ah yes, you're right. Still, there is precedent for the EU agreeing to a short extension to attempt to pass a deal, so I don't think it would be interference in domestic British politics to do so.Pro_Rata said:
TMay put in two extension requests did she not? We'd need a whole loop of Benn Bill etc, etc to force Boris to send a second letter.OblitusSumMe said:
Not that awkward, as they agreed to something similar from Theresa May in the spring. We had a short extension to April 12th to see if May could pass her deal and avoid having to run the European elections, and then a longer extension to 31/10 when that wasn't successful.CarlottaVance said:
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1186636085771886594?s=20eek said:
Because there really isn't enough time for an election unless the EU extends to January 31st.Scott_P said:
And without an election the only game in town is Boris's deal.
So one would not be surprised if the EU to agree to the same sort of "short, but.." extension. Have a short extension to November 29th, say, "to provide more time for the legislative process at Westminster", and then agree a longer extension (to June 30th/Dec 31st 2020) if Westminster hasn't ratified by November 22nd (or whenever allows enough time for EU Parliament ratification).
Perhaps the EU framing it as a single extension until 31/1, with an explicit and heavily emphasised break point on, say, 14/11 (time pressure, but not stupid time pressure) would do.
Never mind the UK govt can break off extension anyway as soon as they have a deal, the UK government is conveniently ignoring that and so the EU need to, metaphorically, write it on the side of a bus.0 -
This is exactly right. Though, to be fair to him, he has ended up doing the right thing by Ireland as a result - and even if he does not quite understand that he has.kinabalu said:
You are right, objectively speaking it was juvenile and counter-productive. Arbitrary hard deadlines on complex projects increase stress levels but do the opposite to the quality of the ultimate deliverable. Every person who has worked on one in either public or private sector knows this.Richard_Nabavi said:What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.
However this is politics and the 'project' here is not Brexit, as many mistakenly assume, it is the promotion of the interests of Boris Johnson. In that context, the magic date was not a blunder. It had two purposes. (i) To secure the leadership, the adoration of the members, thus power as PM. (ii) To ramp up the 'people vs procrastinating parliament' GE positioning narrative, 'no more dither', 'get it done ffs' etc. It has worked on both counts.
This is not about Brexit. It is about Johnson. IMO one cannot go far wrong if one analyses events through that lens.
0 -
Presumably that would give Tom Watson a fair amount of power in the interimParistonda said:
It would be great for Labour not to have an official leader in current circumstances, it would be a great excuse to not have an early election. Would be unsporting to have an election while main opposition still choosing its leader. Could be a good way to buy a couple months (not that I do think Corbyn is going anywhere)Richard_Nabavi said:
The trouble is though that it takes too long. Even if Corbyn were to want to resign, he's effectively stuck because Labour can't afford not to have a leader in place in current circumstances. (This is why it really is a bad idea to have party members choose leaders - much better to let MPs alone do it, because they can do it quickly).Anabobazina said:I am wondering whether McD has plans to oust Corbo. These internal rumblings with Milne and Murphy point to something going on.
0 -
Mrs Rata's sofa on the other hand....FrancisUrquhart said:https://twitter.com/EmmaHardyMP/status/1186640362036707329?s=20
3 years for a kitchen seems a bit excessive. Even Mrs Urquhart managed it in less time than that.0 -
The exit mechanism Johnson has agreed guarantees there will not be an exit. Don't get me wrong, I think it is absolutey the right things to do - but it is also absolutely everything the EU could have wanted.RobD said:
The distinction is more about the exit mechanism. Both would have come into force at the end of the transition without a FTA, so the timing isn’t different.SouthamObserver said:
The EU wanted a Northern ireland only backstop. They agreed a UK-wide one reluctantly. They now have a Northern Ireland front stop. It is arguable that they actually got more than they could have hoped for.RobD said:
In the previous arrangement, the whole U.K. would have been trapped in the backstop until the EU decided to play ball and negotiate a new deal. Now the whole arrangements can be brought down on a whim by the DUP. Which do you think the EU would prefer?SouthamObserver said:
Johnson gave himself an arbitrary deadline which forced him to give the EU everything it wanted, throw the DUP under a bus and remove the tiny amount of leverage the UK might have had in the forthcoming FTA negotiations. So, in one sense, you are absolutely spot on!Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness e of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.
