Monday 16th October 2017
Posted: Mon 16 Oct, 2017 7:09 am
Morning all.
If they really mean this, there's no way May can get her Withdrawal Bill through in its present form. No wonder it's been paused.The 10 Democratic Unionist party MPs, upon whose votes May relies for a Commons majority, have made it clear to government whips that they would not accept a “no deal” outcome because it would mean a return to a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic. If May were to try to push such an approach, the deal with the DUP that keeps her in power could fall.
All too late.Willow904 wrote:https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -brexit-eu
If they really mean this, there's no way May can get her Withdrawal Bill through in its present form. No wonder it's been paused.The 10 Democratic Unionist party MPs, upon whose votes May relies for a Commons majority, have made it clear to government whips that they would not accept a “no deal” outcome because it would mean a return to a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic. If May were to try to push such an approach, the deal with the DUP that keeps her in power could fall.
So panic stations then. No wonder May has rushed off to Brussels. The business community is serious about needing firm indications of a transition deal before Christmas if we're to stem the outward tide.David Lammy
David Lammy @DavidLammy
"The apparent resilience of foreign investment flows immediately after Brexit was an illusion". And that's according to the Telegraph
Once again another article that gives the government the last word with an impressive sounding statistic that the journalist completely fails to challenge or put into context:PIP Unfairly Penalising People With Epilepsy, Leading Charity Warns
What we need to know here is the total number of claimants under each system, to assess whether or not the highest rate of support is going to less, the same or more people in total. A percentage of an undefined whole tells us very little.“Under PIP 29% of claimants receive the highest rate of support compared to 15% under DLA.”
I hope they're not travelling to Brussels to talk to one another. After all, Theresa May went all the way to Florence to speak to British journalists.May and Davis to travel to Brussels for urgent Brexit talks
Our cities need fewer cars, not cleaner cars
I think Hugo, is his reply to this, is right - we leave after two years whether there is a deal on the future and on the terms of leaving or not.Willow904 wrote:https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -brexit-eu
If they really mean this, there's no way May can get her Withdrawal Bill through in its present form. No wonder it's been paused.The 10 Democratic Unionist party MPs, upon whose votes May relies for a Commons majority, have made it clear to government whips that they would not accept a “no deal” outcome because it would mean a return to a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic. If May were to try to push such an approach, the deal with the DUP that keeps her in power could fall.
I'm going to pull this out of order to reply in parts...howsillyofme1 wrote:Hugo is not 'right' as he does not allow for any other outcome
As has been said many times before it is a political decision as much as a legal one....the latter is the one that will be supreme but it is not settled yet.
The former is a consequence of us having a Tory Government...A50 would have passed no matter what Labour did.
With the Tories not having a majority now then there may be other political outcomes that are unforeseen....noone predicted Labour doing so well in June do shocks still do hapoen
The unknown is how many Tories put principles above party and would actually vote for something else
Completely agree, there is no question of where responsibility lies. However, I still believe Labour could and should have abstained, on the clear basis that there was no settled policy at all on what the detail of leaving would look like, and they could and should have raised a lot of the detailed issues then that have since come out. I don't know what effect it would have had on the election but leaving the EU is not something that we are going to muddle through and make into something okay, and at some point politicians need to seek to lead public opinion rather than to chase or follow it.The former is a consequence of us having a Tory Government...A50 would have passed no matter what Labour did.
I agree that this is unknown but I would be completely astonished if there were enough backbench tories voting to bring about an election that Labour would have a very good chance of winning. I've been astonished before and politics has been quite astonishing recently but I'd still be astonished. I think this is a dead end even as a thought experiment.The unknown is how many Tories put principles above party and would actually vote for something else
I disagree, I don't think the legal question will ever get a chance to be formally put. The most that might happen is that at some point - like with the Miller case - the government could be compelled to put something to Parliament again, but I think they will win if they do.As has been said many times before it is a political decision as much as a legal one....the latter is the one that will be supreme but it is not settled yet.
