Good read, thanks for sharing @Rothko. The Spectator also produces a 10-15 minute podcast each day called Coffee Shots, worth a listen on your commute.
I'm curious whether anyone here thinks any of the political parties are capable of delivering a Brexit that will satisfy those who voted to leave and not completely fuck over this country for years or decades to come? Personally I don't think such a deal even exists!
Agreed, which is why I changed my mind in the summer and decided we should remain. I believe hardly anyone expected we would be in this complete mess 2.5 years later.
I admit that many thought Brexit would prove extremely difficult to achieve, as did I. But never for one second did I think it would be an almost impossible task.
We could end this all quite quickly by voting to remain, although the desire to remain on CL does not necessarily seem to reflect the feeling in the UK. I've listened to plenty of people this week that voted remain, but now think we should brexit (whatever that is), because it is the democratic thing to do.
Simple straight question. Have you seen or even heard Richard Burgon in "action"?
For your information, he is the Shadow Justice Minister. He was hand-picked by Corbyn.
Yvette Cooper is a back-bencher.
It’s tragic isn’t it. We do have to take into consideration though that with one or two exceptions there is no one of any calibre willing to serve in Corbyns shadow cabinet. Doesn’t really inspire confidence does it.
Ironically, Corbyn, who is considering when to call a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister, lost a vote of confidence in his own leadership by 172 to 40 and yet rather than resign he chose to hide behind the skirts of the membership. What you're left with is 40 Corbyn apologists to make up the opposition front bench. The Labour party is exactly the jokeshop it deserves to be.
It is a vote of confidence in the ability of the government being able to pass legislation not leadership. While this has nothing to do with Brexit and I agree he has been ineffectual, I can't believe this myth persists that fringes of the Labour party elected him. The labour party is the largest political in europe, the numbers simply do not stack up that he was hiding behind the fringes. He increased his share of the vote when put to the membership. Not to mention that he has never faced a credible candidate from within the party.
He lost that vote before he led them in to the election, when the PLP didn't believe he could do that well. A lot of those 172 were made to eat their own words on election night. He tried to be inclusive in his first two shadow cabinets, but they all resigned. If the Labour front bench is devoid of those talents it is because they choose to act in a fashion that was counter to the direction the membership had chosen twice.
You kid yourself if you think May would have done anything different if the situation was reversed. She has more then plenty of occasions to do the honourable thing. The difference between her and Corbyn is if she loses a vote of no confidence by the MPs she is not allowed to stand in a members vote. After all the Tories don't like leaving things up to the membership, much like the last leadership election.
Ironically, I find myself in complete agreement with them. It is a truly terrifying thought that the result of May leaving is the fate of the country will be decided by a few thousand members of Tory party. The very same people who they were trying to placate when they got us in to this mess.
Simple straight question. Have you seen or even heard Richard Burgon in "action"?
For your information, he is the Shadow Justice Minister. He was hand-picked by Corbyn.
Yvette Cooper is a back-bencher.
It’s tragic isn’t it. We do have to take into consideration though that with one or two exceptions there is no one of any calibre willing to serve in Corbyns shadow cabinet. Doesn’t really inspire confidence does it.
Ironically, Corbyn, who is considering when to call a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister, lost a vote of confidence in his own leadership by 172 to 40 and yet rather than resign he chose to hide behind the skirts of the membership. What you're left with is 40 Corbyn apologists to make up the opposition front bench. The Labour party is exactly the jokeshop it deserves to be.
It is a vote of confidence in the ability of the government being able to pass legislation not leadership. While this has nothing to do with Brexit and I agree he has been ineffectual, I can't believe this myth persists that fringes of the Labour party elected him. The labour party is the largest political in europe, the numbers simply do not stack up that he was hiding behind the fringes. He increased his share of the vote when put to the membership. Not to mention that he has never faced a credible candidate from within the party.
He lost that vote before he led them in to the election, when the PLP didn't believe he could do that well. A lot of those 172 were made to eat their own words on election night. He tried to be inclusive in his first two shadow cabinets, but they all resigned. If the Labour front bench is devoid of those talents it is because they choose to act in a fashion that was counter to the direction the membership had chosen twice.
You kid yourself if you think May would have done anything different if the situation was reversed. She has more then plenty of occasions to do the honourable thing. The difference between her and Corbyn is if she loses a vote of no confidence by the MPs she is not allowed to stand in a members vote. After all the Tories don't like leaving things up to the membership, much like the last leadership election.
Ironically, I find myself in complete agreement with them. It is a truly terrifying thought that the result of May leaving is the fate of the country will be decided by a few thousand members of Tory party. The very same people who they were trying to placate when they got us in to this mess.
I look at it the other way. He doesn't have to work with the membership every day in parliament. By choosing to remain in post, he has left those MPs that have no confidence in him with no option but to sit on the back benches and effectively rendered the opposition front bench useless.
We hear every day how 17 million people got it wrong when they voted in the referendum. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Labour members are barking up the wrong tree too.
Simple straight question. Have you seen or even heard Richard Burgon in "action"?
For your information, he is the Shadow Justice Minister. He was hand-picked by Corbyn.
Yvette Cooper is a back-bencher.
It’s tragic isn’t it. We do have to take into consideration though that with one or two exceptions there is no one of any calibre willing to serve in Corbyns shadow cabinet. Doesn’t really inspire confidence does it.