0 -
The pressure on himself, arguably. The EU were never going to object once he'd caved in so comprehensively.Pulpstar said:
The pressure has bought about the bill though.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.0 -
SunnyJim said: "If the government allow the SNP to table a VoNC (which passes on a simple majority) then FTPA is circumvented is it not?"
No - this would be as under the FTPA rules. 14 days to form new gov - GNU possible or a Labour minority government in some form. GE date not secured (unless agreed within GNU set up).0 -
Corbyn will go for an early election I expect. knowing him. He doesn't care about the opinion polls.0
-
He didn't give the EU everything it wanted. It got some of what it wanted and means that NI can unilaterally exit the arrangements on a simple majority basis something we were assured was impossible when we were talking about the backstop as 'a backstop with an exit is no backstop'.SouthamObserver said:
Johnson gave himself an arbitrary deadline which forced him to give the EU everything it wanted, throw the DUP under a bus and remove the tiny amount of leverage the UK might have had in the forthcoming FTA negotiations. So, in one sense, you are absolutely spot on!Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness e of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.
NI arrangements are devolved to NI's control and the rest of the UK leaves. Quite satisfactory IMHO.0 -
It's 14 days with Boris remaining in power until a new leader receives the confidence of Parliament.Stocky said:SunnyJim said: "If the government allow the SNP to table a VoNC (which passes on a simple majority) then FTPA is circumvented is it not?"
No - this would be as under the FTPA rules. 14 days to form new gov - GNU possible or a Labour minority government in some form. GE date not secured (unless agreed within GNU set up).
If after 14 days no leader has confidence of Parliament we then enter the election timescales (minimum 25 days but could be extended by the PM - who would still be Boris).0 -
I am sure that many MPs today will feel empathy for members of the Reichstag facing pressure to pass Hitler's Enabling Act in March 1933.-2
-
The EU could never have wanted a deal with democratic consent at its heart.Philip_Thompson said:
He didn't give the EU everything it wanted. It got some of what it wanted and means that NI can unilaterally exit the arrangements on a simple majority basis something we were assured was impossible when we were talking about the backstop as 'a backstop with an exit is no backstop'.SouthamObserver said:
Johnson gave himself an arbitrary deadline which forced him to give the EU everything it wanted, throw the DUP under a bus and remove the tiny amount of leverage the UK might have had in the forthcoming FTA negotiations. So, in one sense, you are absolutely spot on!Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness e of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.
NI arrangements are devolved to NI's control and the rest of the UK leaves. Quite satisfactory IMHO.
0 -
Your as bad as Red Ken.justin124 said:I am sure that many MPs today will feel empathy for members of the Reichstag facing pressure to pass Hitler's Enabling Act in March 1933.
0 -
Yes but as the vote is devolved in a way that the DUP will never win such a vote - it's irrelevant.Philip_Thompson said:
He didn't give the EU everything it wanted. It got some of what it wanted and means that NI can unilaterally exit the arrangements on a simple majority basis something we were assured was impossible when we were talking about the backstop as 'a backstop with an exit is no backstop'.SouthamObserver said:
Johnson gave himself an arbitrary deadline which forced him to give the EU everything it wanted, throw the DUP under a bus and remove the tiny amount of leverage the UK might have had in the forthcoming FTA negotiations. So, in one sense, you are absolutely spot on!Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness e of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.
NI arrangements are devolved to NI's control and the rest of the UK leaves. Quite satisfactory IMHO.
