"Are PPE graduates ruining Britain? In recent years, the ever-popular degree, which has produced a disproportionate number of senior British politicians, has come under criticism from all sides of the political spectrum."
As if I wasn't pissed off enough already by today's dose of Brexit, I read this.
So, let's take the first sentence : "Are PPE graduates ruining Britain?" "Ruin" in what way? The article goes on to demonstrate that these graduates are most likely to have voted Remain. So the very first sentence implies that to vote remain is to "ruin the country". Do you see the problem right there, with this piece of "analysis"?
Since the authors are both proud Oxbridge graduates, but would obviously have difficulty "analysing" the state of the League One table in order to make a conclusion about Bowyer's tenure, I think this article tells us only that a lot of our 'elite' graduates are as effective in the real world as the average Wetherspoons regular.
Absolutely not the way I interpret the first sentence at all.
Anyway, it’s not my article, just thought others might be interested. Didn’t mean to upset you
This is a quick note for anyone who might not be following the full intricacies and nuances of the harm the British public are about to visit on themselves. For example, if you're tuning in from another country, interested to know which version of self-inflicted crisis we are about to allow ourselves to suffer. There is one, all-encompassing, critical debate that's coursing through the British public's conscience today. Brace yourself. It's this: should May and Corbyn debate on BBC1 after Strictly or ITV before I'm A Celebrity.
According to the ONS figures I've just read on the BBC net EU migration has fallen significantly compared to last year. BUT this has been almost exactly matched by a significant increase in non EU migration into the UK.
My concern with this is that while EU citizens can just get in their car and drive back to their home town or somewhere else in Europe if they lose their job. It's not so easy if you've come from further afield to find work elsewhere in Europe.
In the end leaving the EU is just going to leave us with a higher population and the need to keep the vicious circle of constant growth and immigration. I dont believe this is what most leavers actually want!
Yet more proof of the shit show that is Brexit. The other day I watched a political panel show that had Ian Dale defending the Brexit argument and yet another incompetent low intelligent female Labour MP (how many have they got?) making the Remain case. The Labour MP made the incontestable point about city firms moving jobs out of the city. Ian Dale countered, no they are not; name one. She refused to name one and just continued her, what now seemed like a rant she could not back up with facts while Ian Dale just kept repeating ”name one”. She came onto the show without arming herself with the basic and widely available facts to back up her argument and thus managed to completely lose the argument to one of the more reasonable Brexiteers but still a pedlar of outright lies and disinformation. The Remain cause has been badly let down by the non stop stream of second rate incompetent Remain MPs and other spokesmen/women that get invited onto Brexit discussion programs.
And, behind the subscription paywall, a warning from Stephen Collins that Irish people not get too haughty when watching Brexit "unfold"...
Brexit is no excuse for bashing the British
Irish sneering at UK’s nervous breakdown is offensive and counter-productive
Brexit is the most compelling political drama of our age not only because the consequences will be with us for generations but because nobody knows what the next act in the coming weeks is going to bring us, never mind what the final scene will be.
Most political crises involve the fate of political parties or leading politicians and follow certain generally accepted rules of engagement which have little direct bearing on the lives of ordinary people, but the outcome of this one will affect the lives of more than 60 million people in a direct fashion.
It will also have a serious impact on the lives of people on both parts of this island and that is why it has absorbed so much attention from Irish politicians, officials and the media.
Some letter writers to this paper have bemoaned the sheer volume of the coverage but, given the overwhelming importance of the issue and the unpredictable nature of the outcome, it puts all other issues in the shade.
The official Irish response to Brexit has been tough but professional with senior politicians and diplomats working to protect the national interest by getting cast-iron assurances on the avoidance of a hard border while also being mindful of the need to ensure the best possible trading arrangements between the European Union and the United Kingdom in the long term.
However, some of the commentary around Brexit has provided a pretext for a return to the kind of nasty British bashing that in the past helped to sour relations between the people of the two islands and the two communities in the North. Of course the decision of the British people to leave the EU was a short-sighted one, facilitated by unscrupulous politicians like Boris Johnson, but there is no escaping the fact that, for whatever reason, a majority voted to leave.
That’s democracy.
Spurious grounds It is no harm to remember that twice since the beginning of this century the Irish people have voted down EU treaties on utterly spurious grounds. Given the positive image of the EU in this country, by contrast with the UK, and the clear economic benefits of membership, the No votes to the Nice and Lisbon treaties showed just how open electorates can be to manipulation.
Sneering at the foolishness of the British people and taking pleasure at the political contortions required of Theresa May and her ministers to make the best of a bad lot is not simply unneighbourly but potentially dangerous. Is the mirror image of the attitude of those in the UK who demonised the EU for so long.
We have always been very touchy in this country about the condescending attitude of some British politicians and commentators who struggle to understand our concerns. Now that the British are having what amounts to a political nervous breakdown, some of the sneering on this side of the Irish Sea is offensive as well as counter-productive.
