Stanley Road
Renaissance Man
Did it go through all 27 parliaments? Eyes to the left an all that?Strangely in 27 other democracies they all agreed.
Did it go through all 27 parliaments? Eyes to the left an all that?Strangely in 27 other democracies they all agreed.
About 18 months ago.Did it go through all 27 parliaments? Eyes to the left an all that?
Well surprisingly enough it's hard for the opposition party to pass legislation. If Labour got more seats in a GE then there would be more MPs to vote for it.Which should first be ratified by parliament and by the EU27 otherwise it's pointless.
Of course bearing in mind that Corbyn's plan has been overwhelmingly voted against 3 times in parliament already and is a non-starter.
It's a mess, isn't it? I can't see any temporary government lasting long enough and having the unity to agree upon and pass the legislation for a second referendum. A general election is more likely in my view but even then there's no guarantees that could harbour a consensus. My guess/hope is that there's an achievable compromise with Corbyn willing to let a figure like Clarke lead a temporary government in return for the Lib Dems etc acquiescing to a GE preceding a second referendum.To be honest, I don't get the feeling that Corbyn is fussed enough about Brexit to compromise on his current stance. Firstly he's a Brexiteer. Secondly he leads a party who's electorate is pretty divided on issue, so no need for him to over-extend to either side. Thirdly if a no-deal Brexit happens and is (inevitably) greatly damaging, he hopes he can milk it by pinning it on the Tories. So I reckon he'll just stick to it, until Brexit happens.
I don't see Tory MPs rebelling to the point that they give him the keys to #10, so that'll be that. Personally I think Ken Clarke in a temporary government to avert no deal makes sense. It's still a Tory MP, so it will entice Tories to rebellion. His stance will anyway be moderated by the fact that the bulk of his support would be coming from Labour MPs who could withdraw support any minute and bring it down.
What matters more is the remit of the temp govt. They all agree on applying for extension to avert no deal. But then Corbyn wants a GE, Swinson wants a referendum and god knows what the Tory rebels want.
I think it's just a countdown towards the inevitable.
Yes, if the UK agreed on something but any one of the 27 didn't agree, then it doesn't pass.
All sides have to agree.
This is why trade deals between the EU and others take years, even decades to conclude.
The EU is supposed to negotiate with the UK and it's members. The UK with its own parliament and the EU.
Personally think Corbyn is a waste of space but having him as temp PM in order to block no deal I could live with. With emphasis on temp. However I can’t see enough tories going for this.To be honest, I don't get the feeling that Corbyn is fussed enough about Brexit to compromise on his current stance. Firstly he's a Brexiteer. Secondly he leads a party who's electorate is pretty divided on issue, so no need for him to over-extend to either side. Thirdly if a no-deal Brexit happens and is (inevitably) greatly damaging, he hopes he can milk it by pinning it on the Tories. So I reckon he'll just stick to it, until Brexit happens.
I don't see Tory MPs rebelling to the point that they give him the keys to #10, so that'll be that. Personally I think Ken Clarke in a temporary government to avert no deal makes sense. It's still a Tory MP, so it will entice Tories to rebellion. His stance will anyway be moderated by the fact that the bulk of his support would be coming from Labour MPs who could withdraw support any minute and bring it down.
What matters more is the remit of the temp govt. They all agree on applying for extension to avert no deal. But then Corbyn wants a GE, Swinson wants a referendum and god knows what the Tory rebels want.
I think it's just a countdown towards the inevitable.
Well a lot of Remainers would see us leave the EU if the alternative was a Corbyn government. They are fully aware of the legitimacy having even a temporary seat in No. 10 would bestow upon Corbyn.I don't get why remainers want Ken Clarke as temporary PM when he has said he'd have no plans for a 2nd ref. If you're a remainer and you back him over Corbyn then you're a fecking idiot to put it bluntly.