NI is now permanently tied to Ireland while it's ties to the rest of GB progressively loosen.0 -
eek said: " It's 14 days with Boris remaining in power until a new leader receives the confidence of Parliament.
If after 14 days no leader has confidence of Parliament we then enter the election timescales (minimum 25 days but could be extended by the PM - who would still be Boris)."
Yes - that`s what I thought
Likely that GNU would be formed within the 14 days, with possibility of long delay, referendum or revoke.0 -
Is it theoretically possible, due to the strict timetable of the FTPA, for an election to happen on, say, Boxing Day, by accident? 0
-
How if Corbyn insists of being PM and labour reject all options that aren't Corbyn.Stocky said:eek said: " It's 14 days with Boris remaining in power until a new leader receives the confidence of Parliament.
If after 14 days no leader has confidence of Parliament we then enter the election timescales (minimum 25 days but could be extended by the PM - who would still be Boris)."
Yes - that`s what I thought
Likely that GNU would be formed within the 14 days, with possibility of long delay, referendum or revoke.
With a Brexit deal in existence I suspect the momentum to form a GoNU will have disappeared.0 -
Nope, we were never assured that. No-one ever asked. When I suggested it on here, you thought it was outrageous - a majority inflicting its wishes on a minority to deny that minority the right to vote for the people making its laws. I am glad you changed your mind and I am glad that Johnson did. But the EU now has everything it could ever have wanted - a de facto permanent solution to the Irish border issue in all circumstances. And it got it because Johnson caved because he had set himself an arbitrary deadline and prioritised that over remianing true to the assurances he had given to the DUP.Philip_Thompson said:
He didn't give the EU everything it wanted. It got some of what it wanted and means that NI can unilaterally exit the arrangements on a simple majority basis something we were assured was impossible when we were talking about the backstop as 'a backstop with an exit is no backstop'.SouthamObserver said:
Johnson gave himself an arbitrary deadline which forced him to give the EU everything it wanted, throw the DUP under a bus and remove the tiny amount of leverage the UK might have had in the forthcoming FTA negotiations. So, in one sense, you are absolutely spot on!Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness e of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.
NI arrangements are devolved to NI's control and the rest of the UK leaves. Quite satisfactory IMHO.
0 -
You are clearly aiming to win the award for most infantile comment of the year.justin124 said:I am sure that many MPs today will feel empathy for members of the Reichstag facing pressure to pass Hitler's Enabling Act in March 1933.
0 -
What is wrong with you.justin124 said:I am sure that many MPs today will feel empathy for members of the Reichstag facing pressure to pass Hitler's Enabling Act in March 1933.
Time is coming for the moderators to consider your constant references to Hitler.
I remember the immediate aftermath of the concentration camps as a child and it is seared into my memory. Your comments are unnecessary1 -
What was his immortal line again? A strategic genius.Alistair said:
That was Labour being morons all by themselves.Pulpstar said:The Tories and SNP have effectively worked together to cook Labour's goose before - Indyref 1 was a good example.
"I know", thought Labour morons like Duncan Hothersal, "let's show Conservative party members where all their best potential voters are whilst simultaneously demonising the 40% of our voters who support Indy. This will be a great plan and I will continually insist it was great after we get wiped out"
'Spending Tory money to win Labour votes makes me extremely happy. A win-win.'1 -
You are absolutely right.AndyJS said:Corbyn will go for an early election I expect. knowing him. He doesn't care about the opinion polls.
0 -
Yes, it's what I suggested might be a possible way out of the problem of the 'permanent' backstop* - a mechanism which in theory allows it to be cancelled, but which in practice doesn't.eek said:
The DUP can't do that it requires the support of Stormont as a whole so unless the DUP gets Stormont up and going and then wins 51% of the seats the DUP can't do anything.
Neither of those items are likely to occur.
