Brexit discussion thread IV

BonnieSituation

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It really would be a lot better if we stopped pretending to know the ins and outs of international airspace agreements.

Beat me to it. One thing I really enjoy about this thread is the informed opinions and the willingness to be informed. Let's not start down the road of AH.

BonnieSituation

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Beat me to it. One thing I really enjoy about this thread is the informed opinions and the willingness to be informed. Let's not start down the road of AH.

Exactly. It's one of the only threads where it's fine to stand up and say "I don't get this. Can someone try explain it to me? Thanks."

Infini

EdgeCase wrote: »

The aviation situation will simply *have* to be resolved. Otherwise, you're looking at vast damage to the UK economy. It's not really something they can spend time fussing about over.

The problem though is that the way the Brits are acting atm expecially that little troll mogg and that bufoon boris, they dont care how much damage is caused or how catastrophic the effects are. Makes me wonder if they're doing this for ulterior motives like short selling or profiteering since no politician who was serious about their jobs would let a clusterfeck of a situation intentionally come about that would leave an entire country worse off.

These fools will end up crashing their country out and the amount of treaties and such required would take a significant amount of time to correct. I honestly believe by September well know for for certain that a crash out brexit is all but certain and only the chance of a referendum on wether to actually drive the country off a cliff has a chance of undoing this mess. I don't think the EU can afford to wait until the last minute if the Brits are dead set on blowing themselves up they'll have to have serious plans ready to go months beforehand.

Zubeneschamali

EdgeCase wrote: »

The aviation situation will simply *have* to be resolved. Otherwise, you're looking at vast damage to the UK economy.

How long did they survive the volcanic ash cloud? 4 or 5 days?

So Hard Brexit could last as long as a week.

J Mysterio

TM going on two day visit to NI. Meeting business leaders apparently, should be a lovely trip for her.

Professor Moriarty

J Mysterio wrote: »

TM going on two day visit to NI. Meeting business leaders apparently, should be a lovely trip for her.

She'll spend much of her time with her fingers in her ears while singing "La, la, la, I can't hear you."

devnull

Now being reported that the breach of the pairing agreement was not in fact a 'mistake' but may have been a deliberate ploy by the Tory Whips to make sure that they won all of the votes.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chief-whip-julian-smith-told-mps-to-defy-pairing-deals-r5rv59fm3

If that is indeed the case then it is extremely serious since it suggests that on top of all the scandal with vote leave and the Russian interference influencing the referendum, there is now also a lot of unethical things going on in relation to votes in the house.

I think the leavers must be close to being morally bankrupt at this stage.

trellheim

Beat me to it. One thing I really enjoy about this thread is the informed opinions and the willingness to be informed.

Ref Aviation there is a lot of knowledge in thread. 1st,2nd,3rd,4th freedoms and cabotage - all worth reading up on to get an idea of what the UK will need to do. For detailed knowledge worth reading the pprune thread ref licensing https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/607757-ec-notice-brexit-issued-licenses-certificates-invalid.html

Professor Moriarty

devnull wrote: »

Now being reported that the breach of the pairing agreement was not in fact a 'mistake' but may have been a deliberate ploy by the Tory Whips to make sure that they won all of the votes.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chief-whip-julian-smith-told-mps-to-defy-pairing-deals-r5rv59fm3

If that is indeed the case then it is extremely serious since it suggests that on top of all the scandal with vote leave and the Russian interference influencing the referendum, there is now also a lot of unethical things going on in relation to votes in the house.

I think the leavers must be close to being morally bankrupt at this stage.

The Tory Remainers are now facing an existential moral dilemma. Party or country.

judeboy101

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The Tory Remainers are now facing an existential moral dilemma. Party or country.

Pairing makes a farce of democracy. If you cant win a vote because one of your party cant make the vote, you should not be in charge.

fash

I understand the unresolvable flying rights the UK would ultimately lose (and which Varadkar was talking about) are the rights to fly from Paris to Berlin (etc.). Flights between Paris and London or Berlin and London are relatively easy to fix. For someone with knowledge to confirm however.

Professor Moriarty

judeboy101 wrote: »

Pairing makes a farce of democracy. If you cant win a vote because one of your party cant make the vote, you should not be in charge.

If you can't unite your party behind your policies you shouldn't be in charge. But May clings on.

ambro25

devnull wrote: »

Now being reported that the breach of the pairing agreement was not in fact a 'mistake' but may have been a deliberate ploy by the Tory Whips to make sure that they won all of the votes. (...).