At this stage it is strongly in the interests of the Irish people on both sides of the border that Theresa May can persuade the House of Commons to ratify the deal she has done with the EU. It appears very unlikely that she will be able to accomplish this on December 11th but the deal may well come back for a second vote shortly before or after Christmas.
There is an outside chance that the majority in the Commons who favour a continuing close relationship with the EU may prevail over the Tory ultras and the Labour hard-left and vote for a better alternative than the deal on offer, but a “crash out” hard Brexit is the more likely outcome if May does not prevail.
Ties of blood It is important that good relations between Ireland and the UK are maintained whatever the ultimate Brexit deal. This is not simply as a matter of economic self-interest. The ties of blood, language and culture that exist between the two islands are too important for relations to be soured.
One of the great benefits of the Belfast Agreement was that, whatever about its failure to deliver a stable administration in Northern Ireland, it facilitated the flowering of truly close and friendly relations between the governments in Dublin and London.
This simply reflected the reality of the relations that already existed between the vast majority of Irish and English people. Just look at the two big sporting announcements of the past week. One was that the Irish soccer team will again be managed by Mick McCarthy, a tough Yorkshire man who played his heart out for Ireland on the field and managed the team that got to the World Cup finals in 2002.
The other was the announcement that English rugby league legend Andy Farrell, father of current English rugby union star Owen Farrell, will succeed Joe Schmidt as manager of the Irish rugby team.
McCarthy and Farrell, whose surnames leave no doubt about their ancestry, represent the intertwined relationship of the two islands. Hopefully they will bring honour and glory to this country in the years ahead and, with luck, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees Mogg will be relegated to the margins of history.
I have to strongly disagree with this view. The contempt and ridicule that the UK is currently receiving from the rest of the civilised world is fully justified. Similarly, the powerful elites who sowed the seeds of this Brexit disaster and the fools who voted for it deserve never ending contempt and ridicule. After nearly 3 years debate and after every single Brexit premise and promise has foundered on the hard rock face of truth, reality and facts, the country is now in deep self inflicted peril. I am truly truly embarrassed to be a citizen of this country. I think I am experiencing the same feelings as the non Nazi voting Germans must have felt in the 1930s.
And, behind the subscription paywall, a warning from Stephen Collins that Irish people not get too haughty when watching Brexit "unfold"...
Brexit is no excuse for bashing the British
Irish sneering at UK’s nervous breakdown is offensive and counter-productive
Brexit is the most compelling political drama of our age not only because the consequences will be with us for generations but because nobody knows what the next act in the coming weeks is going to bring us, never mind what the final scene will be.
Most political crises involve the fate of political parties or leading politicians and follow certain generally accepted rules of engagement which have little direct bearing on the lives of ordinary people, but the outcome of this one will affect the lives of more than 60 million people in a direct fashion.
It will also have a serious impact on the lives of people on both parts of this island and that is why it has absorbed so much attention from Irish politicians, officials and the media.
Some letter writers to this paper have bemoaned the sheer volume of the coverage but, given the overwhelming importance of the issue and the unpredictable nature of the outcome, it puts all other issues in the shade.
The official Irish response to Brexit has been tough but professional with senior politicians and diplomats working to protect the national interest by getting cast-iron assurances on the avoidance of a hard border while also being mindful of the need to ensure the best possible trading arrangements between the European Union and the United Kingdom in the long term.
However, some of the commentary around Brexit has provided a pretext for a return to the kind of nasty British bashing that in the past helped to sour relations between the people of the two islands and the two communities in the North. Of course the decision of the British people to leave the EU was a short-sighted one, facilitated by unscrupulous politicians like Boris Johnson, but there is no escaping the fact that, for whatever reason, a majority voted to leave.
That’s democracy.
Spurious grounds It is no harm to remember that twice since the beginning of this century the Irish people have voted down EU treaties on utterly spurious grounds. Given the positive image of the EU in this country, by contrast with the UK, and the clear economic benefits of membership, the No votes to the Nice and Lisbon treaties showed just how open electorates can be to manipulation.
Sneering at the foolishness of the British people and taking pleasure at the political contortions required of Theresa May and her ministers to make the best of a bad lot is not simply unneighbourly but potentially dangerous. Is the mirror image of the attitude of those in the UK who demonised the EU for so long.
We have always been very touchy in this country about the condescending attitude of some British politicians and commentators who struggle to understand our concerns. Now that the British are having what amounts to a political nervous breakdown, some of the sneering on this side of the Irish Sea is offensive as well as counter-productive.
At this stage it is strongly in the interests of the Irish people on both sides of the border that Theresa May can persuade the House of Commons to ratify the deal she has done with the EU. It appears very unlikely that she will be able to accomplish this on December 11th but the deal may well come back for a second vote shortly before or after Christmas.
There is an outside chance that the majority in the Commons who favour a continuing close relationship with the EU may prevail over the Tory ultras and the Labour hard-left and vote for a better alternative than the deal on offer, but a “crash out” hard Brexit is the more likely outcome if May does not prevail.
