UK General Discussion: 2017 and onwards, Mayhem

[Blair]

And Cooper amendment failed due to Labour rebels- and they're certainly a motley bunch.

[rc18]

From what I understand from this latest round of voting, no deal has just become much more likely.

It was always somewhat likely given it is the default and parliament is hopelessly divided on any alternative.  The most significant thing from today IMO was it demonstrated that there is no majority in parliament to frustrate brexit. If there is no majority for delay there is likely no majority for a 2nd ref or revocation. Will be interesting to watch how MPs change tack in the coming weeks.

[Antonio the Sixth]

This is pure denial. If Parliament keeps asking to have its cake and eat it too, they'll end up with no cake at all.

[Middle-aged Europe]

So, Theresa May will now (again) unsuccessfully try to renegotiate the deal with the EU until the hard Brexit happens on March 29?

[jaichind]

I do have a question:  Say The the Cooper amendment which would extend Article 50 to 12/31/19 passed.  Is that something that the UK decide unilaterally?  Even if it passed would not the EU have to agree to that as well ? 

Overall it seems May's strategy is still to get her original deal passed by waiting until the night of 3/29 when it will become clear that there is no majority for No Deal Brexit, no majority for delaying Brexit ergo there has to be a default majority for the May deal.  All the stuff she will be up to talking to the EU is just a smokescreen of showing that "she is trying to get a new better deal."

[rc18]

I do have a question:  Say The the Cooper amendment which would extend Article 50 to 12/31/19 passed.  Is that something that the UK decide unilaterally?  Even if it passed would not the EU have to agree to that as well ? 

Overall it seems May's strategy is still to get her original deal passed by waiting until the night of 3/29 when it will become clear that there is no majority for No Deal Brexit, no majority for delaying Brexit ergo there has to be a default majority for the May deal.  All the stuff she will be up to talking to the EU is just a smokescreen of showing that "she is trying to get a new better deal."

No the UK could not decide unilaterally. It would require all 27 EU countries to agree, and they have said they wouldn’t extend unless there was a clear plan that a deal could be agreed within that time, which is fair.  Hence why the Cooper amendment was no less pie in the sky than asking the EU to renegotiate the WA.

Yes that does seem to be her plan, the question is will parliament back her deal at the last minute? That’s a gamble that based on current evidence I wouldn’t want to touch with a barge pole.

[Middle-aged Europe]

I do have a question:  Say The the Cooper amendment which would extend Article 50 to 12/31/19 passed.  Is that something that the UK decide unilaterally?  Even if it passed would not the EU have to agree to that as well ? 

Yes. But EU representatives seemed to be open to the idea... certainly more open than renegotiating the deal with May. From the EU's perspective it would give the UK time to get their sh**t straight (in whatever way this would happen), while postponing a hard Brexit.

Overall it seems May's strategy is still to get her original deal passed by waiting until the night of 3/29 when it will become clear that there is no majority for No Deal Brexit, no majority for delaying Brexit ergo there has to be a default majority for the May deal.  All the stuff she will be up to talking to the EU is just a smokescreen of showing that "she is trying to get a new better deal."

Yes, although it's a gamble for the lack of a better strategy. Can we really rule out the possibility that the House of Commons will vote in favour of a extension a week before the March 29? Or that majority of MPs start to act in an even more irrational manner and continue to oppose both  the deal with the EU and an extension of the deadline, despite the fact that they also oppose a no-deal Brexit?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

We can't really rule anything out, and that's part of the problem. No one has a clue what's going, including and especially the people making the decisions.

[Silent Hunter]

We can't really rule anything out, and that's part of the problem. No one has a clue what's going, including and especially the people making the decisions.

A serious question that has to be asked is how quickly can we 'recover' from a No Deal situation i.e. revert to pre-existing customs procedures?

[pilskonzept]

We can't really rule anything out, and that's part of the problem. No one has a clue what's going, including and especially the people making the decisions.

