one out all out: a brexit from the modern world and every one of its problems please (we're all gonna die lol)

breaking news: our press is very bad

Surely the fact that a) the ECJ has ruled that the UK can unilaterally revoke A50, plus b) there is a clear parliamentary majority against no deal, means that no deal is an impossibility? ie if we're on the verge of no-deal, there will be a successful vote of no confidence in the government and whatever takes its place will have to revoke A50

Really want to know which UK journalist heckled the Irish ambassador with "Brexit!" and "boring". pic.twitter.com/NHUVF4qDKG

— Richard Chambers (@newschambers) December 18, 2018

Sounds like Julia Hartley-Fuckwit or Isabel Oakeshott.

No fucking manners these English!

I don't really follow how that works given that the Maybot deal will already have been voted down by the time the Grieve debate even begins?

I think it's because (as with the HoL proposals) it pre-dates the voting process so comes back into play when the alternatives are discounted.

There's not going to be a majority for anything until a reasonable sized chunk of MPs realise their personal preference isn't available any more and I doubt that'll happen until the very last minute. Still think May's deal is the most likely option.

a50 revoke won't happen because that means revoking brexit itself. the EU has been clear that they will not accept a "temporary" revocation to play for time.

At this point I just want the possibility of a People's Vote destroyed completely so that awful hashtag dies down - why can't I even get that for xmas?

It’s not too late to admit a managed no-deal Brexit is a dangerous fiction
Gaby Hinsliff

BREAKING: Government tells citizens to start preparing for no-deal Brexit as Cabinet agrees to ramp up preparations. Public service announcements to be made in the coming weeks. No10 spokesman: “These are the actions of a sensible government to ensure people are prepared.”

— Kevin Schofield (@PolhomeEditor) December 18, 2018

xp Yerself and NV are certainly putting in the hard yards to being "you seething" up above "possibility of not crippling my two favourite countries" as reasons I'd be happy to see the vote.

anyone declaredly pro the PV has i think to announce (i) what their favoured questions or choices are, and (ii) how they plan to ensure they're on the ballot -- that it's not for example just a choice between maydeal and no deal (which is presumably what the govt will be pushing for)

(you may well have done this andrew but it is by no means general and remains a basic tactical and strategic failing of the push for a PV, at least as practical politics as opposed to magic thinking)

I get that Ireland is a favourite country - what's the other one? Its not the UK is it? xp

Kirsty Blackman was on PM last week as an official PV delegate and said their ballot options were to remain in the EU and the May deal, with the latter only added when pushed that there had to be at least a choice on the ballot. Rejected completely any other options being there.

I'm assuming xyzzz posted those two next to one another because they're supposed to contradict each other but they don't, the idea of any kind of managed or organised no deal is bollocks, the "preparation" the government is making won't even touch the sides.

It doesn't matter anyway, it's all vapid political theatre, the government has taken the wheel and is driving deliberately at the cliff in order to persuade its opponents to back down.

xxp It is of course - I've lived here for 13 years now.

Yeah, I completely agree Mark (and I did some of that upthread), I do not have a massive amount of faith in it, but what are the good alternatives?

In other words, xpost to myself, I don't think the PV campaign has given the ballot any thought at all other than 'call the whole thing off'.

Can anyone weigh up the relative complexity of working out what goes on a ballot paper vs rewriting every single element of the UK's international trade policy from scratch?

Matt - not so much contradiction - but saying what most of us know (that you can't manage no-deal) isn't going to stop the government from trying to.

Right now its theatre - until the moment that it could of course become reality. They will ofc fail to manage any of this.

the good alternative is the refashioning of all uk political institutions from scratch (and also the EU) but i agree that is unlikely to be achieved by 14 jan either

Its nice that you like it here Andrew. In some ways I envy that. I've lived here for 25 years and I'd say its the same shit as the other couple of countries I kinda know: you've got to pay rent and your enemies aren't in camps.

Of all the things they hate, the DUP must _surely_ hate No Deal most of all, no? And would, regardless of the dread fear of Corbyn, bring down the government to stop it.

The fact they are not means they either must think (like everyone else) that this is a ludicrous (and wasteful) May bluff, or, fuck, shruggy-emoji where the duppers are involved.

The DUP’s opinions are immaterial; you’d imagine there’s more than 7 Tory MPs who would vote against any no deal scenario. I would have trust in this rather than counting on DUP votes. Why would they hate no deal? No deal = hard border.

agreed that DUP are immaterial and disagreed that they are in any way predictable or sane actors

Hah, that's fair enough, xyzzzz__ - goals vmic - and obviously my love for it has taking a kicking over the last few years.

(my love for Ireland doesn't mean I think it's perfect either - I've just been worse at keeping up on the various barefaced cynicism in the politics there)

This is all afaict a bluff - 3500 troops for the whole country? £2bn preparation? Lolno - and there’s probably no better time than for Corbyn to put down a losing no confidence motion.

The DUP matter because I can’t see 7 Tories bringing down their own government. (I can see them voting for a ref, but the govt can stop that coming to a vote unlike a no-conf)

Is the government admitting that May's deal is shit and they are back at "no deal is better than a bad deal"? I'm sure a couple of weeks ago we were hearing that any deal was better than no deal?