Would it surprise anybody on here greatly, if I said that I’m wholly unsurprised by this revelation?

Maybe I’ve just grown too cynical (well past the point of no return, tbh)...but given the play of politics and media in the UK since February 2016, and the average level of capacity to analyse critically demonstrated by the lambda UK public -as perceived from interviews, social media activity, and actually being on the ground Oop North until Feb’18- there is simply nothing that surprises me over there.

Einstein’s quote (paraphrasing: human stupidity is boundless) has been proven true daily in the U.K. for months and years now, and still is, with no end in sight.

prawnsambo

judeboy101 wrote: »

Pairing makes a farce of democracy. If you cant win a vote because one of your party cant make the vote, you should not be in charge.

That's debatable. If the makeup of the parliament is a reflection of the people's will, then the absence of members through illness, other duties etc. would not reflect what people voted for. It would also be an incentive to 'nobble' members to affect the outcome of a vote in parliament.

J Mysterio

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If you can't unite your party behind your policies you shouldn't be in charge. But May clings on.

"On Thursday morning the chair of the Brexit select committee in the Commons, Hilary Benn, warned May there was no majority in the Commons for her plan.

“While it’s prudent for the government to prepare for all eventualities, what the government really needs to be focusing on is getting a deal that can command a majority in parliament,” Benn said.

"He predicted that the public would turn against a no-deal Brexit as they became more aware of its implications. “I think the public needs to be told what the potential implications are, because I think the more the public engages with it, the less likely they are to say no-deal is OK, because it really isn’t OK,” he said."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/19/brexit-raab-and-barnier-to-meet-as-eu-steps-up-no-deal-warnings

Meanwhile, new Brexit secretary is due to meet Barnier today. His plan is to spell out the consequences of a no deal to the EU, despite the fact that the EU have done more work in this area, are circulating a document on this to the EU27 and are asking them to step up preparations for a no deal.

devnull

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The Tory Remainers are now facing an existential moral dilemma. Party or country.

Thing is though with a proper opposition they'd have been seen off ages ago, but because Corbyn is so weak and a Brexiteer himself, the Tories have had a very lucky ride and have been getting away with doing all kinds of things they never would have been able to do with a credible opposition in place.

I see the likes of Chukka Umuna standing up to the Brexiteers again and again and I wonder how much more effective opposition Labour could have been if Corbyn took more of the same tack. Sure perhaps he's waiting for it to all blow up, but that doesn't benefit the country really by waiting till the situation gets more and more serious.

The trouble is I don't see a lot of these Tories defying the party, it's always the party first and since most of them are not exactly going to be in groups that are effected much either way due to their wealth, there is not really that much consequence for them putting the party first as it would be for the less well off.

You just have to see how the Tory remainers captiulate when they are threatened with things by the whips and leadership, which most are almost certainly idle threats anyway. I have no respect for the hard right of the Tory party whatsoever, but what I will say is at least they talk the talk and don't back down in the face of threats.

cml387

devnull wrote: »

Now being reported that the breach of the pairing agreement was not in fact a 'mistake' but may have been a deliberate ploy by the Tory Whips to make sure that they won all of the votes.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chief-whip-julian-smith-told-mps-to-defy-pairing-deals-r5rv59fm3

If that is indeed the case then it is extremely serious since it suggests that on top of all the scandal with vote leave and the Russian interference influencing the referendum, there is now also a lot of unethical things going on in relation to votes in the house.

I think the leavers must be close to being morally bankrupt at this stage.

It's not unique in the annals of history that the paring system has broken down. It happened in 1977, for the confidence vote that brought down Jim Callaghan.

Angrydwarf

How certain is a hard brexit now?

Professor Moriarty

devnull wrote: »

Thing is though with a proper opposition they'd have been seen off ages ago, but because Corbyn is so weak and a Brexiteer himself, the Tories have had a very lucky ride and have been getting away with doing all kinds of things they never would have been able to do with a credible opposition in place.

I see the likes of Chukka Umuna standing up to the Brexiteers again and again and I wonder how much more effective opposition Labour could have been if Corbyn took more of the same tack. Sure perhaps he's waiting for it to all blow up, but that doesn't benefit the country really by waiting till the situation gets more and more serious.

The trouble is I don't see a lot of these Tories defying the party, it's always the party first and since most of them are not exactly going to be in groups that are effected much either way due to their wealth, there is not really that much consequence for them putting the party first as it would be for the less well off.