Ironically, Corbyn, who is considering when to call a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister, lost a vote of confidence in his own leadership by 172 to 40 and yet rather than resign he chose to hide behind the skirts of the membership. What you're left with is 40 Corbyn apologists to make up the opposition front bench. The Labour party is exactly the jokeshop it deserves to be.
It is a vote of confidence in the ability of the government being able to pass legislation not leadership. While this has nothing to do with Brexit and I agree he has been ineffectual, I can't believe this myth persists that fringes of the Labour party elected him. The labour party is the largest political in europe, the numbers simply do not stack up that he was hiding behind the fringes. He increased his share of the vote when put to the membership. Not to mention that he has never faced a credible candidate from within the party.
He lost that vote before he led them in to the election, when the PLP didn't believe he could do that well. A lot of those 172 were made to eat their own words on election night. He tried to be inclusive in his first two shadow cabinets, but they all resigned. If the Labour front bench is devoid of those talents it is because they choose to act in a fashion that was counter to the direction the membership had chosen twice.
You kid yourself if you think May would have done anything different if the situation was reversed. She has more then plenty of occasions to do the honourable thing. The difference between her and Corbyn is if she loses a vote of no confidence by the MPs she is not allowed to stand in a members vote. After all the Tories don't like leaving things up to the membership, much like the last leadership election.
Ironically, I find myself in complete agreement with them. It is a truly terrifying thought that the result of May leaving is the fate of the country will be decided by a few thousand members of Tory party. The very same people who they were trying to placate when they got us in to this mess.
I look at it the other way. He doesn't have to work with the membership every day in parliament. By choosing to remain in post, he has left those MPs that have no confidence in him with no option but to sit on the back benches and effectively rendered the opposition front bench useless.
We hear every day how 17 million people got it wrong when they voted in the referendum. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Labour members are barking up the wrong tree too.
Spot on - the same policies with a different leader (e.g. Chuka) would be a far more effective opposition and likely to win a GE.
Simple straight question. Have you seen or even heard Richard Burgon in "action"?
For your information, he is the Shadow Justice Minister. He was hand-picked by Corbyn.
Yvette Cooper is a back-bencher.
It’s tragic isn’t it. We do have to take into consideration though that with one or two exceptions there is no one of any calibre willing to serve in Corbyns shadow cabinet. Doesn’t really inspire confidence does it.
Ironically, Corbyn, who is considering when to call a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister, lost a vote of confidence in his own leadership by 172 to 40 and yet rather than resign he chose to hide behind the skirts of the membership. What you're left with is 40 Corbyn apologists to make up the opposition front bench. The Labour party is exactly the jokeshop it deserves to be.
It is a vote of confidence in the ability of the government being able to pass legislation not leadership. While this has nothing to do with Brexit and I agree he has been ineffectual, I can't believe this myth persists that fringes of the Labour party elected him. The labour party is the largest political in europe, the numbers simply do not stack up that he was hiding behind the fringes. He increased his share of the vote when put to the membership. Not to mention that he has never faced a credible candidate from within the party.
He lost that vote before he led them in to the election, when the PLP didn't believe he could do that well. A lot of those 172 were made to eat their own words on election night. He tried to be inclusive in his first two shadow cabinets, but they all resigned. If the Labour front bench is devoid of those talents it is because they choose to act in a fashion that was counter to the direction the membership had chosen twice.
You kid yourself if you think May would have done anything different if the situation was reversed. She has more then plenty of occasions to do the honourable thing. The difference between her and Corbyn is if she loses a vote of no confidence by the MPs she is not allowed to stand in a members vote. After all the Tories don't like leaving things up to the membership, much like the last leadership election.
Ironically, I find myself in complete agreement with them. It is a truly terrifying thought that the result of May leaving is the fate of the country will be decided by a few thousand members of Tory party. The very same people who they were trying to placate when they got us in to this mess.
I look at it the other way. He doesn't have to work with the membership every day in parliament. By choosing to remain in post, he has left those MPs that have no confidence in him with no option but to sit on the back benches and effectively rendered the opposition front bench useless.
We hear every day how 17 million people got it wrong when they voted in the referendum. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Labour members are barking up the wrong tree too.
Spot on - the same policies with a different leader (e.g. Chuka) would be a far more effective opposition and likely to win a GE.
Would like to see Andy Burnham back from local politics.
Simple straight question. Have you seen or even heard Richard Burgon in "action"?
For your information, he is the Shadow Justice Minister. He was hand-picked by Corbyn.
Yvette Cooper is a back-bencher.
It’s tragic isn’t it. We do have to take into consideration though that with one or two exceptions there is no one of any calibre willing to serve in Corbyns shadow cabinet. Doesn’t really inspire confidence does it.
Ironically, Corbyn, who is considering when to call a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister, lost a vote of confidence in his own leadership by 172 to 40 and yet rather than resign he chose to hide behind the skirts of the membership. What you're left with is 40 Corbyn apologists to make up the opposition front bench. The Labour party is exactly the jokeshop it deserves to be.
It is a vote of confidence in the ability of the government being able to pass legislation not leadership. While this has nothing to do with Brexit and I agree he has been ineffectual, I can't believe this myth persists that fringes of the Labour party elected him. The labour party is the largest political in europe, the numbers simply do not stack up that he was hiding behind the fringes. He increased his share of the vote when put to the membership. Not to mention that he has never faced a credible candidate from within the party.