A serious question that has to be asked is how quickly can we 'recover' from a No Deal situation i.e. revert to pre-existing customs procedures?

As quickly as you can hold a second referendum.

(Unless the No Deal is bad enough that a cross-party consensus emerges for rejoining CU/SM - i.e. Norway - but I'm not sure we should wish for that to happen.)

[Blair]

We can't really rule anything out, and that's part of the problem. No one has a clue what's going, including and especially the people making the decisions.

A serious question that has to be asked is how quickly can we 'recover' from a No Deal situation i.e. revert to pre-existing customs procedures?

Some estimates I've seen have said we'd have 12-18 weeks of serious delays at the border, both due to increased checks and the pile up that these checks would cause.

If there is a No Deal the Government would collapse. A Government with a majority would collapse if they had food and medical shortages, along with the huge hit that councils and local government would face.

We can't really rule anything out, and that's part of the problem. No one has a clue what's going, including and especially the people making the decisions.

A serious question that has to be asked is how quickly can we 'recover' from a No Deal situation i.e. revert to pre-existing customs procedures?

As quickly as you can hold a second referendum.

(Unless the No Deal is bad enough that a cross-party consensus emerges for rejoining CU/SM - i.e. Norway - but I'm not sure we should wish for that to happen.)

A high enough number of Tory MPs have said they'd rebel and bring down the government if they pursue no-deal, of course the problem is that we're trusting that people on the Government payroll would join them and also resign- the vote this week showed that some Labour MPs are happy to bail the govt out.

[Sir Mohamed]

We can't really rule anything out, and that's part of the problem. No one has a clue what's going, including and especially the people making the decisions.

A serious question that has to be asked is how quickly can we 'recover' from a No Deal situation i.e. revert to pre-existing customs procedures?

As quickly as you can hold a second referendum.

(Unless the No Deal is bad enough that a cross-party consensus emerges for rejoining CU/SM - i.e. Norway - but I'm not sure we should wish for that to happen.)

There is not going to be a second referendum in the near future. Neither the Tories nor Labor under Corbyn have interest to do so. The Tories are too divided and the Brexit hardliners would break up the govt. Maybe Labor would support one, if a Blair-style leader was still around.

[MABA 2020]

We can't really rule anything out, and that's part of the problem. No one has a clue what's going, including and especially the people making the decisions.

A serious question that has to be asked is how quickly can we 'recover' from a No Deal situation i.e. revert to pre-existing customs procedures?

As quickly as you can hold a second referendum.

(Unless the No Deal is bad enough that a cross-party consensus emerges for rejoining CU/SM - i.e. Norway - but I'm not sure we should wish for that to happen.)

There is not going to be a second referendum in the near future. Neither the Tories nor Labor under Corbyn have interest to do so. The Tories are too divided and the Brexit hardliners would break up the govt. Maybe Labor would support one, if a Blair-style leader was still around.

Even if Labour had a Blair style leader there's too many Labour MPs in leave constituencies for the party to fully back a second referendum. Labour's number one concern is winning the next election

[Lumine]

If Parliament can only get a 318-310 majority for a symbolic, non-binding resolution against a no-Deal Brexit it does seem rather clear there isn't a chance of a parliamentary majority for a second referendum nor any indications Corbyn is about to cave on the issue (which still wouldn't make the 2nd Ref likely, just less implausible), much less May (who has been proven to preference her party not breaking up at the end of the day). Plus the clock has moved enough to make it too late for one unless Article 50 was extended, say, all the way to December.

[OSR stands with Israel]

We can't really rule anything out, and that's part of the problem. No one has a clue what's going, including and especially the people making the decisions.

A serious question that has to be asked is how quickly can we 'recover' from a No Deal situation i.e. revert to pre-existing customs procedures?

As quickly as you can hold a second referendum.