You just have to see how the Tory remainers captiulate when they are threatened with things by the whips and leadership, which most are almost certainly idle threats anyway. I have no respect for the hard right of the Tory party whatsoever, but what I will say is at least they talk the talk and don't back down in the face of threats.

IMO, Corbyn was the main reason why Leave won. He's useless in so many ways that May is still more popular in the polls. But that's the way things are for Labour. If I were a betting man, I'd put a lot of money on a GE in September after the negotiations finally prove that a deal is impossible. The ramifications for the Tory party in that scenario would be dire. Hopefully.

Professor Moriarty

Angrydwarf wrote: »

How certain is a hard brexit now?

Today, more likely than not.

Imreoir2

judeboy101 wrote: »

Pairing makes a farce of democracy. If you cant win a vote because one of your party cant make the vote, you should not be in charge.

This is nonsense. Pairing is a normal practice, in a case where government is in power on a slim majority, pairing is often agreed to allow the government to function effectively.

Imagine a case where your foreign minister can't attend an international summit on Nuclear Weapons because they have to turn up for a vote on water charges. That is not how a normal democracy works.

Leroy42

Less than 9 months from a possible (probable) crash out and still the Brexiteers have nothing of substance to say. The point was brought up in this thread, that people should not pretend to know the ins and outs or airline regulations, but does anyone think that Davies (formally) and now Raab have?

Given that May couldn't answer a simply question on the collection of tariffs yesterday, and also that the civil service has been pointing out massive issues should the UK crash out for months in commons hearings, I doubt very much that the UK have given many of these things much thought.

Even Boris speech yesterday, full on whinge mode. It was akin to Trump complaining that healthcare was complicated. The NI border is difficult, surely ROI and EU should just let the UK have it as a no border and simply forget about it. Himself, and Davies speech previously, to me sound like a group that have no grasp of the instricities of what is facing them. And normally, that's fine. They are the grand scheme thinkings, the ideas. They let the minions in the civil service do the ground work. Except now they don't believe the experts, of the civil service so they are left with nothing but a scheme.

I would liken it to JFK saying that within the next decade the US will land on the moon. Brilliant, gets everyone excited. Then he hands it over to the boffins to make it happen. But instead, JFK wants to design, build and fly the spaceship himself and any problems will be down the gravity being a bully or the rotation of the earth want stop to let them work it out easier.

Nody

fash wrote: »

I understand the unresolvable flying rights the UK would ultimately lose (and which Varadkar was talking about) are the rights to fly from Paris to Berlin (etc.). Flights between Paris and London or Berlin and London are relatively easy to fix. For someone with knowledge to confirm however.

It's worse than that; let's say an Ryanair Irish serviced plane lands in London. The problem is if EU does not recognise UK's authority for certification & training (process can only start after UK has left to start certification as current certification is done via EU authority which goes away day 1 of Brexit and there is no way to do this before) the plane is not allowed to lift off because the technical review of the plane certifying it's in a state to fly is not valid in EU. Hence the plane could lift off but without passengers and would most likely need special landing permission with firefighters etc. on standby as the plane is not technically signed off to fly and hence landing is a high risk manoeuvrer.

Basically think of it like taking a plane and landing in a random small private airport outside of EU and refuel (by people not certified), get signed off to fly (by people not certified) and then return to EU and ask for permission to land. It's not your run of the mill event at the airport and would likely involve further technical checks required than normal before it's certified to be allowed to fly again as well.

seamus

cml387 wrote: »

It's not unique in the annals of history that the paring system has broken down. It happened in 1977, for the confidence vote that brought down Jim Callaghan.

Sure. But it just stinks to high heaven when the "democracy" drum has been banged every time someone suggests that Britain doesn't have to leave. Completely hypocrisy. Democracy is great as long as the Tories get the outcome they want.

Angrydwarf wrote: »

How certain is a hard brexit now?

Look, never say never. There are still 8 months, and we saw in 2016 that a lot can change in 8 months.

On the current path laid out, a hard Brexit seems very likely, perhaps with some level of a transitional period or a stay of execution. The EU don't want this either, so if the UK go to the EU on 30th March 2019 with a good exit strategy, but saying they need more time, then the EU will likely vote unanimously to allow it.
If they ask for more time but can't prove it'll be used any more wisely than they've used the last two years, then it'll be denied.

devnull

devnull wrote: »

Now being reported that the breach of the pairing agreement was not in fact a 'mistake' but may have been a deliberate ploy by the Tory Whips to make sure that they won all of the votes.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chief-whip-julian-smith-told-mps-to-defy-pairing-deals-r5rv59fm3

If that is indeed the case then it is extremely serious since it suggests that on top of all the scandal with vote leave and the Russian interference influencing the referendum, there is now also a lot of unethical things going on in relation to votes in the house.

