desensitized43

54 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

Excuse my ignorance,  but what's wrong with Corbyn? 

To the tories, DUP or to me?

To the tories he wants to undo 30 years of Thatcherite policy of privatisation of pretty much our entire national infrastructure.

To the DUP he's pretty much Satan-made-flesh because he dared to speak to the IRA decades before it became government policy to do so.

To me, he's a relic of a bygone era. I like a lot of what he says and does but you can't just wish away the modern capitalist world. He's a fantasist but he's not entirely wrong.

7 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

Just got in and seen the result ...So much for Tory’s gonna Tory

 

was I closest with 206 ?

Got to wonder what the margin of defeat would have been if she'd gone for it in December. No wonder she pulled it last minute as she'd have definitely lost the party vonc with that scale of defeat. The only reason she'll be allowed to go on is because the tories are terrified if comrade corbyn. Hardly a ringing endorsement from your own lot. 

86 because cowards gonna be cowardly

22 minutes ago, Genie said:

Thanks for that.

I think the last line is telling, whatever we do will be worse than the current arrangement. Are MP's holding off approving TM's deal because they are pushing for no Brexit at all, is that their end game?

If its because its not as good as today then they'll never be happy.

There's a multitude of different reasons why some of them don't like it. Some of them want to stay in, some of them want to have another vote, some of them want to force a no deal scenario, the DUP want to take out the bits about the backstop and the irish border, some of them want a deal but with a closer relationship, some of them want a deal but with a less close relationship, some of them want to force a general election, some of them don't like that NI is being treated differently to their part of the UK.

When you list all the different view/factions/agenda's it becomes quite easy to see why May was always onto a fools errand and Cameron decided to ride off into the sunset.

16 minutes ago, Genie said:

In which way? (I'm not trying to be clever btw, genuinely interested as to me it seems alright considering where we are).

It keeps us tied in perpetuity to rules and regulations on tariffs and goods standards we'll have no say at all in making, made by those who might not have our best interests at heart anymore. If the backstop comes into force it'll essentially mean a part of the country has been economically annexed. We'll be paying £39 billion for no other reason than to enter "best endeavours" trade discussions. We'll potentially be unable to conduct an independant trade policy as we'll be tied to the aforementioned rules on standards and tariffs.

Democratically-speaking it's awful. All the arguments from the (in my opinion) sensible non-racist Brexiteers about the whole thing being about "sovereignty of our parliament" will be completely bogus as we'll be less sovereign under this agreement. 

Edit: In defence of the agreement it probably will stave off economic armageddon, but imo the price is too high and it's a million times worse than the current arrangement.

1 hour ago, snowychap said:

 

Seems I was right first time and should've ignored Ian Dunt's tweets about it - but given that he was listening to it and I wasn't, I'd have thought I was on safe ground.

Anyway, apparently she did go through with the Welsh bit but with this one amendment:

 

Jess Philips correctly pointed out that even the amended version is factually incorrect as the people of Birmingham rejected a city mayor and one was imposed by parliament anyway.

Just now, Chindie said:

She's trying to scare Brexiteers into backing her deal, that's all. 'If you don't back me, you might not get anything at all and will lose this golden opportunity!'. It won't work, but it might win a couple of extra supporters and make her defeat tomorrow look slightly less bad.

It'll also set the tone for when she inevitably makes this deal get voted on again down the line.

She can't just ask the same question again and again. Parliament already voted. She's subverting the will of Parliament. It's anti-democratic. Shall we have a 'best of 3' votes?

33 minutes ago, bickster said:

May is saying that voting her deal down is more likely to lead to no Brexit than no deal. Oh well

Funny that only a few days ago she was telling the other side that voting it down meant no deal, so which is it? She'll say anything she has to say. Pathetic

15 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Just to humour this, what exactly do you think would have happened if Corbyn had chosen this morning to announce his this new Remain policy?

A lot of right wing newspapers would have published articles denouncing him as a borderline communist who can't be trusted to be PM. Pretty much the same as every other day, except those of us who wanted to remain in the EU and those on the other side that want to leave but can't countenance "no deal" wouldn't have to waste our vote at the next time there's a GE.

2 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

I hope you're right. I'd imagine though that many of them see it that they won the vote once and now, unlike then when they had everything to win, have everything to lose.

This is how I see it as well. If they have another vote and it goes against them they instantly lose their "will of the people" arguments overnight.

36 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

On which topic, I see that members of his constituency party have begun the process of deselecting Nick Boles . . .