And yet what Johnson seems to be proposing to the EU is a modified version of the WA. Assuming the EU don’t modify it (and I don’t see how they can although perhaps there’s a fudge instead) the options are still revoke, fudged WA, no deal. The WA is still in play. (Edit: and I mean fudged not renegotiated - perhaps there’s fiddling with words and timescales on the backstop which leave its fundamentals unchanged but are enough for Johnson to save face.)It's been my point all along. That the WA is dead, and unless the EU is willing to come back to the table, then we leave with no deal.
Others keep refering to the 27 agreeing to it. I've maintained that the UK didn't pass it so therefore it is no longer under consideration.
Agreed although I’m not sure how much legitimacy it’d give the remain side having such a disastrous leader fronting it, even if temporarily.Well a lot of Remainers would see us leave the EU if the alternative was a Corbyn government. They are fully aware of the legitimacy having even a temporary seat in No. 10 would bestow upon Corbyn.
Yes but it would need an overall majority for Labour to do that and for all their MPs to back it. The Tories had many more seats and partners and still couldn't get anything through. Also to remember what he is proposing won't be possible but let's imagine it would.Well surprisingly enough it's hard for the opposition party to pass legislation. If Labour got more seats in a GE then there would be more MPs to vote for it.
If Labour are not successful in passing a deal through parliament then they will back remain over doing what the Tories are doing and trying to push no-deal through.
They don't even want control, open borders , no control over their imports, they want to keep the same regulations, democracy out the window, they could have their 3rd unelected PM quite soon. The image of utopia is blurred.The closer it gets the more depressing the thought. How anyone still thinks that things like paying more for less choice, lack of meds, hospital staff shortages, etc etc etc is a good exchange for “taking back control” is a good idea is beyond me. I refer of course to the ordinary man and not those sly pricks who stand to profit from it
The reality is that a GE preceding a referendum doesn't really suit Labour or Lib Dems.It's a mess, isn't it? I can't see any temporary government lasting long enough and having the unity to agree upon and pass the legislation for a second referendum. A general election is more likely in my view but even then there's no guarantees that could harbour a consensus. My guess/hope is that there's an achievable compromise with Corbyn willing to let a figure like Clarke lead a temporary government in return for the Lib Dems etc acquiescing to a GE preceding a second referendum.
Labour have to make their publicly facing post-GE plans assume a majority for obvious reasons. I'm sure they have an idea of what they want to do if they didn't achieve that. Same for whether or not they'd achieve a new and "improved" deal that they can present to the public.Yes but it would need an overall majority for Labour to do that and for all their MPs to back it. The Tories had many more seats and partners and still couldn't get anything through. Also to remember what he is proposing won't be possible but let's imagine it would.
What does backing remain mean and stopping no deal - hope that there is a referendum and that remain would win it and then he revokes A50?
Personally I wouldn't mind him either. But the problem as you said is that it doesn't work because Tory MPs won't rebel to that extend, even if Swinson buckles under pressure and gives in. He still needs some Tory rebels especially as there might be rebels from his side as wellPersonally think Corbyn is a waste of space but having him as temp PM in order to block no deal I could live with. With emphasis on temp. However I can’t see enough tories going for this.
I don't see how they can be for both. Any form of Brexit will be a disaster for the UK and especially for the people Labour are supposed to represent.Labour have to make their publicly facing post-GE plans assume a majority for obvious reasons. I'm sure they have an idea of what they want to do if they didn't achieve that. Same for whether or not they'd achieve a new and "improved" deal that they can present to the public.
Stopping no-deal means having a referendum where no-deal is not a choice.
Backing remain would mean that Labour would support the remain choice in the 2nd ref in their campaigning.
Regardless of whether they back remain, if remain won a 2nd ref they would honour the result and revoke A50
People will get a sharp shock when the fuel shortages kick inThey don't even want control, open borders , no control over their imports, they want to keep the same regulations, democracy out the window, they could have their 3rd unelected PM quite soon. The image of utopia is blurred.
They are pro remain but also pro respecting the result of the original referendum which is also where I stand. It's a ridiculous situation to be in but that's the Conservative party's fault for having the referendum in the first place and opening Pandora's box.I don't see how they can be for both. Any form of Brexit will be a disaster for the UK and especially for the people Labour are supposed to represent.