I think the leavers must be close to being morally bankrupt at this stage.

Last month they made an 8+ month pregnant woman show up and another lady travelled from Birmingham on morphine in a wheelchair. I said it at the time, any semblance of decency is now gone.

Leroy42

seamus wrote: »

On the current path laid out, a hard Brexit seems very likely, perhaps with some level of a transitional period or a stay of execution. The EU don't want this either, so if the UK go to the EU on 30th March 2019 with a good exit strategy, but saying they need more time, then the EU will likely vote unanimously to allow it.
If they ask for more time but can't prove it'll be used any more wisely than they've used the last two years, then it'll be denied.

The only saving grace, is (I could be wrong so open to correction) that the PM does not have the votes to get a hard Brexit through the commons. Now, I freely admit, I am not really sure what happens in that case, Will they be asked to go and renegotiate? Bt then the likes of the ERG will simply vote down any new deal.

Nody

seamus wrote: »

if the UK go to the EU on 30th March 2019 with a good exit strategy, but saying they need more time, then the EU will likely vote unanimously to allow it.
If they ask for more time but can't prove it'll be used any more wisely than they've used the last two years, then it'll be denied.

Highlighted the critical path; I think EU would in general give an extension at this time simply to give their countries another year to prepare for crash out if possible no matter the plan from the UK. However this depends on UK actually asking for the extension and if you got a Brexiteer in charge that may not be the case (or someone like May who can be bullied into not asking for an extension since "a bad deal is worse than no deal").

cantwbr1

Nody wrote: »

Highlighted the critical path; I think EU would in general give an extension at this time simply to give their countries another year to prepare if possible no matter the plan from the UK. However this depends on UK actually asking for the extension and if you got a Brexiteer in charge that may not be the case (or someone like May who can be bullied into not asking for an extension since "a bad deal is worse than no deal").

And it seems that for ERG any deal is a bad deal

trellheim

Here's the detailed briefing from the UK POV .... see Section 3 for Aviation

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7633/CBP-7633.pdf

trellheim

On pairing agreements , there is history and tradition for this. If a "three line whip" is called all pairings are off or on a case-by-case basis https://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/principal/whips/. In this case you see sick people being wheeled in to vote - although appalling thats the form.

However in this case an agreed pair was broken - which is the egregious part of it all.

Zubeneschamali

seamus wrote: »

On the current path laid out, a hard Brexit seems very likely, perhaps with some level of a transitional period or a stay of execution. The EU don't want this either, so if the UK go to the EU on 30th March 2019 with a good exit strategy, but saying they need more time, then the EU will likely vote unanimously to allow it.

Agreed. I wouldn't be surprised if the UK try to bluff the EU - Raab is apparently going to attempt to explain to the EU how bad a crashout will be for the EU this week - and when they finally realise no-one cares, suddenly cave and beg for an extension.

I would prefer a decent extension, let's say 5 years, rather than a year-on-year renewal when nothing is ready in 2020 either.

Leroy42

The problem with any extension is it brings the likelihood of Uk still being in place when the next budget is agreed, and as such they will have to continue to pay.

That seems a red rag to the Brexiteers.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

The only saving grace, is (I could be wrong so open to correction) that the PM does not have the votes to get a hard Brexit through the commons.

I am not clear on why this matters. They already pulled the ripcord on brexit.

If Westminster goes on holidays now and passes nothing at all before the end of March 2019, they crash out

So when exactly is the House of Commons supposed to vote down a hard brexit? Why would the EU care?

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

The problem with any extension is it brings the likelihood of Uk still being in place when the next budget is agreed, and as such they will have to continue to pay.

That seems a red rag to the Brexiteers.

If the UK had any sense, they'd have asked for an extension already - everyone knows they are not ready to leave next March. So I think the only way they admit they need an extension is if utter disaster is upon them. The Brexiteers are a noisy bunch, but most MPs will not actually want to recreate the crash of 1929 for fun.

prawnsambo

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Agreed. I wouldn't be surprised if the UK try to bluff the EU - Raab is apparently going to attempt to explain to the EU how bad a crashout will be for the EU this week - and when they finally realise no-one cares, suddenly cave and beg for an extension.

