Politics, politics, politics

[ShipOfTheseus]

Yeah, that's where I got it from. So Mogg and the boys could still tell her "choose Canada" and she could go to the EU with that, everyone says yes...bar Labour, SNP, Lib Dems, The Green...and "Tory rebels."

Labour will probably vote down whatever the deal is because to get one that passes those 6 tests is nigh on impossible, but that's what they have maintained needs to happen from the beginning. "Tory Rebels" are all fannies bar Ken Clarke, so they can't be relied on to actually rebel. ERG MPs will vote down anything 'softer' than Canada deal. Right?

The ERG aren't homogeneous. Maybe 20 will vote against anything softer than Canada. Maybe 20 are in the Gove camp: they'll vote through anything that means we're out. That leaves 40 in between those positions.

Meanwhile, there are quite a few Labour MPs who can't be trusted to go with the whip on voting down a deal.

Fudge has got a fair old chance, and of course even though we end up faced with a very similar choice in 2020, the revoke and remain option will no longer be on the table for a referendum. Which is why the wording Labour accepts at conference on a people's vote is so important.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Lib Dems will oppose May's Chequers plan - Cable

• 16 September 2018

If Theresa May strikes a Brexit deal with Brussels based on her Chequers plan the Liberal Democrats will oppose it, Sir Vince Cable has warned.

"We are not going to buy it," the Lib Dem leader told a fringe meeting at his party's conference to loud applause.

He said the party's 12 MPs - with one exception - were "solid" in their determination to stop Brexit.

Stephen Lloyd MP voted Remain but has vowed to respect the wishes of his Leave-voting Eastbourne constituents.

Mr Cable said he hoped to persuade Mr Lloyd to change his mind before the "meaningful" vote promised to MPs on the terms of any Brexit deal.

Downing Street believes it can get Mrs May's Chequers plan - which would see the UK obeying single market rules for goods after Brexit - through Parliament, despite opposition from many Conservative MPs.

Mr Cable, who was business secretary in David Cameron's coalition government, said the Chequers deal had an "enormous hole in it" because it did not include services - which make up 80% of the British economy.

The Chequers plan was a "second best solution" to the issue of frictionless trade in goods but was based on a "very, very complicated mechanism," he added.

And Mr Cable said he could not vote for it even if the government claimed the only alternative was a no deal Brexit because there are "better alternatives".

Sir Vince, who is campaigning for a referendum on the final Brexit deal, said: "We're absolutely solid that we need to vote against Brexit and stop it."

In other conference developments:

• Party members backed a policy that would allow migrant spouses an entitlement to benefits from their first day in the UK - without any form of means testing.
• The party also backed a complete ban on single-use plastics within three years.
• Deputy leader and former minister Jo Swinson admitted the party had "lost too many arguments" with their Conservative coalition partners and said "when they fought dirty, we were too nice".
• Sir Vince ruled out going into coalition with Labour or the Conservatives in the near future.

Speaking at an earlier meeting, Mr Cable warned the world economy "could well" be heading for a serious crash within the "next 18 months to two years".

The Lib Dem leader - who famously predicted the 2008 financial crash - warned about "dangerously high" levels of debt in the UK economy.

And it was "difficult to see" major economies coming together to tackle any crisis as they did in 2008 with the current political climate, he added.

The Lib Dem leader is also calling for the creation of a £100bn "citizens fund" to protect the UK from future economic crises by bolstering the public finances.

The fund could be built up through taxes on the rich and the sale of state assets, such as the UK stake in Royal Bank of Scotland, he argues.

 

[the dza]

The ERG aren't homogeneous. Maybe 20 will vote against anything softer than Canada. Maybe 20 are in the Gove camp: they'll vote through anything that means we're out. That leaves 40 in between those positions.

Meanwhile, there are quite a few Labour MPs who can't be trusted to go with the whip on voting down a deal.

Fudge has got a fair old chance, and of course even though we end up faced with a very similar choice in 2020, the revoke and remain option will no longer be on the table for a referendum. Which is why the wording Labour accepts at conference on a people's vote is so important.

What do you think the fudge will be that passes in Parliament and is good with the EU? My brain hurts trying to think of one.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

What do you think the fudge will be that passes in Parliament and is good with the EU? My brain hurts trying to think of one.

If they can box us into a Norway type deal the EU will be tinkling themselves.

The real hang up, then, is free movement of people - something they have deliberately been inflexible on.

My guess is thats the bit where they are waiting for May to crack. She wont be able to carry on as is- but some pathetic work around wouldnt surprise me at all. Perhaps fast-tracked visa that are applied after a citizen has come in anyway or something. The idea we get to process it, but the reality that very little has actually changed.

 

[ShipOfTheseus]

What do you think the fudge will be that passes in Parliament and is good with the EU? My brain hurts trying to think of one.

One that commits both parties to solving the trade, compliance and governance problem in the transition period, and has a backstop which - on the face of it - commits both parties to complicated, invisible border mechanisms in Ireland, some of those at land and some of those at sea, which can in turn be deferred or swapped for pork barrels when they turn out to be unrealistic.

