-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
BREXIT |OT| ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Thread starter theaface
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
Because, ultimately, a vote is either "meaningful" or it isn't. The government going to parliament and saying "Here's what we got, take it or crash out with nothing" isn't really giving the commons a meaningful say when one of the two outcomes is nuclear. The rebels are trying to force protections against a no deal scenario, and the Brexiteers are paranoid that it's a covert means to cancel Brexit.
Truth be told, if we get to the pivotal moment in time without any sort of deal, we SHOULD suspend Article 50, or at the very least extend it (with EU consent), but the government isn't driven by pragmatism.
There isn't a compromise. Grieve et al want parliament to decide on what to do if there is no deal. Davies et al want only ministers to have a say.
Dominic Grieve has said there is still time to fix things, which is pretty fucking generous considering what they just done to him...
The EU lol must be looking at this and thinking WTF!! May will literally say anything then change her mind as soon as your back is turned, she is becoming Trump 2.0
The EU lol must be looking at this and thinking WTF!! May will literally say anything then change her mind as soon as your back is turned, she is becoming Trump 2.0
I think part of it is that some of them are only willing to risk their necks if it seems like there's a chance of winning. If Labour hadn't been ordered to abstain on Tuesday then I think more Tory rebels may well have come out in favour of the EEA. But when they know that it's going to pass by a huge margin they figure that it's not worth risking themselves for uselessly.
The thing is, even if you take into account the maybes, the numbers just aren't there. You'd need at least twenty-five Tory MPs willing to vote against the government. I simply don't believe there is that number.
OP
OP
Before any rebellions, you have the following:
Conservatives + DUP = 326
Other parties excluding Sinn Fein = 317
Allowing for Labour rebels Hoey and Field you have:
With government = 328
Against government = 315
To swing the needle the other way and defeat the government, you'd only need 7 rebels:
With government = 321
Against goverment = 322
Obviously this doesn't account for abstentions/absences and the like.
Edit: The Speaker is counted in the 'Other Parties' portion and I'm not sure he votes in Parliament, so the numbers could be marginally out to account for him.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Depends on the subject matter. Hoey and Field are arch Brexiteers on every subject going, whereas some other Labour MPs are in favour of a meaningful vote but opposed to EEA membership, for example. On the meaningful vote which the Grieve drama has focused on this week, I'm only aware of those two who would go against the Labour benches.
Got my first, thanks for bidding for the work but we're unsure about your ability to service our Frankfurt office easily post Brexit so we're going with a European provider. Although it looks like they might subcontract the London and Edinburgh stuff to me.
Edit: and my business is pretty transactional: i.e I do work, implement it and move on but the project end date is August 2019 so there's part of that post Brexit. Annoying it's a big bit of work which would have basically been a good 6 months of work, a lot of which I can do in Edinburgh (aka not dossing in London 4 nights a week)
Edit: and my business is pretty transactional: i.e I do work, implement it and move on but the project end date is August 2019 so there's part of that post Brexit. Annoying it's a big bit of work which would have basically been a good 6 months of work, a lot of which I can do in Edinburgh (aka not dossing in London 4 nights a week)
Generally speaking there's not a good reason for Labour MPs to vote against something that gives Labour MPs more power. :P
Unless you're Hoey, in which case you're not a Labour MP.
As Theaface puts above, the government does not appear to have the numbers to avoid Grieve's amendment passing if it returns to the Commons. Fortunately for them right now they don't actually need to care. They'll presumably let the entire thing stew until a few minutes prior to the vote before panicking again.
Ah. Thanks, I thought the situation was a bit worse than that
Hoey and Field voted with the Government back in December when the original meaningful vote amendment was passed. Every other Labour MP voted for the amendment or abstained.
This week's vote had Hoey, Field, Stringer, Mann and Campbell vote with the Government though.
OP
OP
Exactly that... Basically if they ever have visions of promotion etc...
Honestly, if anything, those headlines have motivated rebellious MPs, particularly those who were in the fence. If their face is already on the front of the paper and they're already being called a traitor, what incentive do they have to toe the line?