He lost that vote before he led them in to the election, when the PLP didn't believe he could do that well. A lot of those 172 were made to eat their own words on election night. He tried to be inclusive in his first two shadow cabinets, but they all resigned. If the Labour front bench is devoid of those talents it is because they choose to act in a fashion that was counter to the direction the membership had chosen twice.
You kid yourself if you think May would have done anything different if the situation was reversed. She has more then plenty of occasions to do the honourable thing. The difference between her and Corbyn is if she loses a vote of no confidence by the MPs she is not allowed to stand in a members vote. After all the Tories don't like leaving things up to the membership, much like the last leadership election.
Ironically, I find myself in complete agreement with them. It is a truly terrifying thought that the result of May leaving is the fate of the country will be decided by a few thousand members of Tory party. The very same people who they were trying to placate when they got us in to this mess.
I look at it the other way. He doesn't have to work with the membership every day in parliament. By choosing to remain in post, he has left those MPs that have no confidence in him with no option but to sit on the back benches and effectively rendered the opposition front bench useless.
We hear every day how 17 million people got it wrong when they voted in the referendum. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Labour members are barking up the wrong tree too.
If the PLP forced him out in favour of a bloke they’d prefer, that is a massive slap in the face of people who voted him into the leadership twice.
I’d rather vote Lib Dem (or Green like I did in 2015) than for a Labour Party that has Chuka forced in through the back door.
Simple straight question. Have you seen or even heard Richard Burgon in "action"?
For your information, he is the Shadow Justice Minister. He was hand-picked by Corbyn.
Yvette Cooper is a back-bencher.
It’s tragic isn’t it. We do have to take into consideration though that with one or two exceptions there is no one of any calibre willing to serve in Corbyns shadow cabinet. Doesn’t really inspire confidence does it.
Ironically, Corbyn, who is considering when to call a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister, lost a vote of confidence in his own leadership by 172 to 40 and yet rather than resign he chose to hide behind the skirts of the membership. What you're left with is 40 Corbyn apologists to make up the opposition front bench. The Labour party is exactly the jokeshop it deserves to be.
It is a vote of confidence in the ability of the government being able to pass legislation not leadership. While this has nothing to do with Brexit and I agree he has been ineffectual, I can't believe this myth persists that fringes of the Labour party elected him. The labour party is the largest political in europe, the numbers simply do not stack up that he was hiding behind the fringes. He increased his share of the vote when put to the membership. Not to mention that he has never faced a credible candidate from within the party.
He lost that vote before he led them in to the election, when the PLP didn't believe he could do that well. A lot of those 172 were made to eat their own words on election night. He tried to be inclusive in his first two shadow cabinets, but they all resigned. If the Labour front bench is devoid of those talents it is because they choose to act in a fashion that was counter to the direction the membership had chosen twice.
You kid yourself if you think May would have done anything different if the situation was reversed. She has more then plenty of occasions to do the honourable thing. The difference between her and Corbyn is if she loses a vote of no confidence by the MPs she is not allowed to stand in a members vote. After all the Tories don't like leaving things up to the membership, much like the last leadership election.
Ironically, I find myself in complete agreement with them. It is a truly terrifying thought that the result of May leaving is the fate of the country will be decided by a few thousand members of Tory party. The very same people who they were trying to placate when they got us in to this mess.
I look at it the other way. He doesn't have to work with the membership every day in parliament. By choosing to remain in post, he has left those MPs that have no confidence in him with no option but to sit on the back benches and effectively rendered the opposition front bench useless.
We hear every day how 17 million people got it wrong when they voted in the referendum. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Labour members are barking up the wrong tree too.
Spot on - the same policies with a different leader (e.g. Chuka) would be a far more effective opposition and likely to win a GE.
Labour voters that are not extreme are being cheated by Corbyn and the groups that prop him up. They have the control of the party stitched up and it’s hard to see and end to that. Labour as was is basically finished. Credible and talented Labour politicians like Chukka Umanna and Yvette Cooper and there are many others are sidelined with no prospect of a change allowing them to steer the party. Unless at some point they call it a day and help form another party with centre right and liberal politicians we are forced to accept the fact that we could easily see Tory governments for a generation. God help us.
Labour should be storming ahead at the polls but are basically nip and tuck with probably the worst government in this county’s recent history.
Simple straight question. Have you seen or even heard Richard Burgon in "action"?
For your information, he is the Shadow Justice Minister. He was hand-picked by Corbyn.
Yvette Cooper is a back-bencher.
It’s tragic isn’t it. We do have to take into consideration though that with one or two exceptions there is no one of any calibre willing to serve in Corbyns shadow cabinet. Doesn’t really inspire confidence does it.
Ironically, Corbyn, who is considering when to call a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister, lost a vote of confidence in his own leadership by 172 to 40 and yet rather than resign he chose to hide behind the skirts of the membership. What you're left with is 40 Corbyn apologists to make up the opposition front bench. The Labour party is exactly the jokeshop it deserves to be.