 

[the dza]

If they can box us into a Norway type deal the EU will be tinkling themselves.

The real hang up, then, is free movement of people - something they have deliberately been inflexible on.

My guess is thats the bit where they are waiting for May to crack. She wont be able to carry on as is- but some pathetic work around wouldnt surprise me at all. Perhaps fast-tracked visa that are applied after a citizen has come in anyway or something. The idea we get to process it, but the reality that very little has actually changed.

The EU might like that position, but would it get through Parliament? Surely too many Tories would vote against it.

 

[the dza]

One that commits both parties to solving the trade, compliance and governance problem in the transition period, and has a backstop which - on the face of it - commits both parties to complicated, invisible border mechanisms in Ireland, some of those at land and some of those at sea, which can in turn be deferred or swapped for pork barrels when they turn out to be unrealistic.

Is this what Chequers actually is?

 

[ShipOfTheseus]

The EU might like that position, but would it get through Parliament? Surely too many Tories would vote against it.

Yep, agreed, Norway (or Norway + with CU membership) wouldn't get past the ERG. It has a chance of passing Labour's six tests and winning a Westminster majority, though. Maybe not to be discounted as the 2020 settlement.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Fudge has got a fair old chance, and of course even though we end up faced with a very similar choice in 2020, the revoke and remain option will no longer be on the table for a referendum. Which is why the wording Labour accepts at conference on a people's vote is so important.

That's why the ERG won't vote down Chequers. Get this out of the way and there can be another 21 months of Ukraine vs Canada. But only Ukraine vs Canada - everything else will be permanently off the table

This is the last thing Corbyn also has to survive pretending he's not a staunch leaver. Be ambiguous for 6-8 more weeks and he gets his long desired Brexit, plus his London, Brighton and Bristol metropolitan vote largely intact.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Lib Dems will oppose May's Chequers plan - Cable

• 16 September 2018

If Theresa May strikes a Brexit deal with Brussels based on her Chequers plan the Liberal Democrats will oppose it, Sir Vince Cable has warned.

"We are not going to buy it," the Lib Dem leader told a fringe meeting at his party's conference to loud applause.

He said the party's 12 MPs - with one exception - were "solid" in their determination to stop Brexit.

Stephen Lloyd MP voted Remain but has vowed to respect the wishes of his Leave-voting Eastbourne constituents.

Mr Cable said he hoped to persuade Mr Lloyd to change his mind before the "meaningful" vote promised to MPs on the terms of any Brexit deal.

Downing Street believes it can get Mrs May's Chequers plan - which would see the UK obeying single market rules for goods after Brexit - through Parliament, despite opposition from many Conservative MPs.

Mr Cable, who was business secretary in David Cameron's coalition government, said the Chequers deal had an "enormous hole in it" because it did not include services - which make up 80% of the British economy.

The Chequers plan was a "second best solution" to the issue of frictionless trade in goods but was based on a "very, very complicated mechanism," he added.

And Mr Cable said he could not vote for it even if the government claimed the only alternative was a no deal Brexit because there are "better alternatives".

Sir Vince, who is campaigning for a referendum on the final Brexit deal, said: "We're absolutely solid that we need to vote against Brexit and stop it."

In other conference developments:

• Party members backed a policy that would allow migrant spouses an entitlement to benefits from their first day in the UK - without any form of means testing.
• The party also backed a complete ban on single-use plastics within three years.
• Deputy leader and former minister Jo Swinson admitted the party had "lost too many arguments" with their Conservative coalition partners and said "when they fought dirty, we were too nice".
• Sir Vince ruled out going into coalition with Labour or the Conservatives in the near future.

Speaking at an earlier meeting, Mr Cable warned the world economy "could well" be heading for a serious crash within the "next 18 months to two years".

The Lib Dem leader - who famously predicted the 2008 financial crash - warned about "dangerously high" levels of debt in the UK economy.

And it was "difficult to see" major economies coming together to tackle any crisis as they did in 2008 with the current political climate, he added.

The Lib Dem leader is also calling for the creation of a £100bn "citizens fund" to protect the UK from future economic crises by bolstering the public finances.

The fund could be built up through taxes on the rich and the sale of state assets, such as the UK stake in Royal Bank of Scotland, he argues.

I'm not sure the votes of both their MPs will make that much difference to the maths. The both missed the last series and no one really noticed.

 

[ShipOfTheseus]

Is this what Chequers actually is?

No, Chequers splits goods and services and has a really weird system for handling customs declarations which involves the EU taking UK processes on trust. It's too specific and too impractical to fly as is.

 

[Gutter Boy]

If they can box us into a Norway type deal the EU will be tinkling themselves.

The real hang up, then, is free movement of people - something they have deliberately been inflexible on.