* not that that was ever a real problem, because the EU wouldn't have stood for it becoming permanent.0 -
I couldn't care less if the DUP will win its vote, what matters is how voters vote.eek said:
Yes but as the vote is devolved in a way that the DUP will never win such a vote - it's irrelevant.Philip_Thompson said:
He didn't give the EU everything it wanted. It got some of what it wanted and means that NI can unilaterally exit the arrangements on a simple majority basis something we were assured was impossible when we were talking about the backstop as 'a backstop with an exit is no backstop'.SouthamObserver said:
Johnson gave himself an arbitrary deadline which forced him to give the EU everything it wanted, throw the DUP under a bus and remove the tiny amount of leverage the UK might have had in the forthcoming FTA negotiations. So, in one sense, you are absolutely spot on!Philip_Thompson said:
This was madness e of you then and even madder now when Boris thanks to this date has managed to get a deal that might actually get through Parliament unlike Theresa May.Richard_Nabavi said:
What was crazy was Boris boxing himself in to this arbitrary date. Everything else follows from that stupid blunder.DavidL said:
But this is crazy. We will either put a really complicated bill (which should have been passed more than a year ago and then been capable of being brought into force by SI but there we are) in 3 days or we will not do it at all? What's the sense in that? Why is Brexit in November so much worse than 31st October?
As I have said the only logical conclusion is that the government has decided that if they don't ram this bill through with minimal opportunity to amend they will never get it through at all, at least not in any recognisable form. I want Brexit as much as anybody and way more than most but this is irresponsible.
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.
NI arrangements are devolved to NI's control and the rest of the UK leaves. Quite satisfactory IMHO.
NI is now permanently tied to Ireland while it's ties to the rest of GB progressively loosen.
If the arrangements are bad for NI then if all unionists were to vote parties wanting to end them they would end.0 -
No it's a bank holiday as is January 2nd and the rules for an election are 25 working days after the election is called - so it's logical that the election should be on the 26th working day.alex. said:Is it theoretically possible, due to the strict timetable of the FTPA, for an election to happen on, say, Boxing Day, by accident?
It's logical to assume an election will only be held on a Thursday due to convention which means once we move beyond October 31st any VoNC results in an election on January 9th.
I suppose after the 19th you could always go for the 23rd or 24th December.
Mind you postal votes and a December election would be fun.0 -
eek said: "How if Corbyn insists of being PM and labour reject all options that aren't Corbyn."
I suspect that remain alliance will come in behind Corbyn in the end.
0 -
Looks like the EU are losing patience with the HOC0
-
This is fundamentally untrue. People make compromises and reach agreements when it is mutually beneficial to do so. Johnson compromised before a deadline because he is desperate to do Brexit, so it was beneficial for him to move to get this deal agreed. It was beneficial to the EU because it was from their point of view it is much better than what they had offered TM.Philip_Thompson said:
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.
When there is a deadline approaching people start to make bad decisions. There is a lot of pressure to meet the deadline and not enough time to examine the implicatons of these "compromises".0 -
I wonder if it's possible under the rules of the HoC to have a second humble address recommending Corbyn as PM?Stocky said:eek said: "How if Corbyn insists of being PM and labour reject all options that aren't Corbyn."
I suspect that remain alliance will come in behind Corbyn in the end.0 -
They don't have to table what's in the queen's speech and they may table whatever they like that isn't in it - except that before they're introduced government bills get scrutinised for whether they affect the monarch or Prince of Wales's interests, and if they do they need queen's or prince's consent.RobD said:
Does a bill have to be explicitly mentioned in the queens speech? I thought the government was at liberty to table any bill it wants by virtue of this provisoeek said:
But let me ask the question again - how does Boris introduce a bill that changes the FTPA to allow an election.Theuniondivvie said:
I daresay that there would be an attempt by Labour types to say the Nats had again conspired to sustain the evil Tories, but difficult to construct that around what is effectively a VONC (even from themselves) in Her Maj's Most Loyal Opposition.RobD said:
1979, also.Pulpstar said:The Tories and SNP have effectively worked together to cook Labour's goose before - Indyref 1 was a good example.
