Brexit delayed

[Son of Mathonwy]

quite. Centre ground needs something credible to emerge.

Angela Smith has gone to the LDs.

The Lib Dem’s wasted so many years under Cable who was Mr Anonymous.

In fairness they were bu55ered for many of those years by being 'tainted' from Govt with the Tories, and really wasn't it Farron i/c for a lot of their rehab time, Cable wasn't even an MP from 15-17 and not leader til after the 17 election.....and under him they have actually done well in local elections etc; their role in reining in austerity overdrive and other stuff was overlooked in tuition fee-gate. Unfortunately Swinson is marmite.

Agreed, I think it was Farron who ran the party in stealth mode.

[Mellsblue]

I have no problems she wanted to concentrate on an important job, I can understand given her affiliation to the party taking Boris at his word he'd seek a deal. I didn't understand her staying quiet once Boris had decided to close Parliament and then fired 21 colleagues, it simply didn't stack up with anything I'd ever heard from her that that was a situation she could accept, and it turns out she couldn't. Whether she took a few days to consult with friends and/or wanted to let Jo go first I don't know, it was just a bit weird she and Hancock were possibly staying put. Amber has gone now, which just leaves one wondering how the blazes Hancock is rationalising his continuation in cabinet, maybe he has come to Damascus as with Niki Morgan, the rest of the cabinet I either know little to nothing about or consider self serving as with Boris or insane so I doubt anyone else goes, the remainder have well and truly taken the red pill

She obviously had her reasons for staying quiet in public, getting on with the day job and trying to influence behind the scenes. From what I know of her, this is usually how she operates. I’m surprised Morgan hasn’t piped up more or quit, not so Hancock. He has as much ambition as Johnson. I’m sure Rudd will now say more in public. She’s no longer under cabinet collective responsibility, remember when that used to be a thing, so may feel she can speak freely.
All that said, it’s one less sensible voice at the table. The echo chambers that pervade social media may now be entering no10. Good luck everyone.

The reasons can't have been getting on with the day job really, 3-4 days more isn't going to do much. And Hancock can have as much ambition as he wants, he's going to need a lot of patience and maybe 2-3 general election losses before they wouldn't consider him too wet as a leader, and by then someone with charisma might have emerged

May be she spent the last 3/4 days trying to get the whip reinstated for Clarke et al. Who knows. That said, there was nothing in the media so she must’ve just been sat in her office playing minesweeper.

[Mellsblue]

Damn, I thought we could have got at least a couple more pages out of that.

A soft Brexit won't satisfy all leavers but it might well satisfy enough of them.

I’m up for giving it a go!!

I’m sure it will. I think something along the lines of Common Market 2.0 would be acceptable. It is pretty much what the official Leave campaign stood on and gets you out of most of the mechanisms and institutions that piss people off, ie the ones I listed when showing WT I didn’t think Norway = brino. My disagreement with you was that you couldn’t leave the EU but stay in the CU, SM, CAP, CFP etc etc and please most/enough/plenty Leavers. Another good thing about Common Market 2.0 is that it keeps freedom of movement which is the thing that seems to have emotionally affected people the most. Stom is rightly worried about it and it’s causing my mother in law (and therefore my wife and therefore me), and all the other expats she knows in France, a lot of stress.

Before anyone picks me up on the fact that I’ve argued there should be no need for compromise. I still believe that if you lose a vote (which I did) then you lose, and I still believe that Canada++ would be closest to what Leave campaigned on. Admittedly, there is ambiguity on whether that included staying in the SM depending on who you listened to!! However, if Canada++ isn’t acceptable, and it may have now been ruled out unilaterally and seemingly out of nowhere by Macron, and freedom of movement is, rightly, such a big concern then I think Common Market 2.0 should tick enough of the boxes for Leavers. Plus, as mentioned above, there were those such as Hannan who said that Brexit didn’t mean leaving the SM. Though, a lot of Leavers think he’s an idiot and thoroughly wrong on every other point he makes!

Al that must gives us at least enough for another page

To be honest, although my preferred soft Brexit would be what you call Brino, I guess joining EFTA would be fairly acceptable... other than the Northern Ireland issue - I don't know enough about the issue to know if anything other than the CU and hence open border would keep the Good Friday Agreement functioning (clearly May was unable to find such a solution).

On the matter of compromise, consider this, the curry house analogy:

29 people are planning to go out for an office celebration. They take a vote on whether or not to go to the local Indian restaurant. The result is 15 for and 14 against (that's 52:48 ). So Indian it is.

On approaching the restaurant, the holder of the social fund announces that, as money is tight everyone will have to have the same meal. So the question is, what should the meal be?

In particular, would it be reasonable to order 29 servings of extra strength vindaloo?
The 14 who were against curry would almost certainly not like this but indeed how many of the 15 would in all honesty prefer a mild dish? Indeed who knows how many, if any, of the group would actually like the strongest possible curry, since no one was ever asked this?

