Thursday, 15 November 2018

The Red Pill!

Oh dear, with rolling resignations today the Prime Minister won't last.


The maths are quite simple.


The Tories only have a majority with the DUP voting with them.
The SNP will vote against any deal, as they want to remain.
The Liberal Democrats, both of them, will vote against any deal.
Labour only want power, they will always vote against the deal.,
Sinn Fein will not participate.


There maybe a few Labour Leave rebels, but by my count there are at least 10 Tory rebels at a minimum anyway.


The Lords will vote against any deal too by the way, as the Tories are a minority there.


May said something very insightful in her valedictory last night on the steps of Downing Street,


"It's this deal, no deal or remain."


So it is not her deal, which means we are down to No Deal or Remain. What a choice and a terrible reflection on the Tories to have led the Country to a path where No Deal is not properly prepared for in the event of a failure of the EU to negotiate fairly (which was always going to be the case).


Up until today I laughed at everyone who said there would be a second referendum, that won't be happening going forward. Interested to see in the comments what you would do - vote for hard brexit or remain?

27 comments:

Anonymous said...

Remain is not an option. This is like any divorce - messy, fractious, and expensive. Everyone has an opinion about divorces and some people do not have the divorcees interests at heart.

Would anyone wish to remain in an abusive relationship? It's down to maximum benefit at minimum cost. Walking away with no deal is simply stupid and you have to question the reasons for even suggesting it.

Oliver Pool said...

In what sense is remain an option? We've served notice, we leave in March with or without a deal. Why would the EU let us remain now?

So it's either deal or no deal - that's it.

As anonymous above says, walking away wit no deal is stupid. But it seems to me that doing this deal is even stupider.

Raedwald said...

Paradoxically, it's only the disruption and uncertainties of a no-deal that can bring us nearer to closure on Brexit; if May's asinine deal gets through, the anger and toxicity of the polarised factions will worsen. To be frank, the nation needs to externalise its anger in order to help heal the divisions - and that means a no-deal, with all the hostility, unhelpfulness, nastiness and bitterness that Brussels can manage.

A no deal is only stupid in economic terms - but Britain is its people, not its balance sheet.

E-K said...

I'd vote No deal.

I say that terrified.

If we stay we're going to get utterly shafted. Oh and Corbyn WILL get in.

Any meaningful preparation for No Deal is what has actually brought us to a No Deal scenario. As in "prepare for war if you want peace." Surely this was basic in negotiation ?

A second referendum likely ?

Well. She said she wouldn't hold one but May's promises don't matter now do they - not that they ever did count for anything.

It was the ploy all along. Create a deal so dire that the public would clamour for another referendum and beg to stay in.

Terry Needham said...

In these situations politicians look to start a war somewhere - to unite the country

E-K said...

Edit

*Lack of any meaningful preparation for No Deal* is what has actually brought us to a No Deal scenario. As in "prepare for war if you want peace." Surely this was basic in negotiation ?

Anonymous said...

I would vote for No Deal. The disruption won't be anywhere near as bad as some people make out. A clean break will be best.

In a few years, if the EU want to negotiate some kind of deal, similar to that they have with Japan, we may be interested.

Don Cox

Timbo614 said...

The cards are dealt the bets are placed. It's all-in or fold in the final round. May would fold obviously. Will Raab and McVey's action push us all-in?

Looks that way to me. We don't need a deal. After 29th March we just say "we are out of the club but still here just off the shore ... Would you like to do some business?" As far as the EU are concerned this was only ever about money, power & control when the chances of that are gone (the all-in scenario) I think we will get some sensible talk.

Anonymous said...

"this deal, no deal or remain" is what TM said no?

Has she been secretly offered an option to rescind Article 50 and act as if the last 2 years have all been but a bad dream?

personalmusing said...

1,
This deal puts the EU firmly in charge. There have to be quite a few remainers who believe that is the proper state of things and will support this. As such the vote is more uncertain than you present.

2.
What would be the question on a 2nd ref?
You can't vote to go back to June 2016 as you need the EU consent to either withdraw the Art 50 notice, or their consent to rejoin.
1. If we sign this deal then the EU have more power than they would with us as a member - they won't negotiate.
2. If a ref is held before March (really?) then the content is just "go and negotiate" - why would EU move from this deal
3. Only if we are out can you call a ref to rejoin - but on what terms? Just as the remainers mocked the leavers for not defining leave, in a 2nd ref what would rejoin be voting for? We would also be past the initial disruption and project fear power would be dissipating fast.

Timbo614 said...

Oh, I meant to add: If we stay in now one thing is fairly certain and that is we would be forced into the Eurozone. We are then at the EC/EU/ECB's mercy. Think Greece, Italy, Spain. We have to leave no matter what the conditions.

personalmusing said...

@Timbo

"As far as the EU are concerned this was only ever about money, power & control when the chances of that are gone (the all-in scenario) I think we will get some sensible talk."

well put

decnine said...

The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 defines 'Exit Day' as 11:00pm on 29 March 2019. Unless Parliament amends the Act, at that time on that date, we're out: do not pass Go, do not pay £40bn.

Section 20(4) empowers 'a Minister of the Crown' to amend the date 'by Regulation'. Does anyone know whether Parliament would have to agree to such a change? If so, unless Parliament can agree to amend the date, 'remain' does not exist as an option.

Jan said...