Xp if they believed no deal was a serious threat, I could see enough of them abstaining to move the numbers in Labour’s favour; ia that they would not actually want to be seen to enter the chamber with Corbyn. I believe that a lot more than I would believe the DUP would vote against; time and time again they’ve ignored the wishes of their own voters and stakeholders (such as the business community). They’ll take it to no deal. Most of them are in safe enough seats not to have to care about electoral consequences.

Wtev, opinions vary, I personally think the government is bluffing about no deal and they are using this to bounce people into voting for their deal.

my concern is they’re bluffing until they’re not

The thing that makes me think they’ll force the deal is the moving of the date, the amount earmarked for no deal planning, the tiny amount of army standing by. Less than for the London riots? May knows she’s not getting another deal from the EU, therefore she has to corral MPs into voting it for it by running down the clock and sparking public fear about no deal. None more cynical.

the problem with the gov't bluffing would seem to be that, having promised (legislated?) the meaningful vote, they can't back off their bluff if called on it, right? Like if their majority never bails them out, they can't go "oh j/k we're just implementing the deal, what with the sovereign authority we hold and all"

otoh the economic dislocation will be horrific regardless. why throw money at the issue now

don’t really think that’s in their considerations tbf. I fully believe they’re bluffing as well but so does every man and his dog which increases the risk of noone blinking and then we crash out on 29-03

If the meaningful vote, which is the vote on the deal itself on the 14th Jan fails, then aiui this then rubs smack into the EU deadline of the 21st January. Markets will panic and in theory, assuming there’s no extension to Article 50, then this leaves the government out of time to bring an alternative (I think this fucks the Grieve amendment but this is soooo convoluted I’m not even going to attempt to work this out) and this I think thrn means without some sort of extension or w/e that the UK leaves without a deal.

Given this was going to fail last week, May is imo running down the clock to try to spook enough MPs into voting for it. It’s like the January sales where you put the same shit that didn’t sell the previous year out heavily discounted and hope someone desperate for a last minute birthday present will take it off your hands.

Nick Boles, a former minister, has just posted these two messages on Twitter. He is saying that, if Theresa May decided to opt for a no deal (as she implies she will, if her deal gets voted down - although she is reluctant to confirm that with 100% certainty), he will resign the party whip and “vote in any way necessary” to stop that happening. That clearly implies that he would be willing to vote with Labour in a confidence motion.

This is interesting because, if you had to draw up a list of Tory MPs likely to sacrifice their careers in the party in the interests of torpedoing a no-deal Brexit, Boles would not be an obvious candidate for the shortlist. He did vote remain in the referendum, but then he managed Michael Gove’s doomed leadership campaign (not a job that would appeal to most diehard remainers) and he has not been a prominent pro-European rebel in the Commons. He has also been associated recently with the “Norway for now” plan, which at one point was floated as a stepping stone to a Canada-style Brexit in the long term (ie, a fairly hard Brexit).

If Boles feels this way, then there is a good chance that at least six other Tories to two. And that would be about the number needed for May to lose a confidence vote.

Guardian posted this.

Wtev, opinions vary, I personally think the government is bluffing about no deal and they are using this to bounce people into voting for their deal.

― gyac, Tuesday, December 18, 2018 7:11 PM (thirty-three minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This. It's fearmongering 'vote for my deal or vote for chaos'-style. Which is, admittedly, something of a last resort. But then everything seems a last resort tbh.

adam vs professor brian cox pic.twitter.com/UtXZC7zzs6

— a a dril (@demarionunn) December 18, 2018

lol

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/18/rising-homelessness-is-not-due-to-tory-policies-says-james-brokenshire

what is the point of a media that reports such dangerous toxic lies rather than call them out?

he's saying something demonstrably false and not even providing a shred of misleading evidence just invoking the notion of personal perspective. taking this seriously is enabling madness.

look i’m not saying we’d be better off per se if the lung condition that forced brokenshire to step down from his cabinet job had killed him

however

fucking wankers - the graun and that cunt who looks like an 80's geography teacher. You don't need a great imagination (just a basic knowledge of UC/zero hours contracts etc) to see how easy it is to become homeless these days without being addicted to heroin or with serious mental health issues or any other type of "complex" that cunts like Brokenface always insinuate is the root cause of homelessness.it doesn't help that both main parties have been doing their upmost to protect shitty landlords and not build any social housing for decades either.

xxp The article I just read didn't seem to be taking it seriously?

the nerve of the next person that says that the public doesn't treat politicians with enough respect and kindness

i don't enjoy defending the Graun but it's newsworthy that the housing secretary is so out of touch and so blinded by ideology that he's incapable of telling the truth - maybe to himself - about homelessness. it's not like the article doesn't undermine everything Brokenshire says with references to statistics

the guy who makes Scrotum the housing czar saying all homeless people are feckless druggies should be a scandal. But the graun are just cynically using as outrage clickbait.

imo

tbh I only read the Dr R Franicis summary of the article yesterday, and my blood was boiling enough to go any further.

brokenshire's comments are total rubbish, literally worse than nearly every thoughtless conversation about housing and homelessness that's been had on the bus yesterday, and lending them gravitas of serious, neutral newspaper coverage is insulting and dangerous. if the media is supposed to hold the govt to account then when ministers spout dishonest drivel that should be the headline, not impartially presenting the details of the bullshit. the article is way too soft.

it's not like they don't already have the state broadcaster at the ready for neutral coverage for any spurious crap like that already.

if the media is supposed to hold the govt to account