Ties of blood It is important that good relations between Ireland and the UK are maintained whatever the ultimate Brexit deal. This is not simply as a matter of economic self-interest. The ties of blood, language and culture that exist between the two islands are too important for relations to be soured.
One of the great benefits of the Belfast Agreement was that, whatever about its failure to deliver a stable administration in Northern Ireland, it facilitated the flowering of truly close and friendly relations between the governments in Dublin and London.
This simply reflected the reality of the relations that already existed between the vast majority of Irish and English people. Just look at the two big sporting announcements of the past week. One was that the Irish soccer team will again be managed by Mick McCarthy, a tough Yorkshire man who played his heart out for Ireland on the field and managed the team that got to the World Cup finals in 2002.
The other was the announcement that English rugby league legend Andy Farrell, father of current English rugby union star Owen Farrell, will succeed Joe Schmidt as manager of the Irish rugby team.
McCarthy and Farrell, whose surnames leave no doubt about their ancestry, represent the intertwined relationship of the two islands. Hopefully they will bring honour and glory to this country in the years ahead and, with luck, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees Mogg will be relegated to the margins of history.
I have to strongly disagree with this view. The contempt and ridicule that the UK is currently receiving from the rest of the civilised world is fully justified. Similarly, the powerful elites who sowed the seeds of this Brexit disaster and the fools who voted for it deserve never ending contempt and ridicule. After nearly 3 years debate and after every single Brexit premise and promise has foundered on the hard rock face of truth, reality and facts, the country is now in deep self inflicted peril. I am truly truly embarrassed to be a citizen of this country. I think I am experiencing the same feelings as the non Nazi voting Germans must have felt in the 1930s.
In fairness to Stephen Collins, he's not saying that the reality of what is happening is any different, but that Irish people should try to avoid a hypocritical holier than thou attitude. Probably under a heading of Remember schadenfreude, like karma, is a bitch...
This is how I see it - firstly, whilst a no deal Brexit cannot be ruled out 100%, despite what we are being fed, it is the most unlikely option. The threat is currently being used to scare MPs into voting for May's deal, but it clearly isn't working. Whilst it is a threat to the more reasonable, it is welcome to the ERG loons so May also felt the need to warn of there possibly being no Brexit at all! You couldn't make it up.
In practice politics would almost certainly trump procedure though. Faced with the prospect of no deal, the government would be pressured to grant one or more of the following: a soft Brexit (European Economic Area membership), a second referendum, or an early general election.
What do you think is the most likely? To me it is the referendum. In such circumstances, the EU has already signalled, as clearly as it is possible to do, that it would be prepared to grant an extension to the Article 50 period (though this requires the unanimous approval of the 27 other EU member states). It would do this, because it would see the opportunity for no Brexit at all, which has always been its preferred position.
Having said that, what could make all this even messier and what makes it dangerous is May resigningafter losing the vote, or even being pushed and being replaced by a hard Brexiter who appoints a hard Brexit cabinet. Ministers do have the ability to frustrate the will of Parliament and a total rebellion would be needed with a vote of no confidence to topple the government. Some Tories will be faced with the dilema of losing their jobs or falling off the Brexit cliff. I'm pretty sure that is the ERG plan in all this.I have confidence that there are enough decent Tories to scupper this, but it is a risk.
My hope regarding the highlighted above is that May knows this full well and as a remainer at heart will not resign and allow the likes of Rees-Mogg and His ilk to propel the U.K. off the cliff edge.
Rees-Mogg is a bit of a busted flush now though, isn’t he? He tried to start a leadership contest and seemingly got nowhere near the numbers that he needed to even initiate the process.
This is how I see it - firstly, whilst a no deal Brexit cannot be ruled out 100%, despite what we are being fed, it is the most unlikely option. The threat is currently being used to scare MPs into voting for May's deal, but it clearly isn't working. Whilst it is a threat to the more reasonable, it is welcome to the ERG loons so May also felt the need to warn of there possibly being no Brexit at all! You couldn't make it up.
In practice politics would almost certainly trump procedure though. Faced with the prospect of no deal, the government would be pressured to grant one or more of the following: a soft Brexit (European Economic Area membership), a second referendum, or an early general election.
What do you think is the most likely? To me it is the referendum. In such circumstances, the EU has already signalled, as clearly as it is possible to do, that it would be prepared to grant an extension to the Article 50 period (though this requires the unanimous approval of the 27 other EU member states). It would do this, because it would see the opportunity for no Brexit at all, which has always been its preferred position.
Having said that, what could make all this even messier and what makes it dangerous is May resigningafter losing the vote, or even being pushed and being replaced by a hard Brexiter who appoints a hard Brexit cabinet. Ministers do have the ability to frustrate the will of Parliament and a total rebellion would be needed with a vote of no confidence to topple the government. Some Tories will be faced with the dilema of losing their jobs or falling off the Brexit cliff. I'm pretty sure that is the ERG plan in all this.I have confidence that there are enough decent Tories to scupper this, but it is a risk.