But anyway, I would pay to witness Corbyn sign the letter of revocation.
The UK is FAR from blameless. Incompetence is the word which best describes the UK parliament(s).SO if the UK doesn't ratify the agreement, nothing we can do, the UK is not the problem. If EU doesn't agree on renegotiating and it goes to No deal (is the default option of UK actions triggering article 50) and needs to put a hard border under the WTA rules (that the EU and UK ratified as an international treaty) is the EU that we should blame
hypocritical much?
Surely the logical thing would be to keep the tariff but drop the tax at the pump by 5p in the pound or make it vat exempt (there is a vote winner)People will get a sharp shock when the fuel shortages kick in
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-4...uk&link_location=live-reporting-correspondent
Russian fuel eh? I wonder why they meddled in the referendum..
Yeah cause Tory MPs would have otherwise supported a Corbyn govt, if Swinson hadn’t told them not tooTory remainers are getting such an easy ride in this. Corbyn expected to stand down, lib Dems expected to support Corbyn. Labour MPs expected to support a Tory caretaker PM. But no one ever expects Tories to do the right thing. Remainers should be putting more pressure on them rather than Corbyn/Lib dems.
Edit: of course Jo Swinson is partly to blame for this by saying it for them.
I think he wants a no-deal. Will want to go down as the PM who actually delivered what the people voted for. Regardless of consequences.I'm under the impression that in an ideal world for Boris, he holds an election , gets enough of a majority to not have to depend on the DUP and allow Northern Ireland to remain in the CU and SM and have the border in the Irish Sea.
Roll eyes all you want, regardless of what they would have done anyway the fact is she made it easier for them to say no and she made it easier for them to not have to justify their position in doing so.Yeah cause Tory MPs would have otherwise supported a Corbyn govt, if Swinson hadn’t told them not too
I agree that they get an easier ride indeed, but there’s no great mystery to it. In the public’s eyes Tory = No Deal atm. So the onus is on the parties that want Remain or Soft Brexit to come to a workable solution.
We've heard that before, though. Labour will definitely not get a majority on their own but there's no reason why an election would not result in a composition more favourable to opposing No Deal and/or Remain. It's the only solution as I see it. I don't see why the Lib Dems fear a GE but seem so willing for a second referendum. There's every chance the answer comes back unchanged. What then? To me, it makes most sense to try and get a more favourable alliance in the HoC before a referendum on the basis that you might not get the answer you want.The reality is that a GE preceding a referendum doesn't really suit Labour or Lib Dems.
Labour with Corbyn in charge will tank in a GE. Especially one that takes place before Brexit. They will lose their hardcore remainers to Lib Dems and their hardcore Brexiteers to either TBP (for those that kind find the heart to vote Tory) or the Tories. This would be a single issue GE and they're sitting on the fence. They will still get plenty MPs because there's always a bunch of traditional Labour voters who are Labour first beyond policies or faces. But any chance of Corbyn becoming PM will hinge on support from Swinson and it's doubtful he'll get it after erecting his back. He's probably playing the long game for the election after the next and who knows i the party will still support him.
Lib Dems want to stop Brexit and fear a GE will not deliver the needed result, because in essence the two biggest parties are pro-Brexit atm. So they want the referendum to settle the issue before a GE. Who can they support after a GE with Brexit still undecided? Corbyn who wants a long extension, renegotiation (prolonging the uncertainty for gods knows how many more years) and then putting it for a referendum backing leave? Or Boris who's after no-deal Brexit? You can see why they feel that going to a Ref now is by far their best chance to cancel Brexit.
He is a bluffer and the EU knows it.During the leadership campaign BoJo was claiming the atmosphere had change within EU and that the EU was willing to negotiate the Irish backstop. Now BoJo is claiming that the EU is unwilling to renegotiate because of Tory remainers trying to stop a hard Brexit. Further, BoJo accuses the EU of playing hardball. This from the man threatening not to pay the 36billion divorce bill as part of his negotiation tactics.
BoJo is a bullshitter who’s completely out of his dept.
