Brexit deal

[drfchound]

Most of the Labour voters that I know would still vote the same way if Kermit the Frog was party leader.

With Corbyn in charge they will still vote Labour.

We all know that the results of elections aren’t always consistent with the polls that preceded the vote.

[albie]

For those wondering where things go, here is a legal overview;
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/what-will-happen-next-brexit-and-the-parliamentary-possibilities

It gets a bit complicated, so the key bit from the full article is here;

"So, this might be a way forward.

MPs could amend the prime minister’s motion on her future plans, to require her to do something other than return her deal to the house for a second vote, or opt for a no deal Brexit. This seems to be the plan of a cross party group of MPs (Nick Boles, Oliver Letwin, Nicky Morgan, Yvette Cooper, Liz Kendall, Norman Lamb, Hilary Benn).

If their amendment were accepted by the Speaker and agreed by parliament, they would propose a new Brexit bill (already drafted). This bill authorises the House of Commons Liaison committee to publish its own plan of action for a new withdrawal agreement, and if approved by MPs, require the prime minister to renegotiate along those lines. (The Liaison committee comprises 36 select committee chairs, and is itself chaired by Sarah Wollaston, a campaigner for a second referendum)."

[BillyStubbsTears]

For those wondering where things go, here is a legal overview;
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/what-will-happen-next-brexit-and-the-parliamentary-possibilities

It gets a bit complicated, so the key bit from the full article is here;

"So, this might be a way forward.

MPs could amend the prime minister’s motion on her future plans, to require her to do something other than return her deal to the house for a second vote, or opt for a no deal Brexit. This seems to be the plan of a cross party group of MPs (Nick Boles, Oliver Letwin, Nicky Morgan, Yvette Cooper, Liz Kendall, Norman Lamb, Hilary Benn).

If their amendment were accepted by the Speaker and agreed by parliament, they would propose a new Brexit bill (already drafted). This bill authorises the House of Commons Liaison committee to publish its own plan of action for a new withdrawal agreement, and if approved by MPs, require the prime minister to renegotiate along those lines. (The Liaison committee comprises 36 select committee chairs, and is itself chaired by Sarah Wollaston, a campaigner for a second referendum)."

Interesting way forward. And a seminal moment in British politics. With a decent majority, the PM is effectively unconstrained. As long as they don't piss off their party too much, they can do more or less what they want (see: Thatcher's mad monetarism experiment that f**ked the economy for a decade, or Blair's mad Iraq venture). What this plan is suggesting is that the PM is the servant of the Commons, not its master/mistress. 

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

For those wondering where things go, here is a legal overview;
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/what-will-happen-next-brexit-and-the-parliamentary-possibilities

It gets a bit complicated, so the key bit from the full article is here;

"So, this might be a way forward.

MPs could amend the prime minister’s motion on her future plans, to require her to do something other than return her deal to the house for a second vote, or opt for a no deal Brexit. This seems to be the plan of a cross party group of MPs (Nick Boles, Oliver Letwin, Nicky Morgan, Yvette Cooper, Liz Kendall, Norman Lamb, Hilary Benn).

If their amendment were accepted by the Speaker and agreed by parliament, they would propose a new Brexit bill (already drafted). This bill authorises the House of Commons Liaison committee to publish its own plan of action for a new withdrawal agreement, and if approved by MPs, require the prime minister to renegotiate along those lines. (The Liaison committee comprises 36 select committee chairs, and is itself chaired by Sarah Wollaston, a campaigner for a second referendum)."

Interesting way forward. And a seminal moment in British politics. With a decent majority, the PM is effectively unconstrained. As long as they don't piss off their party too much, they can do more or less what they want (see: Thatcher's mad monetarism experiment that f**ked the economy for a decade, or Blair's mad Iraq venture). What this plan is suggesting is that the PM is the servant of the Commons, not its master/mistress. 

It is interesting and something I suspect both main party leaders would prefer to avoid (particularly given what many labour mps think of Corbyn).