I would prefer a decent extension, let's say 5 years, rather than a year-on-year renewal when nothing is ready in 2020 either.

I don't think that option is really feasible. It would be death by a thousand cuts. As it is, more and more companies are implementing their plan Bs. There are buildings going up in the Dublin docklands with very hush-hush clients to fill them. A friend pointed out one of those to me recently and although he knows who it's for, wouldn't tell me, except to say that it was a large financial institution moving from London.

LeinsterDub

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/eu-calms-varadkar-s-fears-of-physical-border-checks-after-brexit-1.3569485

The European Union has reassured the Government that no physical checks will be needed on the Border even if the UK crashes out of the bloc without a deal, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has said.

How could this possibly work? What about the WTO and most favored nation?

seamus

Nody wrote: »

Highlighted the critical path; I think EU would in general give an extension at this time simply to give their countries another year to prepare for crash out if possible no matter the plan from the UK.

I tend to agree, but I'm not sure the EU would agree.
Markets don't like uncertainty, people don't like uncertainty. The longer the uncertainty is allowed to continue, the more of a fall you're storing up for yourself.

And especially with the uncertainty about what the other side of the Atlantic is going to do, having this uncertainty hanging over us, leaves us a little exposed. The most prudent course of action might be just tearing off the plaster and getting it over with so we can stabilise and return certainty to the EU, and capitalise on the US and UK's distressed markets.

That is, unless the UK can present a plan which removes the uncertainty around their exit, which would then be beneficial for everyone.

Water John

Laws and Motions in Parliament don't have to be brought by the Gov'nt. If sufficient MPs across all parties are against a hard Brexit they can come together on an agreed Motion and force Govn't to implement it. The other option of Govn't is to resign. That gun may need be put to MPs heads.
We know a overwhelming majority in Parliament disagree with a crash out Brexit.
So MPs ignore the PM and Corbyn and do what is best for the people of the UK.
The key is to draw together a wide range of MPs to cobble this together.
Dominic Grieve or some such respected figure could be the figurehead.

Imreoir2

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I am not clear on why this matters. They already pulled the ripcord on brexit.

If Westminster goes on holidays now and passes nothing at all before the end of March 2019, they crash out

So when exactly is the House of Commons supposed to vote down a hard brexit? Why would the EU care?

The idea is, afaik, that should it become apparent by the end of the year that there is no deal, then the pro-Europe MP's would be forced to band together on a government of national unity basis to pass legislation preventing a no-deal crash. They could, for example, elect a caretaker PM who will be instructed to either apply to extend Art 50 and begin talks on the basis of seeking a Norway+ deal, or perhaps even revoke Art 50 altogether and hold new elections in the UK. That is the threat to May and the ERG from the likes of Dominic Grieve.

Given the lackluster performance from the pro-Europe Tory rebels to date, I don't think they are capable of rupturing the party system and forming a pro-Europe caretaker government.

Call me Al

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The idea is, afaik, that should it become apparent by the end of the year that there is no deal, then the pro-Europe MP's would be forced to band together on a government of national unity basis to pass legislation preventing a no-deal crash. They could, for example, elect a caretaker PM who will be instructed to either apply to extend Art 50 and begin talks on the basis of seeking a Norway+ deal, or perhaps even revoke Art 50 altogether and hold new elections in the UK. That is the threat to May and the ERG from the likes of Dominic Grieve.

Given the lackluster performance from the pro-Europe Tory rebels to date, I don't think they are capable of rupturing the party system and forming a pro-Europe caretaker government.

Dominic Grieve referred to this on Newsnight two nights ago. It was sobering viewing as he talked about the crisis in government and essentially how he feared where this would end for the UK. He referred to possibly needing a national unity government.
All the while Marcus Fysh sat beside him saying if they didn't get Canada +++ then hard brexit was the only viable alternative for them. And he didn't expect EU to cave for the Chequers option so these brexiteers realise full well what's coming down the road, even if they don't talk about it publicly.

J Mysterio

Philip Davies MP of 1922 committee has put down a vote of no confidence in TM!

whatever_

Morning Ireland RTE Radio 1 19/07/18

So after two years of huffing, puffing and scaremongering about Brexit, finally the truth is revealed: in the event of the UK leaving the EU without a deal there will be absolutely no change whatsoever at the Irish border.

"Up to 1000" Customs Officials will have to be recruited says Varadkar. But no change at the Irish border.

Which doesn't impress the Sinn Fein Brexit spokesperson , who immediately inflates the number to 2000. He also believes that the "backstop" is designed to expediate east-west trade. Priceless.