It is a vote of confidence in the ability of the government being able to pass legislation not leadership. While this has nothing to do with Brexit and I agree he has been ineffectual, I can't believe this myth persists that fringes of the Labour party elected him. The labour party is the largest political in europe, the numbers simply do not stack up that he was hiding behind the fringes. He increased his share of the vote when put to the membership. Not to mention that he has never faced a credible candidate from within the party.
He lost that vote before he led them in to the election, when the PLP didn't believe he could do that well. A lot of those 172 were made to eat their own words on election night. He tried to be inclusive in his first two shadow cabinets, but they all resigned. If the Labour front bench is devoid of those talents it is because they choose to act in a fashion that was counter to the direction the membership had chosen twice.
You kid yourself if you think May would have done anything different if the situation was reversed. She has more then plenty of occasions to do the honourable thing. The difference between her and Corbyn is if she loses a vote of no confidence by the MPs she is not allowed to stand in a members vote. After all the Tories don't like leaving things up to the membership, much like the last leadership election.
Ironically, I find myself in complete agreement with them. It is a truly terrifying thought that the result of May leaving is the fate of the country will be decided by a few thousand members of Tory party. The very same people who they were trying to placate when they got us in to this mess.
I look at it the other way. He doesn't have to work with the membership every day in parliament. By choosing to remain in post, he has left those MPs that have no confidence in him with no option but to sit on the back benches and effectively rendered the opposition front bench useless.
We hear every day how 17 million people got it wrong when they voted in the referendum. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Labour members are barking up the wrong tree too.
If the PLP forced him out in favour of a bloke they’d prefer, that is a massive slap in the face of people who voted him into the leadership twice.
I’d rather vote Lib Dem (or Green like I did in 2015) than for a Labour Party that has Chuka forced in through the back door.
This is the pig in a poke that the Labour party bought for themselves when they reformed their leadership election procedure. They thought they were reducing the power of the unions but instead left themselves vulnerable to Momentum.
To my mind, the parliamentary party should elect the parliamentary leader. They're the ones who have to work effectively together as a team. Difficult to do when the team didn't select the captain and most of them think the captain is useless.
Fintan O'Toole's column today, all about another term for Norway + (oh, and the Marx Brothers, but I fear that he could made more of them, and, for me, the lack of any reference to the Duchy of Grand Fenwick is baffling).
UK has two options: a people’s vote or Liechtenstein Plus Brexit looks like it was written by Marx Brothers.
Liechtenstein! As in the mountaintop microstate of 37,877 people. To appreciate the state that the whole Brexit project is likely to arrive at in the next few days, consider this: many of the sensible, decent people in British politics may by the end of this week be hoping to save their country by engineering an alliance with Liechtenstein. And not just an alliance either - what they’re hoping for is an arrangement in which Liechtenstein will be an equal partner and will have a significant say in what Britain does in the future. And, to make all of this even more surreal, a say on what happens with the Irish Border.
Nobody talks much about the Liechtenstein option of course. They talk instead of Norway, and indeed of Norway Plus. Norway is a serious kind of country – Vikings, trolls, Ibsen, resistance to the Nazis, oil money, Ada Hegerberg cooly brushing off the idiot who asked her about twerking. But Norway Plus is also Liechtenstein Plus. A rose by any other name may smell as sweet, but I’m not sure a Brexit Plan B by any other name would smell less like old cod.
There is, as we are about to see, no majority in the House of Commons for Theresa May’s Brexit deal. And, as will also become apparent, there is no majority for exiting the EU with no deal either. Hence we will be left with two possibilities: a people’s vote with the option of staying in, or Liechtenstein Plus. This second option is favoured by many thoughtful people who just want to get their country out of this mess with the least amount of damage. But I’m not quite sure they understand how bizarre it is and how much humiliation it involves.
Permission from Liechtenstein Liechtenstein comes into it because Plan B involves the UK leaving the EU but joining (in fact rejoining) the European Free Trade Association and, through EFTA, the European Economic Area (EEA). The EEA is a kind of adjunct to the EU single market – its members are in the single market but not part of the EU’s political structures. And the EEA has three members: Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. They are equal partners – Liechtenstein has the same weight in these arrangements as Norway does. It has a veto over what happens in the EEA.
So first of all, Britain would have to get Liechtenstein’s permission to join the EEA. And second, even if it did get into the EEA, it would need Liechtenstein’s approval every time it wanted to do something important like having a new EU regulation transposed into EEA market rules. This is of particular interest to us because if we are to maintain an open Border, this procedure would have to be done on a regular basis to insure that market regulations in the North maintained their alignment with the South. A Liechtenstein veto could cause us big problems.
‘Ruritanian charade’ Now, let us push this just a little bit further. My vast knowledge of the Liechtenstein constitution tells me that it grants a veto over all laws to His Serene Highness Hans-Adam II, Prince of Liechtenstein, Duke of Troppau and Jägerndorf, Count of Rietberg, sovereign of the House of Liechtenstein and Knight of the Order of the Golden Fleece. So here we are: having found it utterly intolerable to be “interfered with” by the EU and its Court of Justice, the British are wishing themselves into a situation in which their laws and regulations would be subject to the agreement of the hereditary owner of an Alp. Brexit finally becomes what JG Ballard, in refusing a CBE, called “a Ruritanian charade”.