Hint - No changes to the FTPA were mentioned in the Queen's speech.
Members of the House of Commons.
Estimates for the public services will be laid before you.
My Lords and Members of the House of Commons.
Other measures will be laid before you.
To judge by what Laura Kuenssberg is saying, Dominic Cummings ("a No. 10 source") is already admitting that the queen's speech - full of legislative proposals as it was described only a week ago - didn't contain anything of much importance, the line being that if the WAB doesn't go through then there ought to be a general election because the government hasn't got any other legislative business in the pipeline that is worth proceeding with. I have to wonder what contortions a person would have to twist themselves into to conclude that such a government of buffoons is fit to remain in office.0 -
Well looks like it’s crunch time for those Labour MPs worried about their seats. Election time or programme motion.
I don’t like the fact that Boris is using his rather desperate strongman tactics again but I have said for ages the only way Brexit gets resolved in this parliament is if the government gives it a forced choice vs something it doesn’t like - eg no deal, an election. Whether this will be enough, who knows. Could spook the ex Tories who aren’t standing again anyway.0 -
Promising news on a development milestone for the Reaction Engines hypersonic air breather;
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/10/22/british-made-hypersonic-engine-passes-key-milestone-at-colorado-test-site/2 -
They could repeat the formula of the March extension. A short one if the deal goes through or a longer one to facilitate a referendum.rottenborough said:0 -
Hothersall is many of Scot Lab's problems in human form. Hectoring, no humility even when they have been repeatedly buried by the electorate, and fairly dim.Theuniondivvie said:
What was his immortal line again? A strategic genius.Alistair said:
That was Labour being morons all by themselves.Pulpstar said:The Tories and SNP have effectively worked together to cook Labour's goose before - Indyref 1 was a good example.
"I know", thought Labour morons like Duncan Hothersal, "let's show Conservative party members where all their best potential voters are whilst simultaneously demonising the 40% of our voters who support Indy. This will be a great plan and I will continually insist it was great after we get wiped out"
'Spending Tory money to win Labour votes makes me extremely happy. A win-win.'1 -
So, what you are saying is that the two year limit in Article 50 was designed to give leaving countries leverage over the EU?Philip_Thompson said:People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching.
0 -
Jeremy Corbyn's hour of reckoning when he must make his move will come very soon - hopefully before midnight tonight. Surely Seumas can tell him that being a mere responder to events and to other people's actions isn't an inspiring look.GIN1138 said:
With SNP moving in favour of an election Corbyn doesn't really have a choice to be honest.AndyJS said:Corbyn will go for an early election I expect. knowing him. He doesn't care about the opinion polls.
Nicola will force his hand.0 -
SNP might try and VONC the Gov't right before 3rd reading. That puts Labour in a hilarious* placeGIN1138 said:
With SNP moving in favour of an election Corbyn doesn't really have a choice to be honest.AndyJS said:Corbyn will go for an early election I expect. knowing him. He doesn't care about the opinion polls.
Nicola will force his hand.
* Innocent face: 0 -
The extremes haven't changed. That's what the figures were pret IndyRef. 35% dedicated unionists, 25% dedicated Indynistas.Burgessian said:IndyRef not going anywhere either.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/poll-scottish-independence-voters-switching-to-support-the-union-1-5030614
Ironically the poll was sponsored by Angus Robertson's pro-Indy outfit.