Interesting angle in PMQs today, May very much avoiding the question on what her plan should be (i'm not convinced she wants to listen).  But also very much forcing the issue on to Corbyn, what would he do essentially?  She knows that's a tough position for him.

[drfchound]

Lots of MPs are still going to vote against Mays deal irrespective of what it contains.

How is that helping things?

Pathetic really that they are putting their own interests ahead of the rest of us.

[Filo]

A Corbyn ministry terrifies me

Which of his policies terrify you?

Probably the fact he's actually a terrorist which the Bible that is the Daily Mail has been telling us for years!

I've just seen this last page but talking of the Lib Dems if they're the biggest pro second referendum party then they'll do well if there's another GE with Corbyn being pro Leave despite the members wanting another referendum.

Can you point me to any terrorist activities hes been involved in?

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

A Corbyn ministry terrifies me

Which of his policies terrify you?

Probably the fact he's actually a terrorist which the Bible that is the Daily Mail has been telling us for years!

I've just seen this last page but talking of the Lib Dems if they're the biggest pro second referendum party then they'll do well if there's another GE with Corbyn being pro Leave despite the members wanting another referendum.

Can you point me to any terrorist activities hes been involved in?

I think he was making the point that the papers talk b*llocks about him.

3 times in his questioning he's avoided answering what he would campaign on in an election.....

[IDM]

“3 times in his questioning he's avoided answering what he would campaign on in an election.....”

Imagine that for a politician.!

[BillyStubbsTears]

Funny though isn't it? Corbyn was supposed to herald an age of New Politics. Straight talking. No ducking and diving and avoiding the point.

That was always an immature thing. Politicians duck and dive because the HAVE to duck and dive, not because they want to. It's like Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men. They don't always give us the truth because often, we can't handle the truth. So, if they gave a straight, simple answer to a complex question, they would be crucified by the media. Corbyn appears to be learning that late in life.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Funny though isn't it? Corbyn was supposed to herald an age of New Politics. Straight talking. No ducking and diving and avoiding the point.

That was always an immature thing. Politicians duck and dive because the HAVE to duck and dive, not because they want to. It's like Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men. They don't always give us the truth because often, we can't handle the truth. So, if they gave a straight, simple answer to a complex question, they would be crucified by the media. Corbyn appears to be learning that late in life.

Exactly.   Week 1 it was calm, polite, questions from Dave from Croydon etc.  Now it's shouting, comments like 'stupid woman' etc.  Yet some people still cannot see through him and trust him, I find it baffling.

[GazLaz]

I’m not a Corbyn lover, he’s not for me, but these people that think he’s a Jew hating terrorist are just believing what they want to believe. It’s pretty clear what kind of person he is.

[Ldr]

I just see him as a grown up "Rik" from the young ones

[RedJ]

I just see him as a grown up "Rik" from the young ones

Well there's a concrete argument if ever there was one.

[Ldr]

I just see him as a grown up "Rik" from the young ones

Well there's a concrete argument if ever there was one.

Its a statement of personal opinion, not an argument, there is a difference

[Filo]

I’m not a Corbyn lover, he’s not for me, but these people that think he’s a Jew hating terrorist are just believing what they want to believe. It’s pretty clear what kind of person he is.

More or less in a nutshell there, but I would add they are believing what the right wing media are feeding them

[Ldr]

I’m not a Corbyn lover, he’s not for me, but these people that think he’s a Jew hating terrorist are just believing what they want to believe. It’s pretty clear what kind of person he is.

More or less in a nutshell there, but I would add they are believing what the right wing media are feeding them

You can make the same argument for any political view

[BillyStubbsTears]

Aye.

Except you don't get many mass-circulation media outlets as far to the left, or as far removed from inconvenient things like truth and accuracy as The Sun/Mail/Express are on the right. So there isn't an equivalence.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Interesting though that only 29% of respondents in a yougov poll want a change of government. That stuns me.

[Ldr]

Aye.