But the real humiliation here is not that this is likely to happen. It is that it won’t happen because even Liechtenstein won’t agree to it. Nobody – not Norway, not Iceland, not His Serene Highness Hans-Adam II – wants to be stuck with the Brexit mess. It has reached the point where in order to stay alive it has to swallow more and more absurdities. And it has led to the very thing it was supposed to overcome. It was fuelled by imaginary humiliation and it is creating the real thing. It was bad enough in the 1960s when Britain’s desire to join Europe was rebuffed by General De Gaulle. Now it is getting the bird from Norway, Iceland – and Liechtenstein.
The truth, which will surely begin to dawn in the next few days, is that there is no way forward with the present deal, no chance of renegotiating it substantially even if Theresa May were replaced by Jeremy Corbyn, no real political support for a suicidal no-deal exit and not even a viable Liechtenstein option. A general election in which Corbyn’s “alternative” to May’s deal is just another fantasy of leaving the EU while retaining all the benefits of membership cannot resolve anything because it cannot present a genuine choice. There is only one way out and that is to go back to the people. Those people know that every time they buy a train ticket they have to accept the terms and conditions. The terms and conditions of Brexit now look like they were written by the Marx Brothers.
Nina Lamparski ✔ @ninaism #BREAKING: 'No way to change' Brexit deal, says Merkel after May visit #Brexit @AFP
20 3:43 PM - Dec 11, 2018
I bet Merkel is laughing so much inside she is having trouble containing herself. The UK was despised at the best of times in European circles, now we have given them all the ammo they need.
Nina Lamparski ✔ @ninaism #BREAKING: 'No way to change' Brexit deal, says Merkel after May visit #Brexit @AFP
20 3:43 PM - Dec 11, 2018
I bet Merkel is laughing so much inside she is having trouble containing herself. The UK was despised at the best of times in European circles, now we have given them all the ammo they need.
Oh really? What are these "European circles" you speak of?
Prior to the last referendum we had a Prime Minister who didn’t really understand how the EU works go over to Germany to try and get concessions from Merkel before coming back to London with tail between legs. Maybe this just a sort of ritual humiliation we have to go through prior to EU referendums?
Simple straight question. Have you seen or even heard Richard Burgon in "action"?
For your information, he is the Shadow Justice Minister. He was hand-picked by Corbyn.
Yvette Cooper is a back-bencher.
It’s tragic isn’t it. We do have to take into consideration though that with one or two exceptions there is no one of any calibre willing to serve in Corbyns shadow cabinet. Doesn’t really inspire confidence does it.
Ironically, Corbyn, who is considering when to call a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister, lost a vote of confidence in his own leadership by 172 to 40 and yet rather than resign he chose to hide behind the skirts of the membership. What you're left with is 40 Corbyn apologists to make up the opposition front bench. The Labour party is exactly the jokeshop it deserves to be.
It is a vote of confidence in the ability of the government being able to pass legislation not leadership. While this has nothing to do with Brexit and I agree he has been ineffectual, I can't believe this myth persists that fringes of the Labour party elected him. The labour party is the largest political in europe, the numbers simply do not stack up that he was hiding behind the fringes. He increased his share of the vote when put to the membership. Not to mention that he has never faced a credible candidate from within the party.
He lost that vote before he led them in to the election, when the PLP didn't believe he could do that well. A lot of those 172 were made to eat their own words on election night. He tried to be inclusive in his first two shadow cabinets, but they all resigned. If the Labour front bench is devoid of those talents it is because they choose to act in a fashion that was counter to the direction the membership had chosen twice.
You kid yourself if you think May would have done anything different if the situation was reversed. She has more then plenty of occasions to do the honourable thing. The difference between her and Corbyn is if she loses a vote of no confidence by the MPs she is not allowed to stand in a members vote. After all the Tories don't like leaving things up to the membership, much like the last leadership election.
Ironically, I find myself in complete agreement with them. It is a truly terrifying thought that the result of May leaving is the fate of the country will be decided by a few thousand members of Tory party. The very same people who they were trying to placate when they got us in to this mess.
I look at it the other way. He doesn't have to work with the membership every day in parliament. By choosing to remain in post, he has left those MPs that have no confidence in him with no option but to sit on the back benches and effectively rendered the opposition front bench useless.
We hear every day how 17 million people got it wrong when they voted in the referendum. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Labour members are barking up the wrong tree too.
Spot on - the same policies with a different leader (e.g. Chuka) would be a far more effective opposition and likely to win a GE.
You are starting to sound like a brexiteer! You can't have it both ways. While I don't think many would disagree with you, where was this credible candidate offering the same platform? Because I only saw a series of identikit plastic former special advisors and fecking Owen Jones. If he was the great hope then the Labour party is doomed.
Personally I'd love to see Stramer or Miliband offering a social democratic platform but I don't even know if they want it or what either really stand for.
Saying all that the leader of the opposition can only cause pressure when it comes to Brexit. All the people who think a different leader will somehow find a solution to this shit show when they are not in government are mistaken in my opinion. We essentially face three choices, hard Brexit, vassel status or cancel article 50. How do you find a way out when the other two options are unpalatable to the majority of everyone else?
I am tempted to submit a Freedom Of Information request to find out how much Theresa May's jaunt round Europe today is costing, compared to the short Skype calls that would have had the same result.