Conscious that he might be pouring oil on troubled waters, Varadkar informs us that if Britain takes back it's waters then it will have no access to other peoples skies, and all the planes will be grounded. Thank God ! He's found something else to panic about ! Another petrol bomb lobbed at the British Empire by a disenfranchised teenager !

Meanwhile what about these "up to 1000" customs officials ? Well the top guy at Dublin Port thinks he needs "tens" of extra officials. When pressed by Dobbo - maybe a hundred or so (he can't believe his luck). Dublin Port accounts for more than 80% of Dublin's maritime container imports. Will there be kilometers of British trucks stuck in Dublin Port ? asks Dobbo hopefully. No says the man who actually knows something about this stuff.

What happens to these 1000 Customs Officials if the UK stays in the Customs Union ? Says Rachel (definitely not) English. Another pointless politician points out that the UK is not going to stay in the Customs Union. Nobody points out that Varadkar said "up to 1000" and that they probably haven't been hired yet - if indeed they ever will be.

Well in America at least it's only Trump that flails around in the dark spreading fake news. In Ireland we have the Government, the state broadcaster not to mention all the other clueless politicians and celebrities clogging up RTE with uninformed drivel about Brexit.

Absolutely priceless comedy gold !

ambro25

The EU Commission has released its communication advising to step up preparedness. I can’t see much of anything in there, that will be news to thread regulars. But it’s detailed yet in SimpleSpeak, so it makes a nice frame of regulatory reference in debates with Leavers.

judeboy101

Imreoir2 wrote: »

This is nonsense. Pairing is a normal practice, in a case where government is in power on a slim majority, pairing is often agreed to allow the government to function effectively.

Imagine a case where your foreign minister can't attend an international summit on Nuclear Weapons because they have to turn up for a vote on water charges. That is not how a normal democracy works.

If a government is so weak that they cannot win without pairing, they really shouldn't be in government. Imagine if we applied pairing to sports. Imagine klopp ringing up Jose and saying "well Salah can't play sat because he has Ramadan, so would you mind letting pogba sit it out?"

judeboy101

judeboy101 wrote: »

If a government is so weak that they cannot win without pairing, they really shouldn't be in government. Imagine if we applied pairing to sports. Imagine klopp ringing up Jose and saying "well Salah can't play sat because he has Ramadan, so would you mind letting pogba sit it out?"

Pairing does happen in sports. There are various examples over the years of a team letting the other score because a goal was unfair.

Your squad example is ridiculous though.

LeinsterDub

judeboy101 wrote: »

If a government is so weak that they cannot win without pairing, they really shouldn't be in government. Imagine if we applied pairing to sports. Imagine klopp ringing up Jose and saying "well Salah can't play sat because he has Ramadan, so would you mind letting pogba sit it out?"

I mean you have to know this analogy is a false equivalence

I'm sitting here wondering if the "Brexit dividend" to pay for the NHS is actually the import duties received by government.

J Mysterio

J Mysterio wrote: »

Philip Davies MP of 1922 committee has put down a vote of no confidence in TM!

Hmm. This wasn't as dramatic as I first thought, but the ball is certainly rolling.

"Conservative MP Philip Davies has submitted a letter of no confidence in Theresa May to the chair of the backbench 1922 Committee, saying he has “lost trust” in her ability to deliver the referendum result. According to the Yorkshire Post, the MP told his constituents that the prime minister’s Chequers plan for Brexit is “unacceptable”.

"He added: “Politics is all about trust and once it is lost it is impossible to win back. Many people have told me that as a result of this they have lost trust in the PM to properly and fully deliver the referendum result. It is with much sadness that I have to say that have also lost trust in her to deliver the referendum result too.

“Failure to keep our promise to the electorate will almost certainly lead to the catastrophe of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister and I cannot sit back and allow that to happen.

"Therefore I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that I have no alternative but to send a letter to the Chairman of the 1922 Committee asking him for a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister.

"For a no confidence vote to be triggered, 48 letters from Conservative MPs have to be sent to the chairman of the committee Graham Brady."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-philip-davies-letter-of-no-confidence-theresa-may-conservative-leadership-race-a8454286.html

LeinsterDub

J Mysterio wrote: »

For a no confidence vote to be triggered, 48 letters from Conservative MPs have to be sent to the chairman of the committee Graham Brady.

Anyone know the current count?

devnull

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Anyone know the current count?

There was talk earlier in the week or last week that they believe they might have approx 40.