Bluffer, bullshitter, liar, fantasist, egocentric, untrustworthy, but he can speak some Latin.He is a bluffer and the EU knows it.
Or what sounds like Latin....Bluffer, bullshitter, liar, fantasist, egocentric, untrustworthy, but he can speak some Latin.
The fact that you've heard it before is no counter argument on its own.We've heard that before, though. Labour will definitely not get a majority on their own but there's no reason why an election would not result in a composition more favourable to opposing No Deal and/or Remain. It's the only solution as I see it. I don't see why the Lib Dems fear a GE but seem so willing for a second referendum. There's every chance the answer comes back unchanged. What then? To me, it makes most sense to try and get a more favourable alliance in the HoC before a referendum on the basis that you might not get the answer you want.
I'm not sure. I suspect Deal is a more electorally positive message, especially if he's been careful to prep the ground with all sorts of no deal bad consequences beforehand (while pretending it's not true/leaked by Hammond). He's a useless administrator but he is better at this kind of manipulative shit than May was. I think if he reckons if he preps the ground right, he can get a fudged WA through (fudged on the details not the fundamentals) and rebadged as something else, and go to the country on it. Everyone gives a sigh of relief, he finds some way to buy off Farage who wants nothing more than to be inside the tent, and he wins the applause.I think he wants a no-deal. Will want to go down as the PM who actually delivered what the people voted for. Regardless of consequences.
Strange thatAbout 18 months ago.
Having read what you've put you're probably right about the Lib Dems rationale. I still don't see a second referendum passing before a GE though. That's my main point. The Lib Dems are probably going to have to accept that reality; unless they truly are prepared to accept No Deal. With the present state of the HoC I'd say it's almost impossible to secure a temporary government that is able to both agree upon the details of a second referendum and pass the necessary legislation for it, even if Labour backs it wholeheartedly.The fact that you've heard it before is no counter argument on its own.
I explained to you why the Lib Dems fear a GE before a Referendum. Because the two major parties are pro-Brexit and they have a lot of loyal, generational voters in a way the Remain parties don't. Not to mention media exposure and funding donations. Something reflected in how they (Tory + Labour) currently control 558/650 MPs which is not indicative of how the country voted in the referendum (48/52). There's no indication that Lib Dems, SNP, Greens and various Independents will create enough swing in a GE to form a coalition of their own in the HoC. However it only requires a very small swing to upturn the result of the referendum.
As for your statement "There's every chance the answer comes back unchanged".... that holds 0 ground. Because it certainly won't be the same question asked. We're past Leave - Remain. There's 3 options now: Revoke, Sign the WAB, No Deal. Which of the 3 (maybe all 3?) we would see in a ballot would be the subject of negotiation. Obviously Lib Dems want to see no-deal removed and that's part of the price for supporting an interim govt.
So please, explain to me how a 2nd Ref with no-deal off the table could deliver worse results for Remainers and the Lib Dems than a GE? The worst case scenario of such a 2nd Referendum (WAB signing) is actually a better result than Corbyn trying his own hand at Brexit over the next 3-4 years. In fact, even with all 3 options on the ballot and an STV system, the chance of a no-deal result would be considerably smaller than the chance of another Tory govt emerging from the GE to push ahead with no-deal.
Just seems that long.Strange that
Very.Is Paul the Wolf still trying?
That depends on how many the Tory Rebels are. And the number of rebels will depend upon what is offered. And regardless of what Swinson does, she only has 14 MPs, Corbyn will need the SNP and some Tory rebels anyway. Otherwise there's no temp govt, GE doesn't happen and Boris stays on until the Queen sacks him even if he loses the no confidence. And the Queen won't sack him.Having read what you've put you're probably right about the Lib Dems rationale. I still don't see a second referendum passing before a GE though. That's my main point. The Lib Dems are probably going to have to accept that reality; unless they truly are prepared to accept No Deal. With the present state of the HoC I'd say it's almost impossible to secure a temporary government that is able to both agree upon the details of a second referendum and pass the necessary legislation for it, even if Labour backs it wholeheartedly.