"Hello, Angela! It's Theresa. Can we..." "No"
"Hello Emmanuel! It's Theresa. Do you think we could..." "No"
Simple straight question. Have you seen or even heard Richard Burgon in "action"?
For your information, he is the Shadow Justice Minister. He was hand-picked by Corbyn.
Yvette Cooper is a back-bencher.
Ironically, Corbyn, who is considering when to call a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister, lost a vote of confidence in his own leadership by 172 to 40 and yet rather than resign he chose to hide behind the skirts of the membership. What you're left with is 40 Corbyn apologists to make up the opposition front bench. The Labour party is exactly the jokeshop it deserves to be.
You kid yourself if you think May would have done anything different if the situation was reversed. She has more then plenty of occasions to do the honourable thing. The difference between her and Corbyn is if she loses a vote of no confidence by the MPs she is not allowed to stand in a members vote. After all the Tories don't like leaving things up to the membership, much like the last leadership election.
Ironically, I find myself in complete agreement with them. It is a truly terrifying thought that the result of May leaving is the fate of the country will be decided by a few thousand members of Tory party. The very same people who they were trying to placate when they got us in to this mess.
I look at it the other way. He doesn't have to work with the membership every day in parliament. By choosing to remain in post, he has left those MPs that have no confidence in him with no option but to sit on the back benches and effectively rendered the opposition front bench useless.
We hear every day how 17 million people got it wrong when they voted in the referendum. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Labour members are barking up the wrong tree too.
If the PLP forced him out in favour of a bloke they’d prefer, that is a massive slap in the face of people who voted him into the leadership twice.
I’d rather vote Lib Dem (or Green like I did in 2015) than for a Labour Party that has Chuka forced in through the back door.
This is the pig in a poke that the Labour party bought for themselves when they reformed their leadership election procedure. They thought they were reducing the power of the unions but instead left themselves vulnerable to Momentum.
To my mind, the parliamentary party should elect the parliamentary leader. They're the ones who have to work effectively together as a team. Difficult to do when the team didn't select the captain and most of them think the captain
Simple straight question. Have you seen or even heard Richard Burgon in "action"?
For your information, he is the Shadow Justice Minister. He was hand-picked by Corbyn.
Yvette Cooper is a back-bencher.
It’s tragic isn’t it. We do have to take into consideration though that with one or two exceptions there is no one of any calibre willing to serve in Corbyns shadow cabinet. Doesn’t really inspire confidence does it.
Ironically, Corbyn, who is considering when to call a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister, lost a vote of confidence in his own leadership by 172 to 40 and yet rather than resign he chose to hide behind the skirts of the membership. What you're left with is 40 Corbyn apologists to make up the opposition front bench. The Labour party is exactly the jokeshop it deserves to be.
It is a vote of confidence in the ability of the government being able to pass legislation not leadership. While this has nothing to do with Brexit and I agree he has been ineffectual, I can't believe this myth persists that fringes of the Labour party elected him. The labour party is the largest political in europe, the numbers simply do not stack up that he was hiding behind the fringes. He increased his share of the vote when put to the membership. Not to mention that he has never faced a credible candidate from within the party.
He lost that vote before he led them in to the election, when the PLP didn't believe he could do that well. A lot of those 172 were made to eat their own words on election night. He tried to be inclusive in his first two shadow cabinets, but they all resigned. If the Labour front bench is devoid of those talents it is because they choose to act in a fashion that was counter to the direction the membership had chosen twice.
You kid yourself if you think May would have done anything different if the situation was reversed. She has more then plenty of occasions to do the honourable thing. The difference between her and Corbyn is if she loses a vote of no confidence by the MPs she is not allowed to stand in a members vote. After all the Tories don't like leaving things up to the membership, much like the last leadership election.
Ironically, I find myself in complete agreement with them. It is a truly terrifying thought that the result of May leaving is the fate of the country will be decided by a few thousand members of Tory party. The very same people who they were trying to placate when they got us in to this mess.
I look at it the other way. He doesn't have to work with the membership every day in parliament. By choosing to remain in post, he has left those MPs that have no confidence in him with no option but to sit on the back benches and effectively rendered the opposition front bench useless.
We hear every day how 17 million people got it wrong when they voted in the referendum. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Labour members are barking up the wrong tree too.
Spot on - the same policies with a different leader (e.g. Chuka) would be a far more effective opposition and likely to win a GE.
You are starting to sound like a brexiteer! You can't have it both ways. While I don't think many would disagree with you, where was this credible candidate offering the same platform? Because I only saw a series of identikit plastic former special advisors and fecking Owen Jones. If he was the great hope then the Labour party is doomed.
Personally I'd love to see Stramer or Miliband offering a social democratic platform but I don't even know if they want it or what either really stand for.
Saying all that the leader of the opposition can only cause pressure when it comes to Brexit. All the people who think a different leader will somehow find a solution to this shit show when they are not in government are mistaken in my opinion. We essentially face three choices, hard Brexit, vassel status or cancel article 50. How do you find a way out when the other two options are unpalatable to the majority of everyone else?
To be honest, I wasn't really talking about Brexit per se, just initially commenting on the brassneck of Corbyn trying to organise a vote of no confidence, having lost one and ignored the result himself.
Simple straight question. Have you seen or even heard Richard Burgon in "action"?
For your information, he is the Shadow Justice Minister. He was hand-picked by Corbyn.