Bearing in mind a right wing terrorist pleaded guilty in court last week to planning to kill an Mp.
Anything from petty harassment to threats of party punishment and/or electoral sabotage to other more serious threats.
Wasn't there a leaked list a while ago that showed some of the stuff the whips used to basically blackmail people as well?
Yep - was on here as well!
https://www.resetera.com/threads/uk...sment-for-blackmailing-votes-its-leaked.2805/
Yep - was on here as well!
https://www.resetera.com/threads/uk...sment-for-blackmailing-votes-its-leaked.2805/
Last edited:
Yes, that's entirely my point - if you're already on the front page of the paper, the death threats are already on their way and you're not going to fall over yourself to please the people whose fault it is.
Your link is malformed, take the L out of the end. Yeah there's that too. Parties tend to know what the 'bad apples' are but unless the public knows will do nothing about it because punishing them hurts the party in itself as we've recently seen in labour's case.
Some times parties will go as far as protect their MPs from the law as we saw with Thatcher in the 80s and nonce allegations. This is done to protect the party but also to enforce party loyalty. "Do as we say or we unleash the hounds"
It is a very unfortunate reality of politics.
Guys you just know the Mail, the Express and all will be running full blast with that angle.
And the BBC will report it straight-faced, and then add: "Some dispute these figures" followed by two vox pops, one using actual facts and another with a bare-faced lying Government spokesperson who will go unchallenged.
The media in the UK ladies and gentlemen.
And the BBC will report it straight-faced, and then add: "Some dispute these figures" followed by two vox pops, one using actual facts and another with a bare-faced lying Government spokesperson who will go unchallenged.
The media in the UK ladies and gentlemen.
Interesting thread on the Brexit dividend thing:
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1008282417491337216
It is nonsense, but the entire government is constructed on nonsense right now: a little extra spin is no big deal. :/
This coming week will be entertaining. My suspicion is that yet more delay will be the solution May goes for vs Grieve's amendment. How that happens is up in the air.
This coming week will be entertaining. My suspicion is that yet more delay will be the solution May goes for vs Grieve's amendment. How that happens is up in the air.
I'd hope ministers use this opportunity to go for the throat at PMQ's, if they let the dividend narrative take hold it'll become an effective shield.
May is playing a dangerous game, which she'll lose.
She's let the Brexiteers turn the story into, "Look, we told you we'd get 350M for the NHS and you didn't believe us because of the Remoaners and Project Fear. See, we were right after all!"
The implication will be that if they were right about the 350M, they are also tight about the rest of the Brexit cake, if it weren't for remoaners like Hammond and weaklings like May "giving in" to the EU.
The NHS will be funded by borrowing, which no-one notices at voting time (unlike tax rises). It looks like they'll avoid raising the tax allowance limits to get some of the cash, but people won't see that as a tax rise since it's just letting inflation do the taxing.
Where this is a victory is that the left (and especially the Brexiteer left in the opposition) can't complain too much, since borrowing more to fund public services is something that they generally support (especially since the NHS will still be playing catch-up after the austerity years and will still have less real-terms-funding than it had in the Blair/Brown days).
I mean, the only reason I hate this policy is that it's trying to falsely claim that Brexit has allowed it. More NHS funding is sorely needed.
Maybe the government are just expecting stagflation to make the actual costs negligible.
Good to see some journalists taking on the government over the figures. But I think the damage is done. May and Boris got their headline in the papers they care about. The people they are trying to reachr won't see the guardian counter-stories and political TV interviews.
P.s. Boris autocorrected to virus. Who said machines don't have a sense of humour.
Good to see some journalists taking on the government over the figures. But I think the damage is done. May and Boris got their headline in the papers they care about. The people they are trying to reachr won't see the guardian counter-stories and political TV interviews.
P.s. Boris autocorrected to virus. Who said machines don't have a sense of humour.
OP
OP
Heh.
And the UK is only making their situation worse by playing games, and not making their stances clear. No other nation is going to start trade negotiations with a country that can't decide what it wants (aside from cake).
- Status