. . . which might be a bit of a double-edged sword? I mean, on the one hand sure, certainly makes clear that the cost of stepping out of line here is your Conservative career. On the other hand, if they're making clear that any break with orthodoxy is going to be punished by deselection, what have these guys got to lose?

 

That letter can't possibly be genuine, surely? It's atrociously written. He needs to fire his proofreader forthwith!

5 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

I don't understand the outrage.

The fact that it passed showed there was demand for it. It's the essence of democracy. 

Silence, traitor. Will of the people!

7 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Government loses again. 308 to 297

However this shambles all ends up, this Parliamentary bit of it is all very funny.

If you want funny go and take a look at the Leave Means Leave facebook page. Lots of threats to take Bercow to the tower and [insert medieval torture method here]

...and the amendment passes. Surely this increases the likelihood that the meaningful vote will be delayed again. They won't want to have the vote knowing they only have 3 days to draw up a "Plan B"

Looks like bedlam in the Commons again. Grieve has tabled an amendment that means once the meaningful vote happens, and is inevitably rejected, the Government has to return within 3 days to tell everyone where they plan to go next. Bercow accepted the amendment and a lot of the Tories are going mental about it. That about sum it up?

Seems like a sensible precaution for the speaker of the house to take when it's obvious to all that the Government are deliberately stalling for time in order to make their dog's dinner deal look better, when it would see us either held to rules that we had no hand in making in perpetuity, or the economic annexation of a part of the UK. They're complaining about him not being impartial but it's difficult to be when his job is to uphold the integrity of the house and the Government are intent in sidelining it at every opportunity or holding a revolver to its member's heads.

56 minutes ago, snowychap said:

May option unpopular in Tory three-way

 

I'd be interested to know some of the demographic breakdowns of tory party members by gender/age/wealth etc.

22 minutes ago, Chindie said:

The t&cs for that ferry company that doesn't have any ferries that totally, totally, definitely are going to save us from no deal chaos have been copied from a takeaway delivery website.

They definitely aren't trying anymore.

Standard government policy of awarding a tender to the lowest bidder and then act surprised when the project runs over time/budget or the company turn out to be incompetent blaggers.

https://news.sky.com/story/david-davis-the-closer-we-are-to-no-deal-the-better-the-chance-of-a-good-deal-11597480

Entirely predictable this is going to be delayed again and again. Utter cowardice and maliciousness.

Quote

The former Brexit secretary David Davis has urged Theresa May to further delay the "meaningful vote" on her proposed Brexit deal in order to increase pressure on the EU and MPs.

The vote was originally due in December, but was delayed when it became clear the prime minister's proposals would be rejected. It is now due in the week beginning 14 January.

Writing in The Daily Telegraph, Mr Davis said it could be put back again if the parliamentary numbers remain against the PM.

They're calling the army in apparently. Been wondering all day why they didn't just get some snipers in and blow them out of the sky.

I'd bet money this is some environmental group. News saying the drones they're using aren't cheap ones. Bloody hippies!

58 minutes ago, snowychap said:

 

That's some top-notch preparation for 'no deal' right there!

18 minutes ago, bickster said:

Oh and feminist Jezza appears to have mouthed stupid woman about Theresa May after PMQs today.

EDIT: having now seen it, there's no way the second word is woman, the first word is stupid but the second word definitely isn't woman. Not guilty in the court of Bicks

Regardless of what he did or didn't say the tories have some gall pretending to be on the side of "women in parliament" when they restored the whip to 2 MP's under investigation for sexual misconduct so they could cast their vote for Maybot.

Unfortunately, Corbyn is too gutless/useless to fight his corner and point out the huge hypocrisy in the whole sorry affair.

1 hour ago, NurembergVillan said:

**** idiots.  Theresa May ought to be burned at the **** stake.

She really is a despicable piece of human garbage.

1 hour ago, bickster said:

Single Transferable Vote is the best / most democratic option. Two-stage questions are meaningless and over complicated

The two stage question also creates a massive legitimacy issue. 

Assume the first stage is identical to the first referendum result 48-52.

So of the 52 percent who get to vote again on the second question the result is equally close 48-52 in favour of coming out with no agreement. That means only a little over a quarter of the population are leading nearly 75% who are getting their undesired outcome. It's quite possibly the worst way to do a vote.

14 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said:

In her defence I see Juncker was employing the old 'keep hand on upper arm to exert control' move, straight from the Trump Art of Persuasion ABC Handbook. It's just a good job the camera went out before he moved on to the full p*ssy grab!

I did notice that actually and thought it was odd. Kind of indicative of how little power May has over even the most basic of confrontations. The whole thing is embarrassing.