My hope regarding the highlighted above is that May knows this full well and as a remainer at heart will not resign and allow the likes of Rees-Mogg and His ilk to propel the U.K. off the cliff edge.
My hope is this deal gets rejected, we have another referendum and remain wins. Half bored of it all now and half can see what a shit storm it's become. Sack it off! I can colour in my passport
Either grow a pair and leave with no deal or don't bother at all. (Yes I know no deal is "rather" bad)
Rees-Mogg is a bit of a busted flush now though, isn’t he? He tried to start a leadership contest and seemingly got nowhere near the numbers that he needed to even initiate the process.
I certainly agree that his credibility has been seriously damaged since the vote of no confidence debacle but in relation to @MuttleyCAFC post regarding the very real possibility of May resigning should her plan be voted down, the eventual new PM and cabinet could easily consist of Johnson, Gove, IDS, Grayling, JCM, Hannan etc. I think it would almost certainly be very brexit top heavy. If that were to happen then all bets are off.
Rees-Mogg is a bit of a busted flush now though, isn’t he? He tried to start a leadership contest and seemingly got nowhere near the numbers that he needed to even initiate the process.
I certainly agree that his credibility has been seriously damaged since the vote of no confidence debacle but in relation to @MuttleyCAFC post regarding the very real possibility of May resigning should her plan be voted down, the eventual new PM and cabinet could easily consist of Johnson, Gove, IDS, Grayling, JCM, Hannan etc. I think it would almost certainly be very brexit top heavy. If that were to happen then all bets are off.
Agree, May resigning is not a good outcome for anyone hoping this will end in a sensible manner.
This is how I see it - firstly, whilst a no deal Brexit cannot be ruled out 100%, despite what we are being fed, it is the most unlikely option. The threat is currently being used to scare MPs into voting for May's deal, but it clearly isn't working. Whilst it is a threat to the more reasonable, it is welcome to the ERG loons so May also felt the need to warn of there possibly being no Brexit at all! You couldn't make it up.
In practice politics would almost certainly trump procedure though. Faced with the prospect of no deal, the government would be pressured to grant one or more of the following: a soft Brexit (European Economic Area membership), a second referendum, or an early general election.
What do you think is the most likely? To me it is the referendum. In such circumstances, the EU has already signalled, as clearly as it is possible to do, that it would be prepared to grant an extension to the Article 50 period (though this requires the unanimous approval of the 27 other EU member states). It would do this, because it would see the opportunity for no Brexit at all, which has always been its preferred position.
Having said that, what could make all this even messier and what makes it dangerous is May resigningafter losing the vote, or even being pushed and being replaced by a hard Brexiter who appoints a hard Brexit cabinet. Ministers do have the ability to frustrate the will of Parliament and a total rebellion would be needed with a vote of no confidence to topple the government. Some Tories will be faced with the dilema of losing their jobs or falling off the Brexit cliff. I'm pretty sure that is the ERG plan in all this.I have confidence that there are enough decent Tories to scupper this, but it is a risk.
My hope regarding the highlighted above is that May knows this full well and as a remainer at heart will not resign and allow the likes of Rees-Mogg and His ilk to propel the U.K. off the cliff edge.
My hope is this deal gets rejected, we have another referendum and remain wins. Half bored of it all now and half can see what a shit storm it's become. Sack it off! I can colour in my passport
Either grow a pair and leave with no deal or don't bother at all. (Yes I know no deal is "rather" bad)
Even if we don't dump Brexit now, it is inevitable that with the shifting demographics there will be a huge mandate to rejoin in 10-20 years time, albeit on worse terms than we have now.
And that's all Brexit will prove to be: a 30 year waste of time, money and effort. Decades of wasted opportunities. A lost generation. All for what? Absolutely nothing. There has been and will be zero benefit from this entire exercise. The original objective was to unite the Tory Party and it didn't even manage to do that.
"Are PPE graduates ruining Britain? In recent years, the ever-popular degree, which has produced a disproportionate number of senior British politicians, has come under criticism from all sides of the political spectrum."
As if I wasn't pissed off enough already by today's dose of Brexit, I read this.
So, let's take the first sentence : "Are PPE graduates ruining Britain?" "Ruin" in what way? The article goes on to demonstrate that these graduates are most likely to have voted Remain. So the very first sentence implies that to vote remain is to "ruin the country". Do you see the problem right there, with this piece of "analysis"?
Since the authors are both proud Oxbridge graduates, but would obviously have difficulty "analysing" the state of the League One table in order to make a conclusion about Bowyer's tenure, I think this article tells us only that a lot of our 'elite' graduates are as effective in the real world as the average Wetherspoons regular.
Absolutely not the way I interpret the first sentence at all.