Yvette Cooper is a back-bencher.
It’s tragic isn’t it. We do have to take into consideration though that with one or two exceptions there is no one of any calibre willing to serve in Corbyns shadow cabinet. Doesn’t really inspire confidence does it.
Ironically, Corbyn, who is considering when to call a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister, lost a vote of confidence in his own leadership by 172 to 40 and yet rather than resign he chose to hide behind the skirts of the membership. What you're left with is 40 Corbyn apologists to make up the opposition front bench. The Labour party is exactly the jokeshop it deserves to be.
It is a vote of confidence in the ability of the government being able to pass legislation not leadership. While this has nothing to do with Brexit and I agree he has been ineffectual, I can't believe this myth persists that fringes of the Labour party elected him. The labour party is the largest political in europe, the numbers simply do not stack up that he was hiding behind the fringes. He increased his share of the vote when put to the membership. Not to mention that he has never faced a credible candidate from within the party.
He lost that vote before he led them in to the election, when the PLP didn't believe he could do that well. A lot of those 172 were made to eat their own words on election night. He tried to be inclusive in his first two shadow cabinets, but they all resigned. If the Labour front bench is devoid of those talents it is because they choose to act in a fashion that was counter to the direction the membership had chosen twice.
You kid yourself if you think May would have done anything different if the situation was reversed. She has more then plenty of occasions to do the honourable thing. The difference between her and Corbyn is if she loses a vote of no confidence by the MPs she is not allowed to stand in a members vote. After all the Tories don't like leaving things up to the membership, much like the last leadership election.
Ironically, I find myself in complete agreement with them. It is a truly terrifying thought that the result of May leaving is the fate of the country will be decided by a few thousand members of Tory party. The very same people who they were trying to placate when they got us in to this mess.
I look at it the other way. He doesn't have to work with the membership every day in parliament. By choosing to remain in post, he has left those MPs that have no confidence in him with no option but to sit on the back benches and effectively rendered the opposition front bench useless.
We hear every day how 17 million people got it wrong when they voted in the referendum. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Labour members are barking up the wrong tree too.
Spot on - the same policies with a different leader (e.g. Chuka) would be a far more effective opposition and likely to win a GE.
You are starting to sound like a brexiteer! You can't have it both ways. While I don't think many would disagree with you, where was this credible candidate offering the same platform? Because I only saw a series of identikit plastic former special advisors and fecking Owen Jones. If he was the great hope then the Labour party is doomed.
Personally I'd love to see Stramer or Miliband offering a social democratic platform but I don't even know if they want it or what either really stand for.
Saying all that the leader of the opposition can only cause pressure when it comes to Brexit. All the people who think a different leader will somehow find a solution to this shit show when they are not in government are mistaken in my opinion. We essentially face three choices, hard Brexit, vassel status or cancel article 50. How do you find a way out when the other two options are unpalatable to the majority of everyone else?
Chuka was the credible candidate until he pulled out of the leadership race.
Any predictions on how this might be looked back on in say 20 years? Or where the UK will find itself at that time? Hard to imagine it will be seen as anything other than a complete mess but it should fascinate the historians.
Nina Lamparski ✔ @ninaism #BREAKING: 'No way to change' Brexit deal, says Merkel after May visit #Brexit @AFP
20 3:43 PM - Dec 11, 2018
I bet Merkel is laughing so much inside she is having trouble containing herself. The UK was despised at the best of times in European circles, now we have given them all the ammo they need.
Oh really? What are these "European circles" you speak of?
Comments
I believe hardly anyone expected we would be in this complete mess 2.5 years later.
I admit that many thought Brexit would prove extremely difficult to achieve, as did I.
But never for one second did I think it would be an almost impossible task.
We could end this all quite quickly by voting to remain, although the desire to remain on CL does not necessarily seem to reflect the feeling in the UK. I've listened to plenty of people this week that voted remain, but now think we should brexit (whatever that is), because it is the democratic thing to do.
He lost that vote before he led them in to the election, when the PLP didn't believe he could do that well. A lot of those 172 were made to eat their own words on election night. He tried to be inclusive in his first two shadow cabinets, but they all resigned. If the Labour front bench is devoid of those talents it is because they choose to act in a fashion that was counter to the direction the membership had chosen twice.
You kid yourself if you think May would have done anything different if the situation was reversed. She has more then plenty of occasions to do the honourable thing. The difference between her and Corbyn is if she loses a vote of no confidence by the MPs she is not allowed to stand in a members vote. After all the Tories don't like leaving things up to the membership, much like the last leadership election.
Ironically, I find myself in complete agreement with them. It is a truly terrifying thought that the result of May leaving is the fate of the country will be decided by a few thousand members of Tory party. The very same people who they were trying to placate when they got us in to this mess.
We hear every day how 17 million people got it wrong when they voted in the referendum. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Labour members are barking up the wrong tree too.
I’d rather vote Lib Dem (or Green like I did in 2015) than for a Labour Party that has Chuka forced in through the back door.
Labour should be storming ahead at the polls but are basically nip and tuck with probably the worst government in this county’s recent history.
To my mind, the parliamentary party should elect the parliamentary leader. They're the ones who have to work effectively together as a team. Difficult to do when the team didn't select the captain and most of them think the captain is useless.