Surely, I would argue, it is more likely to be acceptable to the majority if a mild curry is chosen.

(To take the analogy further, onto other issues:
After they are told they must all have the same dish, someone says, "Hold on. Do we really want to have a curry after all (now that we appreciate the details of the idea)? Would anyone fancy a pizza instead, next door? Can we have another show of hands, just to make sure what we really want before it's too late?")

I know the current political class isn’t the sharpest but we surely don’t need to dumb it down that much.
Ive aired my views on whether compromise should be required but I’ll go with this.....if Remain had won 52:48 I’m pretty certain they (we) wouldn’t have said “You know what, it’s so close let’s compromise. We’ll leave the EU and join EFTA”.

[Digby]

She obviously had her reasons for staying quiet in public, getting on with the day job and trying to influence behind the scenes. From what I know of her, this is usually how she operates. I’m surprised Morgan hasn’t piped up more or quit, not so Hancock. He has as much ambition as Johnson. I’m sure Rudd will now say more in public. She’s no longer under cabinet collective responsibility, remember when that used to be a thing, so may feel she can speak freely.
All that said, it’s one less sensible voice at the table. The echo chambers that pervade social media may now be entering no10. Good luck everyone.

The reasons can't have been getting on with the day job really, 3-4 days more isn't going to do much. And Hancock can have as much ambition as he wants, he's going to need a lot of patience and maybe 2-3 general election losses before they wouldn't consider him too wet as a leader, and by then someone with charisma might have emerged

May be she spent the last 3/4 days trying to get the whip reinstated for Clarke et al. Who knows. That said, there was nothing in the media so she must’ve just been sat in her office playing minesweeper.

Indeed there was nothing in the media, which was part of what I thought odd in that there was no way Rudd had nothing to say about prorogation of parliament, and then further the firing of so many MPs, and you told me she had been making noise when I hadn't in that period heard a whisper from her. I'm sure she was doing something, I'm again only saying it was odd to have someone with her set of beliefs being so quiet for even those small number of days with the executive taking such anti-democratic strides forward.

This does all come with a strong bias that no one of any moral decency can defend what Boris is doing in the name of Brexit, and I would take Rudd to be someone of decency

[Son of Mathonwy]

I know the current political class isn’t the sharpest but we surely don’t need to dumb it down that much.
Ive aired my views on whether compromise should be required but I’ll go with this.....if Remain had won 52:48 I’m pretty certain they (we) wouldn’t have said “You know what, it’s so close let’s compromise. We’ll leave the EU and join EFTA”.

The analogy simplifies the situation. In what significant way does it miss the point? What is your view of the most reasonable choice?

What you speculate might have happened had the Brexit vote gone another way is another point entirely.

[Puja]

I’m up for giving it a go!!

I’m sure it will. I think something along the lines of Common Market 2.0 would be acceptable. It is pretty much what the official Leave campaign stood on and gets you out of most of the mechanisms and institutions that piss people off, ie the ones I listed when showing WT I didn’t think Norway = brino. My disagreement with you was that you couldn’t leave the EU but stay in the CU, SM, CAP, CFP etc etc and please most/enough/plenty Leavers. Another good thing about Common Market 2.0 is that it keeps freedom of movement which is the thing that seems to have emotionally affected people the most. Stom is rightly worried about it and it’s causing my mother in law (and therefore my wife and therefore me), and all the other expats she knows in France, a lot of stress.

Before anyone picks me up on the fact that I’ve argued there should be no need for compromise. I still believe that if you lose a vote (which I did) then you lose, and I still believe that Canada++ would be closest to what Leave campaigned on. Admittedly, there is ambiguity on whether that included staying in the SM depending on who you listened to!! However, if Canada++ isn’t acceptable, and it may have now been ruled out unilaterally and seemingly out of nowhere by Macron, and freedom of movement is, rightly, such a big concern then I think Common Market 2.0 should tick enough of the boxes for Leavers. Plus, as mentioned above, there were those such as Hannan who said that Brexit didn’t mean leaving the SM. Though, a lot of Leavers think he’s an idiot and thoroughly wrong on every other point he makes!

Al that must gives us at least enough for another page

To be honest, although my preferred soft Brexit would be what you call Brino, I guess joining EFTA would be fairly acceptable... other than the Northern Ireland issue - I don't know enough about the issue to know if anything other than the CU and hence open border would keep the Good Friday Agreement functioning (clearly May was unable to find such a solution).

On the matter of compromise, consider this, the curry house analogy:

29 people are planning to go out for an office celebration. They take a vote on whether or not to go to the local Indian restaurant. The result is 15 for and 14 against (that's 52:48 ). So Indian it is.