The assumption is that May would feel confident enough to make this (or anything else) a question of Confidence. I think the fact that the progress of the Withdrawal Bill has been delayed is a strong indicator that she does not. It's unlikely there will be a Tory rebellion on a vote in the Commons, I agree, but I wouldn't underestimate the rebellion behind the scenes. It is looking like she will have to compromise to get the Withdrawal Bill through and she has to get the Withdrawal Bill through because, as you say, we will be leaving one way or another in March 2019 and to do so without any mechanism to transfer EU law to British law would cause the kind of constitutional crisis even the Tory party would struggle to recover from. The DUP can be relied upon to vote through any Tory budget and there won't be another Queen's speech until after March 2019 I believe, so this is it, this is the danger moment. If the Withdrawal Bill goes through unamended the Commons will have signed away all control of Brexit to government ministers. There will be no more opportunities to influence or force a general election, imo. All the horse trading, power plays and final stands are happening right now behind the scenes. The implications for Northern Ireland if there isn't a customs union of some sorts with the EU is huge, it makes the likelihood of a united Ireland far greater than present. The DUP are unlikely to be bluffing over preventing a hard border and if they want any control or influence over that they have to ensure the Withdrawal Bill doesn't pass in its current form. I'm kind of holding my breath at the moment. The form of the Withdrawal Bill Theresa May gets through will be a big indicator of what kind of Brexit we will ultimately get. If, like me, you believe the possibility of preventing Brexit at this stage is slim to nil, this is an extremely crucial moment that will have long lasting implications for this county's future.adam wrote:I think Hugo, is his reply to this, is right - we leave after two years whether there is a deal on the future and on the terms of leaving or not.Willow904 wrote:https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -brexit-eu
If they really mean this, there's no way May can get her Withdrawal Bill through in its present form. No wonder it's been paused.The 10 Democratic Unionist party MPs, upon whose votes May relies for a Commons majority, have made it clear to government whips that they would not accept a “no deal” outcome because it would mean a return to a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic. If May were to try to push such an approach, the deal with the DUP that keeps her in power could fall.
I also think - although I completely acknowledge that prophesying party politics is a dangerous and difficult game these days - that the DUP will not risk Corbyn and McDonnell gaining power, and indeed (following from discussions here last night) I don't believe for a second that there are enough (or indeed possibly any, when push comes to shove) conservative MPs who would put country before party and take a similar risk.
May has 318 MPs. With 7 Sinn Fein MPs not taking their seats in the commons she needs 321 votes to always win (because the speaker will vote with the government in a tie- not because Bercow but just because). If the DUP took the view that they couldn't continue to support the most likely - overwhelmingly likely - next step is not that they would vote against but that they would abstain, and May would have enough votes to win, even if everyone else was against her (and again, if push came to shove, she could probably rely on either the support or absention of Sylvia Hermon (independent Unionist, who became Independent because of her unhappiness with the closeness between the UUP and the conservatives but who would join the DUP in disdaining the possibility of a Corbyn McDonnell government).
Looking at the history of close votes in the past I imagine if it comes to it May will explicitly make key votes a question of Confidence and you are left relying on conservative MPs bringing down their government at a time when it seems entirely possible that Corbyn's labour party could win an election. I don't believe they will vote to bring their government down.
How so?SpinningHugo wrote:The Tories are going to have a torrid time passing the Withdrawal Bill, especially with the Lords as if they dig their heels in there is no time to pass it given the 2 year timetable.
None of it matters unfortunately. This just isn't a Parliamentary issue any longer, but one between the UK and the EU27.
Being mildly legalistic for a second, I just think it's moot because the legal question won't ever decisively be put. No legal case will compel the government to seek to revoke and I don't believe that there is any prospect of the political will to revoke gaining any ascendency in government, nor (as I have wittered on about before) do I think there is any realistic prospect of the government falling.howsillyofme1 wrote:
I do not understand why you said you disagreed on the legal point - I accept that the political reality may prevent that ever being explored but I think we cannot discount it ever happening and the legal aspect is not settled - or do you think it is and that revocation is not possible as clearly Hugo does? if so do you have the basis for that in legal judgement not an opinion from an academic?
