Cycling Related

Fabbers wrote: ↑

5 years ago

And in the country an ever increasing majority for no Brexit....

I worry that it’s not as simple as that.

Ask people in an opinion poll, is Britain better off remain or leave, and a majority say remain.

Ask people in a referendum whether we should change the outcome of the previous referendum, and some who believe remain is best will now vote leave instead.

And there's the big unknown of turnout among younger v older voters.

If we get a referendum, I do not believe the outcome is a given.

JohnToo wrote: ↑

5 years ago

There is indeed clearly a majority in Parliament and without against no deal. And May is still cynically using the threat of no deal as a political tool.

But she has a point when she says that she can’t actually guarantee no deal, starting from here. As things stand, we leave in March, and if we don’t have a deal, we leave with no deal.

I wonder if Corbyn would do better to demand an extension of Article 50 as his precondition for talks.

He cannot demand it because it cannot be guaranteed.

LowlifeDes wrote: ↑

5 years ago

He cannot demand it because it cannot be guaranteed.

He could demand a commitment that she will initiate negotiations seeking to extend it?

Seems to me May unfortunately has the upper hand. She can just sit there, do nothing substantive, the clock ticks down, we leave on March 29 with no deal, and there’s little anyone can do to prevent that.

I think there's a parallel between May and Trump. Successful operations of a political system depends on people engaging constructively and in good faith. If you get someone who just ignores the system, the conventions, constraints, and just does what the hell they want, the system breaks down.

Would parliament allow that now? They seem, at long last, to have woken up and look to exert some influence. They are stated to be collectively against a no deal exit.
.

JohnToo wrote: ↑

5 years ago

I wonder if Corbyn would do better to demand an extension of Article 50 as his precondition for talks.

The time has passed now, but he would have done even better to go and talk without preconditions. Asking the party not to talk was even more if a PR own goal. As it stands he looks a little petty and more interested in party advantage than in doing what's best for the country.

LowlifeDes wrote: ↑

5 years ago

Would parliament allow that now? They seem, at long last, to have woken up and look to exert some influence. They are stated to be collectively against a no deal exit.
.

I agree there is strong anti-no-deal majority in parliament. But I’d ask the opposite question - what can parliament actually do to prevent a no deal exit?

Iris wrote: ↑

5 years ago

The time has passed now, but he would have done even better to go and talk without preconditions. Asking the party not to talk was even more if a PR own goal. As it stands he looks a little petty and more interested in party advantage than in doing what's best for the country.

Damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. Talking without any shift from May just plays into her agenda, which is even more nakedly about party/factional advantage (hers).

JohnToo wrote: ↑

5 years ago

Damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. Talking without any shift from May just plays into her agenda, which is even more nakedly about party/factional advantage (hers).

"Throughout my career I have advocated talking to one's opponents, without preconditions, and in good faith. This morning, at long last, Mrs May invited me to discuss Brexit with her. It would have been good to have that phone call two years ago, or on the morning after the General Election at which she lost her majority - but as I said at the Party conference last September I was delighted to receive the invitation to talk, in order to resolve the country's political crisis on a cross-party basis.

Sadly, it quickly became clear that she was not open to a discussion in good faith. Her "red lines" are still in place - and it is those red lines which led to the catastrophic defeat of her Brexit plan earlier in the week. Without an open and constructive attitude on all sides a discussion cannot continue. It was that brave, open and constructive approach which ultimately led to the Good Friday Agreement and peace in Northern Ireland - peace which is currently at risk because of the intransigence of some members of her party and her coalition party. I am sure that Mrs May does not share the desire of those individuals to allow conflict to return to the streets of Belfast.

I have since talked to the leaders in parliament of the Green Party, the Liberal Democrats, the SNP and Plaid Cymru. All of us have been to see Mrs May, and all of us have received the same sorry message. I have also talked to my comrades in Labour, the chairs of the Brexit and Home Affairs committees - both of them received the exact same message in their dialogue with members of the government.

We in Labour stand ready to lead the country, with the support of members of parliament of all political parties, to a settlement with the EU that works for all Britons. We invite Mrs May to join us."

It's not very Milne, but it's almost Corbyn, and it's pretty Starmer. On the front foot, offering leadership where there's currently none.

Selfish prick:

Dyson to move company HQ to Singapore

Joan wrote: ↑

5 years ago

Selfish prick:

Dyson to move company HQ to Singapore

I got rid of my Dyson vacuum. It was just gathering dust.

ransos wrote: ↑

5 years ago

I got rid of my Dyson vacuum. It was just gathering dust.

Someone told me yesterday that a poll in Leeds found that 33% think that no deal means no brexit. Anyone have a link to it?

If this is the case, no wonder we're stuffed.

Not quite.

Rees-Mogg is a prize twat.

Iris wrote: ↑

5 years ago

Rees-Mogg is a prize twat.

What prompted that?