Except you don't get many mass-circulation media outlets as far to the left, or as far removed from inconvenient things like truth and accuracy as The Sun/Mail/Express are on the right. So there isn't an equivalence.

The devil's advocate in me would say the Mirror and anything by Owen Jones would suggest otherwise

[RedJ]

I just see him as a grown up "Rik" from the young ones

Well there's a concrete argument if ever there was one.

Its a statement of personal opinion, not an argument, there is a difference

Stating your opinion to back up a statement kind of is an argument.

[DonnyOsmond]

I’m not a Corbyn lover, he’s not for me, but these people that think he’s a Jew hating terrorist are just believing what they want to believe. It’s pretty clear what kind of person he is.

This. Every day. Some people are gullible enough to lap up what the Daily Mail tells them.

[Filo]

The Government now support convicted criminals

https://news.sky.com/story/conservative-mps-set-up-holiday-fund-for-convicted-tory-agent-11609064?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Aye.

Except you don't get many mass-circulation media outlets as far to the left, or as far removed from inconvenient things like truth and accuracy as The Sun/Mail/Express are on the right. So there isn't an equivalence.

The devil's advocate in me would say the Mirror and anything by Owen Jones would suggest otherwise

How is Owen Jones "mass-circulation media"?

And if you equate the Mirror's approach to facts with that of the Express and Mail, well...

[Glyn_Wigley]

The Government now support convicted criminals

https://news.sky.com/story/conservative-mps-set-up-holiday-fund-for-convicted-tory-agent-11609064?

I can understand an overspend could have happened inadvertently and without malice aforethought, but for the action of deliberately forging fraudulent documentation to be dismissed as merely 'doing what she thought was best for the party' as if it merits rewarding is breathtaking.

[IDM]

I just see him as a grown up "Rik" from the young ones

Well there's a concrete argument if ever there was one.

Its a statement of personal opinion, not an argument, there is a difference

Stating your opinion to back up a statement kind of is an argument.

Oh no it’s not

[Ldr]

Aye.

Except you don't get many mass-circulation media outlets as far to the left, or as far removed from inconvenient things like truth and accuracy as The Sun/Mail/Express are on the right. So there isn't an equivalence.

The devil's advocate in me would say the Mirror and anything by Owen Jones would suggest otherwise

How is Owen Jones "mass-circulation media"?

And if you equate the Mirror's approach to facts with that of the Express and Mail, well...

The guardian.........

[BillyStubbsTears]

You're seriously equating The Guardian and The Mail?
It's not about whether they're right or left? It's about whether they lie to you.

I'll tell you a story about the Mail. I've posted it on here before but it's worth telling.

A few years ago, my company was involved in an R&D project that was part-funded by the EU. It brought together companies from the UK, Holland, Spain, Greece, Italy, Germany and Sweden.

It was very successful. We did some final demo tests which got a lot of media attention.

We put out a press release. Newspapers all over the world reported on it. Literally from Japan to Brazil. All the papers printed our press release, word for word.

Except one.

The Mail.

The Mail removed two sentences from the press release.

One sentence that listed all the other EU countries involved.
One sentence that stated that the EU had part-funded the project.

Some lying, devious, misleading Kitson in the editorial office of the Mail took a decision to deliberately misinform their readership, because the true story reflected well on the EU.

If they do that over something so irrelevant, what do you think they do over important things?

The people who own and run that paper, and the Express and the Sun are a f**king cancer in our society.

[BillyStubbsTears]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46899466

Well, that was worthwhile wasn't it?

[Ldr]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46899466

Well, that was worthwhile wasn't it?

Anyone surprised?

[Donnywolf]

Not in the slightest.

Turkeys would not vote for Christmas so these lot as split as they are (and today pretended NOT to be) voted to keep themselves in a cushy job - JUST in case they lost their Seats in a General Election !

So not in the slightest - and on the face of it it must look like a complete waste of time that could have been spent on sorting out the EU mess or Universal Credit etc
What people watching this in this Country and some others around the World must think I dread to think