Well we've wasted more than 2 years to get precisely nowhere. May has spun it out for as long as she could and that's the only thing she seems to be good at and probably how she managed such a long stint at the Home Office. You only have to see it amounted to the best part of 600 pages to know it was never going to work and just shows the mind set of Brussels and our own Civil Service. I think it could have been written on a single sheet of A4. We don't need all the Brussels bureaucrats as we have enough of our own and is one of the reasons for leaving the bloated EU. I shudder to think how much taxpayers money has been spent on such a pointless exercise.

There's a whole wide world out there for us, we don't need pale and stale Europeans in Brussels. I'd go for a change of Tory leadership and a swift no deal, a border between Republic of Ireland and the UK (it is a separate country after all) and lets get it over with quickly.

andrew said...

Timbo, pm

Sensible talk...

When most / all the other 27 have to agree, cannot see how that will work.
Such a deal may be good for germany / france, but what is in it for spain / italy?

Gardener Fisher said...

No deal is my preferred choice. It would then take a year or two to sort out a proper trading relationship.

The shock of no deal would also shake up the EU leaders and maybe result in Junker being retired. I think Italy is also going to play a big part in the chaos that is coming and the more damage we can do to the eu the better our eventual deal will be.

Thud said...

I'd imagine a second vote will be remain, most people I talk to (including employees today) are pissed off and want nothing to do with any more political games.

Oliver Pool said...

decnine - good spot re s20(4) of the Withdrawal Act. The fact the power is given to a minister to amend the exit date by regulation means that, no, it can be done without a vote in parliament. It woudl be secondary legislation, i.e. coudl be done with a stroke of the Brexit minister's pen.

However - that stroke of the pen would just be meaningless unless the EU had agreed that article 50 was withdrawn. As you say, if nothing is agreed by then, it's a case of "leave and don't pay £40bn." I guess 20(4) is there to ensure that if a deal is cooked up to withdraw article 50 at the last minute, we can quickly and easily delay the effect of the Withdrawal Act.

Jan said...

We certainly don't need a second referendum. May needs to go so a vote of no confidence is the best way to ensure this as she won't resign of her own accord. We don't need a general election just a change of Tory leadership and to elect a leader who will get us out as soon as possible with the least amount of damage. It needs to be someone who really believes in Brexit.

BlokeInBrum said...

Had a stab last night at browsing the withdrawal document, but not being a lawyer and after a 12 hour shift at work wasn't able to get through much of it.

The tactics of May though are rather obviously that of a squalid time-share salesman.
All high pressure, sign on the dotted line, don't read the small print...

A document like this needs months of feedback, refinement, negotiation.

The fact that it has been sprung on us (and the cabinet!) at the last minute in a take it or leave it fashion makes it crystal clear that this is not in our interest.

It will take an historian to discover whether this was done out of hubris or incompetence.

But wherever hubris leads, nemesis is sure to follow.


hovis said...

Has to be no deal;

Was it here or elsewhere this was sneakd into the exit document?

https://elpais.com/elpais/2018/11/15/inenglish/1542268826_971443.html

The Remainee lie is that remain is remaining in what we were in the EU is no longer the EU of 2016...

Remember what Angie Merkel was saying recently at the EU parliament


Sackerson said...

Remain is not a possibility, unless we enter clear-eyed into a future of one single European nation (NOT a US of Europe), which is where it has always been headed. With a sort of Wilhelmine Constitution, and a sort of Kaiser(in).

E-K said...

Thud. I wouldn't vote Remain and I wouldn't vote Corbyn.

I wouldn't vote for anything ever again. Really. What's the point ?

Anonymous said...

"What's the point?"

You presumably voted Leave in the referendum, as did 17.4 million other people. The point is that the vote should be honoured.

A WTO deal is the best that can be managed, at this stage. Most businesses have preparations in hand for it. So have HMRC (the C stands for "Customs", remember?), and so have other government agencies.

We won the Battle of Britain in two months. We can win the Battle for Britain in four and a half months, if we put our mind to it.

Anonymous said...

@anon 4:05

HMRC are nowhere near fucking ready. Neither is anything else government-orientated, earlier DEFRA were busy embarrassing themselves with their lack of preparation.

No deal is better than the one on the table, but as things stand there's going to be trouble. I can't see CDS (the replacement for CHIEF) being ready, especially not for the workload (expected to triple), and there'll be plenty of scare fare for the red tops and Remainer media.

Absolute fucking government mess at it's finest. No wonder they want the deal, despite how crap it is the other option is terrifying them. They've spent the last year, fingers up arses, hoping the EU would rescue them and doing pretty much fuck nothing to prepare for no deal, and now procrastinating and hoping for a magic lamp to rub has failed, it's grab whatever life raft they think might not get them lynched by an irate populace. And the EU know this too.

Beggars belief.

May is worse then Brown, and tilting at Eden for the crown of Worst PM Evah.

No deal is going to be hard for a few months, and I just hope the government can find enough competents to ensure it is just a few months, the current shower would have us back in the 15th century through sheer stupidity.

Timbo614 said...

Tee-hee. Red pills all round then :)

Thud said...

EK. I'll vote because the cons fuck things up slowly as a by product of stupidity, the labour/commies destroy on purpose and next time with the help of modern communications,surveillance etc it will be quick and devastating. So I'll vote for self preservation even if only for a while.