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

May skulking off = quality television/guilty feet ain’t got no rhythm

Either Corbyn knows something we don't about the Parliamentary arithmetic or this is designed to fail and this is the start of the mechanism that leads to Labour supporting a second referendum.

― Matt DC, Monday, December 17, 2018 7:45 PM (fifty-seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Very state of this implies the latter. It's that or a big blunder (tho I'd love to be wrong on this).

Idk, it just seems like another gallon of oil onto a fire already way too big to even control. A gallon of oil won't make a whole lot of difference. S'pose Jezza could say he was there and contributed to it, but idk, what's 12d chess the long game here

Annoying furnur speaking:

Jeremy Corbyn has said Labour will table a motion of no confidence in Theresa May personally because she has delayed the vote on her Brexit deal. This is not the same as a proper motion of no confidence in the government and, unlike a proper motion of no confidence, the government does not have to allow time for it to be debated. Labour could hold a debate on the motion when it next gets allocated a day for an opposition debate, at some point in the new year, or it may never get put to a vote at all. (Labour sources have so far not clarified this point.) But the Labour party is arguing that, if the government does not allow time for a debate itself, that shows it is scared of losing and that May does not have the confidence of the Commons.

I love stuff like this. And the scimitar in parliament. And no-one knowing fuck-all if a vote can be postponed, and if so by who, by what terms etc. You need the greatest experts (..) in democracy to explain what is or isn't possible. This is not good.

Sky Sources: the Government will not grant time in Parliament for Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn's motion of no-confidence in Prime Minister Theresa May

— Sky News Breaking (@SkyNewsBreak) December 17, 2018

I don't think they can possibly win a motion of no-confidence, it would be electoral suicide for the Tories to go to the country now. I suspect Matt DC is OTM.

Either Corbyn knows something we don't about the Parliamentary arithmetic or this is designed to fail and this is the start of the mechanism that leads to Labour supporting a second referendum.

― Matt DC, Monday, December 17, 2018 1:45 PM (two hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

someone explain to me how the second possibility goes down

first, labour opens a jerry can of petrol
it then pours "liberally" all over itself
it then looks around at the several million people hastily lighting matches
???
profit!!

xp They've said (after much arm-twisting) that they'd support a referendum if they can't force a general election - the probably can't do the second, thus the first.

I mean, they have also said a lot of things, as is both strategy and tactics, but this seems fairly from-the-top

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/28/labour-seize-second-brexit-vote-option-john-mcdonnell

Odds of forcing ref 2 not much better if they can't force a general election

They can’t force a GE now, chances are better in January. They can try more than once, Thatcher took three goes at Callaghan before she brought his government down.

all this increased talk of no deal planning being ramped up is extremely comforting

Listen, pal. the medicines are being stockpiled,what else do you want?

There are already Tory calls for a second ref, and ofc you only need 7.

Stuff their mouths with gold...

Hunt / Javid / Mordaunt wanting to look like they're doing it on purpose isn't a good look either

Willingness to seriously countenance no-deal should ordinarily be disqualifying from all high office. It appears to an essential qualification for the next Tory leader.https://t.co/6FBKXWSmMU

— Matthew O'Toole (@MatthewOToole2) December 15, 2018

blame st treesa. 'no deal is better than a bad deal' is the sine qua non for the normalisation of no deal as a viable prospect

They can't force a General Election, but there are enough Tory MPs who would break the party whip to prevent No Deal who would never even consider doing so in a No Confidence vote against their own government. If Labour did officially back a second referendum then they would very likely have the Parliamentary votes which makes it a direct challenge to May's authority.

I think Stephen Bush called it wrong when it said he thought Labour were running the clock down and waiting for the politics to get clearer, when yesterday's events do the opposite. The entire May plan now, perhaps the only plan, is to run the clock down, spook enough Labour MPs with the threat of No Deal that they break their own whip and her deal gets through Parliament, hence the recent appeals to bipartisanship and noises about a free vote.

That's extremely high risk on May's part for all sorts of reasons because if the numbers don't get better for her wrt Tory votes then only the hardcore Brexit Labour MPs will see any value in breaking the whip. But if it did succeed it would both keep Corbyn out of Number 10 until 2022 and undermine his authority in the process. Corbyn knows that hence trying to bring forward the Meaningful Vote.

FWIW I don't think May would have succeeded in this obviously batshit plan but I can see why Labour are looking to close the avenue off.

I saw something by Stephen Bush a week ago that the so-called game is for May to get the other side to blink first (in a rough way - she can't do the politics to make the other side feel they are being spoken to in a grown-up manner), except that all the rival groups at Westminster are doing the same thing.

I thought it was established last week that No Deal is now a complete paper tiger. Not that I don't expect May's tactical game to be absolutely desperate + craven idiocy at this point.

I wouldn't discount anything out. 20% chance of it happening, but I just made that up.

remind again how no deal is avoided using the grieve amendment? parliament has meaningful vote on may deal, this is rejected, MPs then have an opportunity to put down their own suggestions for debate?

The pessimistic view is that even with the Grieve amendment every alternative proposal could be voted down leading to deadlock and No Deal. But someone will probably blink first, just depends who.

The Grieve amendment says that in the event of the deal being voted down the Govt has 21 days to propose the next step, which parliament can vote down before it is taken forward as the new plan.

It doesn't do anything to unlock an impasse - even if we ignore the 21 day provision on the basis of time, anything which couldn't command a majority would conceivably have no chance of being approved which is EVERY FUCKING OPTION.

I think May's plan, if there is one, might be looking like what happened with House of Lords reform. Every option that went forward got voted down, then by eliminating competing options only the original proposal was left as best viable.

The order options are voted on becomes crucial. It's not hard to see a scenario where:

Cancel A50 (rejected majority Tories, DUP, majority Labour)
2nd Ref (rejected majority Tories, DUP, split Labour)
Norway+ (rejected split Tories, split Labour, SNP, LD)
No Deal (rejected split Tories, Lab, SNP, LD)
Maybot deal only thing left not ruled out by parliament.

You have to rule out 2nd Ref before no deal, because you need to eliminate the possible winners first and they will get voted down while less favoured niche unicorns exist.

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?

from now on we just circle through them voting them down one by one forever

under that scoring system the maybot deal should also have rejected: everyone across from it

i hear yere press are heckling our ambassador now durin speeches

jaysus lads

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.