From where I am the chances of a political change of heart are looking more positive than they have done since the referendum. Labour seems to be shifting towards as soft a Brexit as possible, and no deal seems to be out, and a certain number of Tories are finding it difficult to diagree with the Labour position (eg Morgan on Peston) and some, such as Heseltine, are going further.
There may eventually be a catalyst for these to actually break ranks.....perhaps Hammond being fired or the negotiations breaking down completely. If that happens then all bets are off
Adam,adam wrote:Being mildly legalistic for a second, I just think it's moot because the legal question won't ever decisively be put. No legal case will compel the government to seek to revoke and I don't believe that there is any prospect of the political will to revoke gaining any ascendency in government, nor (as I have wittered on about before) do I think there is any realistic prospect of the government falling.howsillyofme1 wrote:
I do not understand why you said you disagreed on the legal point - I accept that the political reality may prevent that ever being explored but I think we cannot discount it ever happening and the legal aspect is not settled - or do you think it is and that revocation is not possible as clearly Hugo does? if so do you have the basis for that in legal judgement not an opinion from an academic?
I know that recent years teach us that when it comes to electoral politics and internal party politics you never know, but conservatives voting their government down would have to do so knowing that it was perfectly possible that a Corbyn and McDonnell led Labour party would come to power as a result and I can't see any - and I repeat for emphasis, any - of them doing that. Someone like Clarke might do knowing that he was the only one and it wouldn't make a difference but I cannot see any possibility of it happening otherwise. If you ask the conservative back benches to put country before party I think they will chose party every time when the alternative is Corbyn and McDonnell in Downing Street.
From where I am the chances of a political change of heart are looking more positive than they have done since the referendum. Labour seems to be shifting towards as soft a Brexit as possible, and no deal seems to be out, and a certain number of Tories are finding it difficult to diagree with the Labour position (eg Morgan on Peston) and some, such as Heseltine, are going further.
There may eventually be a catalyst for these to actually break ranks.....perhaps Hammond being fired or the negotiations breaking down completely. If that happens then all bets are off
This is not said antagonistically however much it sounds like it, and I know I'm repeating myself again, but do you honestly believe that there are conservative members of parliament who will vote to give Corbyn a very good shot of getting into power? I don't believe this is even a worthwhile thought experiment. They could lose their majority because of something entirely left-field - this is said entirely hypothetically with goodwill to all and no intent but Labour MPs have died at a surprisingly high rate compared to the other parties and it's about time statistically that this started to even out (pedantic note at myself - I do understand that this is not how statistics work but it still makes some kind of sense) -but I cannot imagine them losing it through anything else.
Govt must publish Brexit impact papers – or be damned
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Law and policy @davidallengreen
·
11m
A notification under A50 leads automatically to a member state leaving EU, unless something exceptional happens.
Narrative non-fiction.
WillowWillow904 wrote:I think this succinctly sums up the revocability or not of article 50:" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Law and policy @davidallengreen
·
11m
A notification under A50 leads automatically to a member state leaving EU, unless something exceptional happens.
Narrative non-fiction.
So, hope for the best - something exceptional - but expect the worst - come March 2019 we could literally crash out of the EU and out of life as we know it.
Personally I think it wise to never underestimate the amount of damage greedy, powerful people are willing to inflict just to make a fast buck.
I'm not sure why you believe what you are saying is different from what I just posted. The article 50 process is automatic. A positive intervention is necessary to stop that automatic process. That intervention would have to be exceptional. Perhaps legal proceedings to show that article 50 wasn't triggered in line with UK constitutional requirements.howsillyofme1 wrote:WillowWillow904 wrote:I think this succinctly sums up the revocability or not of article 50:" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Law and policy @davidallengreen
·
11m
A notification under A50 leads automatically to a member state leaving EU, unless something exceptional happens.