The question is what's happened in the middle.0 -
Still hoping all roads lead to REMAIN William?williamglenn said:
They could repeat the formula of the March extension. A short one if the deal goes through or a longer one to facilitate a referendum.rottenborough said:
0 -
If the extension is for anything different to 31/1 then it is up to parliament to accept it. They will off 31/1 and leave it up to the UK what to do next. If it passes in November then Johnson can request parliament to seek an immediate departure from the EUrottenborough said:0 -
They do.GIN1138 said:
Still hoping all roads lead to REMAIN William?williamglenn said:
They could repeat the formula of the March extension. A short one if the deal goes through or a longer one to facilitate a referendum.rottenborough said: 0 -
You are wrong and I have addressed this to you directly repeatedly.SouthamObserver said:
Nope, we were never assured that. No-one ever asked. When I suggested it on here, you thought it was outrageous - a majority inflicting its wishes on a minority to deny that minority the right to vote for the people making its laws. I am glad you changed your mind and I am glad that Johnson did. But the EU now has everything it could ever have wanted - a de facto permanent solution to the Irish border issue in all circumstances. And it got it because Johnson caved because he had set himself an arbitrary deadline and prioritised that over remianing true to the assurances he had given to the DUP.Philip_Thompson said:He didn't give the EU everything it wanted. It got some of what it wanted and means that NI can unilaterally exit the arrangements on a simple majority basis something we were assured was impossible when we were talking about the backstop as 'a backstop with an exit is no backstop'.
NI arrangements are devolved to NI's control and the rest of the UK leaves. Quite satisfactory IMHO.
I was quite explicit that a majority electing to enter a backstop with no unilateral exit would be unacceptable. It would mean that in the future even if a majority of NI wanted the backstop to end then they would have no way to exit it. That to permanently deprive a minority of their vote is unacceptable, we have ongoing elections every few years and one vote now can not determine the future.
There is nothing de facto permanent now. If a majority in NI elects a majority in Stormont to end the arrangements then after a notice period the arrangements will end. That is satisfactory to me and is something I repeatedly suggested. I said all along ongoing consent was necessary and that eg a Norwegian style solution is acceptable because Norway can unilaterally exit the arrangements if they ever choose to do so.1 -
The EU was adamant with TM there could be no unilateral exit. There is a unilateral exit now. The EU has compromised.eristdoof said:
This is fundamentally untrue. People make compromises and reach agreements when it is mutually beneficial to do so. Johnson compromised before a deadline because he is desperate to do Brexit, so it was beneficial for him to move to get this deal agreed. It was beneficial to the EU because it was from their point of view it is much better than what they had offered TM.Philip_Thompson said:
People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching. The second the 31/10 becomes flexible everyone will get on their high horses and stop compromising and demand everyone else agrees with them just as everyone did under May.
When there is a deadline approaching people start to make bad decisions. There is a lot of pressure to meet the deadline and not enough time to examine the implicatons of these "compromises".0 -
The champagne will be flowing at shinner HQ tonight.williamglenn said:0 -
No, I am saying it did de facto give some leverage though.rcs1000 said:
So, what you are saying is that the two year limit in Article 50 was designed to give leaving countries leverage over the EU?Philip_Thompson said:People only make compromises when there is a deadline approaching.
If Article 50 had said that leaving countries could leave the EU only upon signing an agreement and had not included the 2 year term then the EU would have had much more leverage. The departing nation would not have been able to walk away. That is what was so horrendous about the TM's backstop - we could exit it only if the EU agreed and had no unilateral right to walk away.0 -
That is not news. That is a given and Goodall is stating the obviouswilliamglenn said:0 -
An election on 23rd or 30th January might be possible. Dissolution before Christmas.Philip_Thompson said:
Not. Going. To. Happen.northern_monkey said:Regarding the potential date of a GE...
A mate of mine is working for a large metropolitan council on their Brexit arrangements, and is in constant contact with bods in central government. He says the working assumption is a January election. Early January, 8th, 10th, something like that.
Nobody is going to trigger an election before Christmas for a vote after Christmas. That would be madness! If there's an election it will be in December no later than the 19th or it will be triggered in January which means we must have a vote no earlier than February.0 -
I think that's quite a good guess but the weakest bit of it remains whether Boris can actually get the deal through parliament even after a short delay. The main risk is that opposition to specific points of detail (such as the paperwork required for GB-NI trade) builds up too much with time.rottenborough said:0