Anyway, it’s not my article, just thought others might be interested. Didn’t mean to upset you
well I know you are not necessarily endorsing it, and I had had my second espresso..but really, what other interpretation can you put on that sentence? What is it even doing there? It is utterly gratuitous. Just as is branding Nick Cohen as "from the Left" so that they can shoehorn his quote into their thesis. Unless they have found a different Nick Cohen to the one who brilliantly excoriates Corbyn on a weekly basis
This is a quick note for anyone who might not be following the full intricacies and nuances of the harm the British public are about to visit on themselves. For example, if you're tuning in from another country, interested to know which version of self-inflicted crisis we are about to allow ourselves to suffer. There is one, all-encompassing, critical debate that's coursing through the British public's conscience today. Brace yourself. It's this: should May and Corbyn debate on BBC1 after Strictly or ITV before I'm A Celebrity.
Yes, it really has sunk that low.
I'd like it to be a Political Celebrities Pointless Special. The Lovely Alexander Armstrong "We surveyed 100 people, and gave the 100 seconds to give as many reasons to want Brexit, Boris you said Blue Passports, lets see how many people said Blue Passports"
This is how I see it - firstly, whilst a no deal Brexit cannot be ruled out 100%, despite what we are being fed, it is the most unlikely option. The threat is currently being used to scare MPs into voting for May's deal, but it clearly isn't working. Whilst it is a threat to the more reasonable, it is welcome to the ERG loons so May also felt the need to warn of there possibly being no Brexit at all! You couldn't make it up.
In practice politics would almost certainly trump procedure though. Faced with the prospect of no deal, the government would be pressured to grant one or more of the following: a soft Brexit (European Economic Area membership), a second referendum, or an early general election.
What do you think is the most likely? To me it is the referendum. In such circumstances, the EU has already signalled, as clearly as it is possible to do, that it would be prepared to grant an extension to the Article 50 period (though this requires the unanimous approval of the 27 other EU member states). It would do this, because it would see the opportunity for no Brexit at all, which has always been its preferred position.
Having said that, what could make all this even messier and what makes it dangerous is May resigningafter losing the vote, or even being pushed and being replaced by a hard Brexiter who appoints a hard Brexit cabinet. Ministers do have the ability to frustrate the will of Parliament and a total rebellion would be needed with a vote of no confidence to topple the government. Some Tories will be faced with the dilema of losing their jobs or falling off the Brexit cliff. I'm pretty sure that is the ERG plan in all this.I have confidence that there are enough decent Tories to scupper this, but it is a risk.
My hope regarding the highlighted above is that May knows this full well and as a remainer at heart will not resign and allow the likes of Rees-Mogg and His ilk to propel the U.K. off the cliff edge.
My hope is this deal gets rejected, we have another referendum and remain wins. Half bored of it all now and half can see what a shit storm it's become. Sack it off! I can colour in my passport
Either grow a pair and leave with no deal or don't bother at all. (Yes I know no deal is "rather" bad)
Even if we don't dump Brexit now, it is inevitable that with the shifting demographics there will be a huge mandate to rejoin in 10-20 years time, albeit on worse terms than we have now.
And that's all Brexit will prove to be: a 30 year waste of time, money and effort. Decades of wasted opportunities. A lost generation. All for what? Absolutely nothing. There has been and will be zero benefit from this entire exercise. The original objective was to unite the Tory Party and it didn't even manage to do that.
Was it to unite the Tory party ? I thought it was to claw back the votes that the Tories were haemorrhaging to the then buoyant UKIP in a fashion that the idiot Cameron thought couldn’t be lost in a referendum. Therefore silencing the swivel eyed and sidelining UKIP for at least another generation.
This is how I see it - firstly, whilst a no deal Brexit cannot be ruled out 100%, despite what we are being fed, it is the most unlikely option. The threat is currently being used to scare MPs into voting for May's deal, but it clearly isn't working. Whilst it is a threat to the more reasonable, it is welcome to the ERG loons so May also felt the need to warn of there possibly being no Brexit at all! You couldn't make it up.
In practice politics would almost certainly trump procedure though. Faced with the prospect of no deal, the government would be pressured to grant one or more of the following: a soft Brexit (European Economic Area membership), a second referendum, or an early general election.
What do you think is the most likely? To me it is the referendum. In such circumstances, the EU has already signalled, as clearly as it is possible to do, that it would be prepared to grant an extension to the Article 50 period (though this requires the unanimous approval of the 27 other EU member states). It would do this, because it would see the opportunity for no Brexit at all, which has always been its preferred position.
Having said that, what could make all this even messier and what makes it dangerous is May resigningafter losing the vote, or even being pushed and being replaced by a hard Brexiter who appoints a hard Brexit cabinet. Ministers do have the ability to frustrate the will of Parliament and a total rebellion would be needed with a vote of no confidence to topple the government. Some Tories will be faced with the dilema of losing their jobs or falling off the Brexit cliff. I'm pretty sure that is the ERG plan in all this.I have confidence that there are enough decent Tories to scupper this, but it is a risk.
My hope regarding the highlighted above is that May knows this full well and as a remainer at heart will not resign and allow the likes of Rees-Mogg and His ilk to propel the U.K. off the cliff edge.
I think she has basically given as firm a clue as she can today that she will resign by saying there won't be a second vote. Given that it is a real if not the best option if/when her plan fails to go through, it is a logical conclusion to take.