Narrative non-fiction.
So, hope for the best - something exceptional - but expect the worst - come March 2019 we could literally crash out of the EU and out of life as we know it.
Personally I think it wise to never underestimate the amount of damage greedy, powerful people are willing to inflict just to make a fast buck.
Another legal opinion fairly challenged below
I think the point made by Adam and others is right....the legal situation is not clear but I am of the view it would be fudged if the will was there
The first and most difficult problem is the Tory political will to change....and then to eat some humble pie in front of the EU followed by any legal judgement (I am sure the ECJ would love to leave it to the politicians though)
It could be Adam is completely right and the legal decision is moot as the important ones are political....I doubt anyone would want it to go to the ECJ without being clear what the judgement would be
I'm not sure why you believe what you are saying is different from what I just posted. The article 50 process is automatic. A positive intervention is necessary to stop that automatic process. That intervention would have to be exceptional. Perhaps legal proceedings to show that article 50 wasn't triggered in line with UK constitutional requirements.
The legal question is a completely different matter to Theresa May changing her mind and negotiating with the EU to remain. That can totally happen at any time and would probably be successful if sincerely undertaken, but every time May, Davis, Johnson et al open their big fat mouths they move us one step further away from such an accommodation, probably by design
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... ain-launchDelays and drips mark Great Western Railway's new train launch
First outing for Hitachi Class 800 Intercity Express gets into London from Bristol 41 minutes late, with seats roped off due to leak
It was perhaps an inevitable first outing for a train service whose development has been plagued by overspending and delay. The first Intercity Express train to carry passengers down the part-modernised Great Western Railway from Bristol arrived in London 41 minutes late, with its air-conditioning switched off, passengers standing in the aisles and rows of its ergonomic seats roped off due to a leak. (Guardian)
They must be expecting to be there for a while - NonOxCol just linked to a picture of their caravan.PorFavor wrote:I hope they're not travelling to Brussels to talk to one another. After all, Theresa May went all the way to Florence to speak to British journalists.May and Davis to travel to Brussels for urgent Brexit talks
Photograph taken in Portsmouth, too!Eric_WLothian wrote:They must be expecting to be there for a while - NonOxCol just linked to a picture of their caravan.PorFavor wrote:I hope they're not travelling to Brussels to talk to one another. After all, Theresa May went all the way to Florence to speak to British journalists.May and Davis to travel to Brussels for urgent Brexit talks
Blood red sun over the black country today.PorFavor wrote:It's more or less dark here (South of England). A strange, sepia-tinged dark.
Edit - tidying up mess, then tidying up mess made by tidying up."Why's the moon red misssir?"
"It's the sun."
"Why's the sun red?"
"Because we're all going to die."
"Really?"
I suppose they might prefer to be damned (again) in that case.......Willow904 wrote:http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analy ... -be-damned
Govt must publish Brexit impact papers – or be damned
Jolyon Maugham's take was "The Government must publish. Or we will be damned". Which sounds more like it.AnatolyKasparov wrote:I suppose they might prefer to be damned (again) in that case.......Willow904 wrote:http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analy ... -be-damned
Govt must publish Brexit impact papers – or be damned
Adam channelling PFadam wrote:Blood red sun over the black country today.PorFavor wrote:It's more or less dark here (South of England). A strange, sepia-tinged dark.Edit - tidying up mess, then tidying up mess made by tidying up."Why's the moon red misssir?"
"It's the sun."
"Why's the sun red?"
"Because we're all going to die."
"Really?"
uncannily summing up the Clanger lifeadam wrote:Blood red sun over the black country today.PorFavor wrote:It's more or less dark here (South of England). A strange, sepia-tinged dark.Edit - tidying up mess, then tidying up mess made by tidying up."Why's the moon red misssir?"
"It's the sun."
"Why's the sun red?"
"Because we're all going to die."
"Really?"