My guess is thats the bit where they are waiting for May to crack. She wont be able to carry on as is- but some pathetic work around wouldnt surprise me at all. Perhaps fast-tracked visa that are applied after a citizen has come in anyway or something. The idea we get to process it, but the reality that very little has actually changed.

I think the ERG will go nuclear on Norway. I think Chequers/Ukraine is their absolute limit.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

The EU might like that position, but would it get through Parliament? Surely too many Tories would vote against it.

I think the ERG will go nuclear on Norway. I think Chequers/Ukraine is their absolute limit.

In both cases, I wouldnt trust any Tory to not put their own promotion ahead of the greater good/idealism.

They are all out for themselves. Just look at Gove, he'll stab May in the back the second he thinks he'll profit from it - regardless of the impact on the country. He is now playing nice and supportive, but already positioning himself for after the dust settles.

 

[the dza]

No, Chequers splits goods and services and has a really weird system for handling customs declarations which involves the EU taking UK processes on trust. It's too specific and too impractical to fly as is.

So you reckon we'll get a Norway-type deal in the end? (Sorry for all the questions but you seem like a clever b*stard and sometimes I don't fully grasp your posts).

I could live with a Norway kind of deal. From the very beginning I thought we'd end up with that as the compromise, where all sides are left unhappy to a degree but the sky doesn't fall in. It's just all these conflicting groups in Parliament that confuses me on what will get voted through.

I hope we end up with a GE sharpish.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I think a Norway deal is a disaster. Even if it does stop the free movement of people.

We will have positioned ourselves as subservient to the EU, which to them is a ridiculous boost.

People like to play it down, but we are a massive asset to the EU, and we will have just given them the keys and told them to drive, we will just be in the back seat.

I would much rather a hard brexit, and whatever follows, than that.

 

[Gutter Boy]

In both cases, I wouldnt trust any Tory to not put their own promotion ahead of the greater good/idealism.

They are all out for themselves. Just look at Gove, he'll stab May in the back the second he thinks he'll profit from it - regardless of the impact on the country. He is now playing nice and supportive, but already positioning himself for after the dust settles.

Gove suggested over the weekend that they could 'Ides of March' May in April and then switch to Canada. But that was over Chequers.

Norway is a much more extreme departure and would tear the party apart, because their membership are much stronger leavers than their MPs.

 

[Gutter Boy]

I hope we end up with a GE sharpish.

There's no point - we'd just get the same result 3rd time in a row.

By 2022 when Brexit is finished, there might for example be a Labour landslide based on domestic policies (renationalisation, scrapping PPIs etc.)

But for now Brexit dominates, so it will mean a barely workable majority for the most leaver party again

 

[ShipOfTheseus]

So you reckon we'll get a Norway-type deal in the end? (Sorry for all the questions but you seem like a clever b*stard and sometimes I don't fully grasp your posts).

I could live with a Norway kind of deal. From the very beginning I thought we'd end up with that as the compromise, where all sides are left unhappy to a degree but the sky doesn't fall in. It's just all these conflicting groups in Parliament that confuses me on what will get voted through.

I hope we end up with a GE sharpish.

If I was clever, I'd be able to set out my thoughts in such a way that they would make sense first time.

No idea what we'll end up with. All sorts of good or horrible things could happen. I think that the only kind of deal which could make it to March would be a rather vague one which defers a lot to the transition agreement, and I think that such a deal is quite likely. And I think that a political consensus over Norway faces just about the same level of difficulty - and solves the problem just as attractively, to a lot of politicians - as a further referendum. Because a referendum would be less effective after March 2019, Norway could well become the preferred option for continuity remain in all Westminster parties.

Another GE could well end up with the Tory majority restored, meaning that the DUP and the union could be jettisoned in favour of CETA. Not what I'd want, personally.

 

[r-u-s-x]

I'm not sure the votes of both their MPs will make that much difference to the maths. The both missed the last series and no one really noticed.

both? - "He said the party's 12 MPs - with one exception - were "solid" in their determination to stop Brexit."

re Norway this would mean no ECJ but EFTA court has ultimate jurisdiction and it also requires free movement outside of "EEA Agreement allows non-EU member states to opt out of the four freedoms if they are facing serious economic, societal or environmental strain." which I guess will be decided by the EFTA court if we try to impose it.

 

[ShipOfTheseus]

I think a Norway deal is a disaster. Even if it does stop the free movement of people.

We will have positioned ourselves as subservient to the EU, which to them is a ridiculous boost.

People like to play it down, but we are a massive asset to the EU, and we will have just given them the keys and told them to drive, we will just be in the back seat.

I would much rather a hard brexit, and whatever follows, than that.

Norway has a place at the table when trade issues are discussed. The narrative about "subservience" is jingoistic nonsense.

Fortunately, the number of people in public life who take your position is declining. The ERG's failure to agree on a no-deal policy platform, and industry's collective decision to go public about the lunacy of no deal (government relations notwithstanding) have left the hard brexit option as the preserve of cranks, hobbyists, and the Daily Telegraph.