Funny when people whinge about Soros hedging against the UK in the 1990s but don't mind that half the Tories in the ERG are openly doing the same thing.
This is how I see it - firstly, whilst a no deal Brexit cannot be ruled out 100%, despite what we are being fed, it is the most unlikely option. The threat is currently being used to scare MPs into voting for May's deal, but it clearly isn't working. Whilst it is a threat to the more reasonable, it is welcome to the ERG loons so May also felt the need to warn of there possibly being no Brexit at all! You couldn't make it up.
In practice politics would almost certainly trump procedure though. Faced with the prospect of no deal, the government would be pressured to grant one or more of the following: a soft Brexit (European Economic Area membership), a second referendum, or an early general election.
What do you think is the most likely? To me it is the referendum. In such circumstances, the EU has already signalled, as clearly as it is possible to do, that it would be prepared to grant an extension to the Article 50 period (though this requires the unanimous approval of the 27 other EU member states). It would do this, because it would see the opportunity for no Brexit at all, which has always been its preferred position.
Having said that, what could make all this even messier and what makes it dangerous is May resigningafter losing the vote, or even being pushed and being replaced by a hard Brexiter who appoints a hard Brexit cabinet. Ministers do have the ability to frustrate the will of Parliament and a total rebellion would be needed with a vote of no confidence to topple the government. Some Tories will be faced with the dilema of losing their jobs or falling off the Brexit cliff. I'm pretty sure that is the ERG plan in all this.I have confidence that there are enough decent Tories to scupper this, but it is a risk.
My hope regarding the highlighted above is that May knows this full well and as a remainer at heart will not resign and allow the likes of Rees-Mogg and His ilk to propel the U.K. off the cliff edge.
I think she has basically given as firm a clue as she can today that she will resign by saying there won't be a second vote. Given that it is a real if not the best option if/when her plan fails to go through, it is a logical conclusion to take.
This is how I see it - firstly, whilst a no deal Brexit cannot be ruled out 100%, despite what we are being fed, it is the most unlikely option. The threat is currently being used to scare MPs into voting for May's deal, but it clearly isn't working. Whilst it is a threat to the more reasonable, it is welcome to the ERG loons so May also felt the need to warn of there possibly being no Brexit at all! You couldn't make it up.
In practice politics would almost certainly trump procedure though. Faced with the prospect of no deal, the government would be pressured to grant one or more of the following: a soft Brexit (European Economic Area membership), a second referendum, or an early general election.
What do you think is the most likely? To me it is the referendum. In such circumstances, the EU has already signalled, as clearly as it is possible to do, that it would be prepared to grant an extension to the Article 50 period (though this requires the unanimous approval of the 27 other EU member states). It would do this, because it would see the opportunity for no Brexit at all, which has always been its preferred position.
Having said that, what could make all this even messier and what makes it dangerous is May resigningafter losing the vote, or even being pushed and being replaced by a hard Brexiter who appoints a hard Brexit cabinet. Ministers do have the ability to frustrate the will of Parliament and a total rebellion would be needed with a vote of no confidence to topple the government. Some Tories will be faced with the dilema of losing their jobs or falling off the Brexit cliff. I'm pretty sure that is the ERG plan in all this.I have confidence that there are enough decent Tories to scupper this, but it is a risk.
My hope regarding the highlighted above is that May knows this full well and as a remainer at heart will not resign and allow the likes of Rees-Mogg and His ilk to propel the U.K. off the cliff edge.
My hope is this deal gets rejected, we have another referendum and remain wins. Half bored of it all now and half can see what a shit storm it's become. Sack it off! I can colour in my passport
Either grow a pair and leave with no deal or don't bother at all. (Yes I know no deal is "rather" bad)
Even if we don't dump Brexit now, it is inevitable that with the shifting demographics there will be a huge mandate to rejoin in 10-20 years time, albeit on worse terms than we have now.
And that's all Brexit will prove to be: a 30 year waste of time, money and effort. Decades of wasted opportunities. A lost generation. All for what? Absolutely nothing. There has been and will be zero benefit from this entire exercise. The original objective was to unite the Tory Party and it didn't even manage to do that.
Was it to unite the Tory party ? I thought it was to claw back the votes that the Tories were haemorrhaging to the then buoyant UKIP in a fashion that the idiot Cameron thought couldn’t be lost in a referendum. Therefore silencing the swivel eyed and sidelining UKIP for at least another generation.
That was the general aim. Two MPs had already crossed the floor on the issue. Many more MPs were threatening to defect or rebel over the issue. Many more were still angry at Cameron over gay rights.
You have to bear in mind Cameron faced a lot more pressure from his own party internally on the issue than from either UKIP or the general public. Shooting the UKIP fox was always a red herring: UKIP were stealing votes from Labour and Tories across the country but not in big enough numbers and not in the right areas to be more than an annoyance. UKIP certainly had a modicum of public support but most voters saw them as the racist, BNP-lite nutters they were. If the public really wanted a referendum so they could leave the EU they would have voted for the only party that wanted to precisely do that. Yet UKIP failed to win a single seat.