(Unless the No Deal is bad enough that a cross-party consensus emerges for rejoining CU/SM - i.e. Norway - but I'm not sure we should wish for that to happen.)

There is not going to be a second referendum in the near future. Neither the Tories nor Labor under Corbyn have interest to do so. The Tories are too divided and the Brexit hardliners would break up the govt. Maybe Labor would support one, if a Blair-style leader was still around.

If a Blair Type was still the leader , Labour would lead by 15-20 points in the polls

[Intell]

We can't really rule anything out, and that's part of the problem. No one has a clue what's going, including and especially the people making the decisions.

A serious question that has to be asked is how quickly can we 'recover' from a No Deal situation i.e. revert to pre-existing customs procedures?

As quickly as you can hold a second referendum.

(Unless the No Deal is bad enough that a cross-party consensus emerges for rejoining CU/SM - i.e. Norway - but I'm not sure we should wish for that to happen.)

There is not going to be a second referendum in the near future. Neither the Tories nor Labor under Corbyn have interest to do so. The Tories are too divided and the Brexit hardliners would break up the govt. Maybe Labor would support one, if a Blair-style leader was still around.

If a Blair Type was still the leader , Labour would lead by 15-20 points in the polls

Definetly not, lol. Labour would be near destroyed if a blair-type was the leader. This not the 1990's/2000's.

[pilskonzept]

Any new referendum on joining anything is only going to happen after Brexit, obviously.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

We can't really rule anything out, and that's part of the problem. No one has a clue what's going, including and especially the people making the decisions.

A serious question that has to be asked is how quickly can we 'recover' from a No Deal situation i.e. revert to pre-existing customs procedures?

As quickly as you can hold a second referendum.

(Unless the No Deal is bad enough that a cross-party consensus emerges for rejoining CU/SM - i.e. Norway - but I'm not sure we should wish for that to happen.)

There is not going to be a second referendum in the near future. Neither the Tories nor Labor under Corbyn have interest to do so. The Tories are too divided and the Brexit hardliners would break up the govt. Maybe Labor would support one, if a Blair-style leader was still around.

If a Blair Type was still the leader , Labour would lead by 15-20 points in the polls

The trouble is the EU issue is always going to be an albatross around the neck of any such person. Heck, we're in an odd position when Corbyn actually represents the moderate ground on Brexit while the "Right" is hopelessly divided between FBPE types and neo-Gaitskellites, both of which would clearly alienate a substantial chunk of Labour's cadre and/or base.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

A 'Blair-type' leader would... not be what you all seem to be assuming, in any case. He was, in his prime at least, an extremely 'electoralist', even populist, figure, often to the point of a very strange form of 'the People have I spoken; I am their leader; I must follow them' dogmatism.

[Antonio the Sixth]

There is no more constituency for the substance of Blair's politics (his political style is, as Al points out, as old as politics itself) in the 2019 UK than there is a constituency for DLC politics in the 2019 US. That's one of the few things both sides are united in hating.

[Angel of Death]

FWIW, those who voted for both the Spelman and Brady amendments were:

Conservative:
Nick Boles
Jeremy Lefroy
Oliver Letwin
Mark Pawsey
Caroline Spelman
Edward Vaizey
Labour:
Ian Austin
Kevin Barron
Jim Fitzpatrick
Roger Godsiff
John Mann
Independent:
Stephen Lloyd

[An American Tail: Fubart Goes West]

Labour and Tory MPs in talks over setting up new centrist party

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Zaybay]

Labour and Tory MPs in talks over setting up new centrist party

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The Labour Party should be quaking in its boots. They might lose 6 members!

[rc18]

6 members may be ready to jump, but also according to the reports there's perhaps a dozen more helping out behind the scenes who might eventually go.

Still it's stupid, they will get squished even more so than the SDP did, this ain't no gang of four.

[Former President tack50]

Labour and Tory MPs in talks over setting up new centrist party

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why not simply join the Lib Dems outright?