UK has two options: a people’s vote or Liechtenstein Plus
Brexit looks like it was written by Marx Brothers.
Liechtenstein! As in the mountaintop microstate of 37,877 people. To appreciate the state that the whole Brexit project is likely to arrive at in the next few days, consider this: many of the sensible, decent people in British politics may by the end of this week be hoping to save their country by engineering an alliance with Liechtenstein. And not just an alliance either - what they’re hoping for is an arrangement in which Liechtenstein will be an equal partner and will have a significant say in what Britain does in the future. And, to make all of this even more surreal, a say on what happens with the Irish Border.
Nobody talks much about the Liechtenstein option of course. They talk instead of Norway, and indeed of Norway Plus. Norway is a serious kind of country – Vikings, trolls, Ibsen, resistance to the Nazis, oil money, Ada Hegerberg cooly brushing off the idiot who asked her about twerking. But Norway Plus is also Liechtenstein Plus. A rose by any other name may smell as sweet, but I’m not sure a Brexit Plan B by any other name would smell less like old cod.
There is, as we are about to see, no majority in the House of Commons for Theresa May’s Brexit deal. And, as will also become apparent, there is no majority for exiting the EU with no deal either. Hence we will be left with two possibilities: a people’s vote with the option of staying in, or Liechtenstein Plus. This second option is favoured by many thoughtful people who just want to get their country out of this mess with the least amount of damage. But I’m not quite sure they understand how bizarre it is and how much humiliation it involves.
Permission from Liechtenstein
Liechtenstein comes into it because Plan B involves the UK leaving the EU but joining (in fact rejoining) the European Free Trade Association and, through EFTA, the European Economic Area (EEA). The EEA is a kind of adjunct to the EU single market – its members are in the single market but not part of the EU’s political structures. And the EEA has three members: Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. They are equal partners – Liechtenstein has the same weight in these arrangements as Norway does. It has a veto over what happens in the EEA.
So first of all, Britain would have to get Liechtenstein’s permission to join the EEA. And second, even if it did get into the EEA, it would need Liechtenstein’s approval every time it wanted to do something important like having a new EU regulation transposed into EEA market rules. This is of particular interest to us because if we are to maintain an open Border, this procedure would have to be done on a regular basis to insure that market regulations in the North maintained their alignment with the South. A Liechtenstein veto could cause us big problems.
‘Ruritanian charade’
Now, let us push this just a little bit further. My vast knowledge of the Liechtenstein constitution tells me that it grants a veto over all laws to His Serene Highness Hans-Adam II, Prince of Liechtenstein, Duke of Troppau and Jägerndorf, Count of Rietberg, sovereign of the House of Liechtenstein and Knight of the Order of the Golden Fleece. So here we are: having found it utterly intolerable to be “interfered with” by the EU and its Court of Justice, the British are wishing themselves into a situation in which their laws and regulations would be subject to the agreement of the hereditary owner of an Alp. Brexit finally becomes what JG Ballard, in refusing a CBE, called “a Ruritanian charade”.
But the real humiliation here is not that this is likely to happen. It is that it won’t happen because even Liechtenstein won’t agree to it. Nobody – not Norway, not Iceland, not His Serene Highness Hans-Adam II – wants to be stuck with the Brexit mess. It has reached the point where in order to stay alive it has to swallow more and more absurdities. And it has led to the very thing it was supposed to overcome. It was fuelled by imaginary humiliation and it is creating the real thing. It was bad enough in the 1960s when Britain’s desire to join Europe was rebuffed by General De Gaulle. Now it is getting the bird from Norway, Iceland – and Liechtenstein.
The truth, which will surely begin to dawn in the next few days, is that there is no way forward with the present deal, no chance of renegotiating it substantially even if Theresa May were replaced by Jeremy Corbyn, no real political support for a suicidal no-deal exit and not even a viable Liechtenstein option. A general election in which Corbyn’s “alternative” to May’s deal is just another fantasy of leaving the EU while retaining all the benefits of membership cannot resolve anything because it cannot present a genuine choice. There is only one way out and that is to go back to the people. Those people know that every time they buy a train ticket they have to accept the terms and conditions. The terms and conditions of Brexit now look like they were written by the Marx Brothers.
Nina Lamparski
✔
@ninaism
#BREAKING: 'No way to change' Brexit deal, says Merkel after May visit #Brexit @AFP
20
3:43 PM - Dec 11, 2018
You are starting to sound like a brexiteer! You can't have it both ways. While I don't think many would disagree with you, where was this credible candidate offering the same platform? Because I only saw a series of identikit plastic former special advisors and fecking Owen Jones. If he was the great hope then the Labour party is doomed.
Personally I'd love to see Stramer or Miliband offering a social democratic platform but I don't even know if they want it or what either really stand for.
Saying all that the leader of the opposition can only cause pressure when it comes to Brexit. All the people who think a different leader will somehow find a solution to this shit show when they are not in government are mistaken in my opinion. We essentially face three choices, hard Brexit, vassel status or cancel article 50. How do you find a way out when the other two options are unpalatable to the majority of everyone else?
"Hello, Angela! It's Theresa. Can we..."
"No"
"Hello Emmanuel! It's Theresa. Do you think we could..."
"No"
"Jean-Claude..."
"No"
...
https://youtu.be/QFces_jzeYc