But thanks to the litany of cock-ups we have seen over the past few years, we have seen UKIP, the biggest losers in UK politics, being the tail wagging the Tory dog. Completely unnecessarily to boot.
This is how I see it - firstly, whilst a no deal Brexit cannot be ruled out 100%, despite what we are being fed, it is the most unlikely option. The threat is currently being used to scare MPs into voting for May's deal, but it clearly isn't working. Whilst it is a threat to the more reasonable, it is welcome to the ERG loons so May also felt the need to warn of there possibly being no Brexit at all! You couldn't make it up.
In practice politics would almost certainly trump procedure though. Faced with the prospect of no deal, the government would be pressured to grant one or more of the following: a soft Brexit (European Economic Area membership), a second referendum, or an early general election.
What do you think is the most likely? To me it is the referendum. In such circumstances, the EU has already signalled, as clearly as it is possible to do, that it would be prepared to grant an extension to the Article 50 period (though this requires the unanimous approval of the 27 other EU member states). It would do this, because it would see the opportunity for no Brexit at all, which has always been its preferred position.
Having said that, what could make all this even messier and what makes it dangerous is May resigningafter losing the vote, or even being pushed and being replaced by a hard Brexiter who appoints a hard Brexit cabinet. Ministers do have the ability to frustrate the will of Parliament and a total rebellion would be needed with a vote of no confidence to topple the government. Some Tories will be faced with the dilema of losing their jobs or falling off the Brexit cliff. I'm pretty sure that is the ERG plan in all this.I have confidence that there are enough decent Tories to scupper this, but it is a risk.
My hope regarding the highlighted above is that May knows this full well and as a remainer at heart will not resign and allow the likes of Rees-Mogg and His ilk to propel the U.K. off the cliff edge.
I think she has basically given as firm a clue as she can today that she will resign by saying there won't be a second vote. Given that it is a real if not the best option if/when her plan fails to go through, it is a logical conclusion to take.
Not sure about that.
We all know the HoC has a remain majority, if she had indicated there would/could be a second vote then her plan would be guaranteed to fail.
My way or the highway is the only line she can take right now.
This is how I see it - firstly, whilst a no deal Brexit cannot be ruled out 100%, despite what we are being fed, it is the most unlikely option. The threat is currently being used to scare MPs into voting for May's deal, but it clearly isn't working. Whilst it is a threat to the more reasonable, it is welcome to the ERG loons so May also felt the need to warn of there possibly being no Brexit at all! You couldn't make it up.
In practice politics would almost certainly trump procedure though. Faced with the prospect of no deal, the government would be pressured to grant one or more of the following: a soft Brexit (European Economic Area membership), a second referendum, or an early general election.
What do you think is the most likely? To me it is the referendum. In such circumstances, the EU has already signalled, as clearly as it is possible to do, that it would be prepared to grant an extension to the Article 50 period (though this requires the unanimous approval of the 27 other EU member states). It would do this, because it would see the opportunity for no Brexit at all, which has always been its preferred position.
Having said that, what could make all this even messier and what makes it dangerous is May resigningafter losing the vote, or even being pushed and being replaced by a hard Brexiter who appoints a hard Brexit cabinet. Ministers do have the ability to frustrate the will of Parliament and a total rebellion would be needed with a vote of no confidence to topple the government. Some Tories will be faced with the dilema of losing their jobs or falling off the Brexit cliff. I'm pretty sure that is the ERG plan in all this.I have confidence that there are enough decent Tories to scupper this, but it is a risk.
My hope regarding the highlighted above is that May knows this full well and as a remainer at heart will not resign and allow the likes of Rees-Mogg and His ilk to propel the U.K. off the cliff edge.
I think she has basically given as firm a clue as she can today that she will resign by saying there won't be a second vote. Given that it is a real if not the best option if/when her plan fails to go through, it is a logical conclusion to take.
Not sure about that.
We all know the HoC has a remain majority, if she had indicated there would/could be a second vote then her plan would be guaranteed to fail.
My way or the highway is the only line she can take right now.
I prefer this view to @MuttleyCAFC but this is very much her deal. She’s lost two Brexit Secretary’s over this and if she can’t sell it I’m not sure where she can logically go or do. The honourable thing would be to resign but as I said before she will know the danger in doing that. She’s also a very stubborn old cow so might just hang around regardless if for no other reason than to piss off ERG.
This is a quick note for anyone who might not be following the full intricacies and nuances of the harm the British public are about to visit on themselves. For example, if you're tuning in from another country, interested to know which version of self-inflicted crisis we are about to allow ourselves to suffer. There is one, all-encompassing, critical debate that's coursing through the British public's conscience today. Brace yourself. It's this: should May and Corbyn debate on BBC1 after Strictly or ITV before I'm A Celebrity.
Yes, it really has sunk that low.
I'd like it to be a Political Celebrities Pointless Special. The Lovely Alexander Armstrong "We surveyed 100 people, and gave the 100 seconds to give as many reasons to want Brexit, Boris you said Blue Passports, lets see how many people said Blue Passports"
I'd prefer to see them take part in the two TV programmes they might otherwise be competing against. Two solid hours of jive, quickstep and American smooth, followed by being left in the Australian jungle with nothing but kangaroo gonads to eat. Permanently.
Circumstances might create a May win. She loses the first vote. She doesn't resign and is not forced out. There is therefore no General Election. There is also a defeat in the commons for any proposed peoples vote. Article 50 can't or won't be extended. That would leave two options, crashing out with nothing, or her deal. Faced with those being the only two options even Labour MP's would (if they weren't abstainers) have to vote (if a second vote was manufactured) for May's deal wouldn't they? On some political calculations May has not lost yet, and may well still be in the game even if her deal was voted down initially.
Circumstances might create a May win. She loses the first vote. She doesn't resign and is not forced out. There is therefore no General Election. There is also a defeat in the commons for any proposed peoples vote. Article 50 can't or won't be extended. That would leave two options, crashing out with nothing, or her deal. Faced with those being the only two options even Labour MP's would (if they weren't abstainers) have to vote (if a second vote was manufactured) for May's deal wouldn't they? On some political calculations May has not lost yet, and may well still be in the game even if her deal was voted down initially.
I would imagine that for there to be a second vote on May's deal it would have to be a different deal - albeit I'm sure they could manufacture some cosmetic changes.
The fact that either thinks anyone gives a monkeys what channel this is on demonstrates how far out of touch they are. Just get on with it, it needs to happen even if it's on channel 5.
The fact that either thinks anyone gives a monkeys what channel this is on demonstrates how far out of touch they are. Just get on with it, it needs to happen even if it's on channel 5.
Really? I think it will be a complete waste of time and do absolutely nothing to dispel the notion that the public level of debate has been beneath that found on a football supporters forum!
Comments
Anyway, it’s not my article, just thought others might be interested. Didn’t mean to upset you
Yes, it really has sunk that low.
My concern with this is that while EU citizens can just get in their car and drive back to their home town or somewhere else in Europe if they lose their job. It's not so easy if you've come from further afield to find work elsewhere in Europe.
In the end leaving the EU is just going to leave us with a higher population and the need to keep the vicious circle of constant growth and immigration. I dont believe this is what most leavers actually want!
Yet more proof of the shit show that is Brexit. The other day I watched a political panel show that had Ian Dale defending the Brexit argument and yet another incompetent low intelligent female Labour MP (how many have they got?) making the Remain case. The Labour MP made the incontestable point about city firms moving jobs out of the city. Ian Dale countered, no they are not; name one. She refused to name one and just continued her, what now seemed like a rant she could not back up with facts while Ian Dale just kept repeating ”name one”. She came onto the show without arming herself with the basic and widely available facts to back up her argument and thus managed to completely lose the argument to one of the more reasonable Brexiteers but still a pedlar of outright lies and disinformation. The Remain cause has been badly let down by the non stop stream of second rate incompetent Remain MPs and other spokesmen/women that get invited onto Brexit discussion programs.
Either grow a pair and leave with no deal or don't bother at all. (Yes I know no deal is "rather" bad)
And that's all Brexit will prove to be: a 30 year waste of time, money and effort. Decades of wasted opportunities. A lost generation. All for what? Absolutely nothing. There has been and will be zero benefit from this entire exercise. The original objective was to unite the Tory Party and it didn't even manage to do that.
The Lovely Alexander Armstrong "We surveyed 100 people, and gave the 100 seconds to give as many reasons to want Brexit, Boris you said Blue Passports, lets see how many people said Blue Passports"
You have to bear in mind Cameron faced a lot more pressure from his own party internally on the issue than from either UKIP or the general public. Shooting the UKIP fox was always a red herring: UKIP were stealing votes from Labour and Tories across the country but not in big enough numbers and not in the right areas to be more than an annoyance. UKIP certainly had a modicum of public support but most voters saw them as the racist, BNP-lite nutters they were. If the public really wanted a referendum so they could leave the EU they would have voted for the only party that wanted to precisely do that. Yet UKIP failed to win a single seat.
But thanks to the litany of cock-ups we have seen over the past few years, we have seen UKIP, the biggest losers in UK politics, being the tail wagging the Tory dog. Completely unnecessarily to boot.
Bloody Tories. Letting the people decide.
This would never happen under communism.
We all know the HoC has a remain majority, if she had indicated there would/could be a second vote then her plan would be guaranteed to fail.
My way or the highway is the only line she can take right now.
She loses the first vote.
She doesn't resign and is not forced out.
There is therefore no General Election.
There is also a defeat in the commons for any proposed peoples vote.
Article 50 can't or won't be extended.
That would leave two options, crashing out with nothing, or her deal.
Faced with those being the only two options even Labour MP's would (if they weren't abstainers) have to vote (if a second vote was manufactured) for May's deal wouldn't they?
On some political calculations May has not lost yet, and may well still be in the game even if her deal was voted down initially.