On approaching the restaurant, the holder of the social fund announces that, as money is tight everyone will have to have the same meal. So the question is, what should the meal be?

In particular, would it be reasonable to order 29 servings of extra strength vindaloo?
The 14 who were against curry would almost certainly not like this but indeed how many of the 15 would in all honesty prefer a mild dish? Indeed who knows how many, if any, of the group would actually like the strongest possible curry, since no one was ever asked this?

Surely, I would argue, it is more likely to be acceptable to the majority if a mild curry is chosen.

(To take the analogy further, onto other issues:
After they are told they must all have the same dish, someone says, "Hold on. Do we really want to have a curry after all (now that we appreciate the details of the idea)? Would anyone fancy a pizza instead, next door? Can we have another show of hands, just to make sure what we really want before it's too late?")

I know the current political class isn’t the sharpest but we surely don’t need to dumb it down that much.
Ive aired my views on whether compromise should be required but I’ll go with this.....if Remain had won 52:48 I’m pretty certain they (we) wouldn’t have said “You know what, it’s so close let’s compromise. We’ll leave the EU and join EFTA”.

Your last comparison is a bit specious, as joining EFTA is still Leave. It is a compromise, but still one on the side of Leave. If it had been 52:48 the other way, it wouldn't've been taken as a sign to join Schengen and the Euro because "the people voted for the EU so we have to deliver." The compromise there probably would've been Cameron going back to the EU for further renegotiations with the barb that it was very very close and we wanted further concessions to take us farther out of integration.

Puja

[Digby]

Ive aired my views on whether compromise should be required but I’ll go with this.....if Remain had won 52:48 I’m pretty certain they (we) wouldn’t have said “You know what, it’s so close let’s compromise. We’ll leave the EU and join EFTA”.

True enough, but Remain was a vote for a practical thing, a known thing, a something. Leave was pie in the sky all things to all people with an ill defined future, with no agreement even among leavers what was meant by leave let alone the near 50% who voted to remain.

That even leavers are so set against each other should by now have given them more pause for thought, but it doesn't seem like thinking is something they do

[Sandydragon]

I know the current political class isn’t the sharpest but we surely don’t need to dumb it down that much.
Ive aired my views on whether compromise should be required but I’ll go with this.....if Remain had won 52:48 I’m pretty certain they (we) wouldn’t have said “You know what, it’s so close let’s compromise. We’ll leave the EU and join EFTA”.

The analogy simplifies the situation. In what significant way does it miss the point? What is your view of the most reasonable choice?

What you speculate might have happened had the Brexit vote gone another way is another point entirely.

This argument on what would have happened if the leave campaign had won is doing the rounds at the moment. It’s missing the point as the remain vote was for the status quo, not for further integration.

The remain vote however was for something that was never clearly defined and seemed to change almost daily.

Hence all this bloody confusion.

[Mellsblue]

I have no problems she wanted to concentrate on an important job, I can understand given her affiliation to the party taking Boris at his word he'd seek a deal. I didn't understand her staying quiet once Boris had decided to close Parliament and then fired 21 colleagues, it simply didn't stack up with anything I'd ever heard from her that that was a situation she could accept, and it turns out she couldn't. Whether she took a few days to consult with friends and/or wanted to let Jo go first I don't know, it was just a bit weird she and Hancock were possibly staying put. Amber has gone now, which just leaves one wondering how the blazes Hancock is rationalising his continuation in cabinet, maybe he has come to Damascus as with Niki Morgan, the rest of the cabinet I either know little to nothing about or consider self serving as with Boris or insane so I doubt anyone else goes, the remainder have well and truly taken the red pill

She obviously had her reasons for staying quiet in public, getting on with the day job and trying to influence behind the scenes. From what I know of her, this is usually how she operates. I’m surprised Morgan hasn’t piped up more or quit, not so Hancock. He has as much ambition as Johnson. I’m sure Rudd will now say more in public. She’s no longer under cabinet collective responsibility, remember when that used to be a thing, so may feel she can speak freely.
All that said, it’s one less sensible voice at the table. The echo chambers that pervade social media may now be entering no10. Good luck everyone.

The reasons can't have been getting on with the day job really, 3-4 days more isn't going to do much. And Hancock can have as much ambition as he wants, he's going to need a lot of patience and maybe 2-3 general election losses before they wouldn't consider him too wet as a leader, and by then someone with charisma might have emerged

It seems those 3/4 days were pretty important after all. From her interview in today’s S Times:

‘In her final act as a cabinet minister on Friday she approved new rules that mean 350,000 children with autism and attention deficit disorder will no longer have to undergo repeated assessments for their disability benefits. Parents currently have to resubmit evidence when their children are seven, 11 and 14. In future they will just be checked at the age of 11.’

[Banquo]

I know the current political class isn’t the sharpest but we surely don’t need to dumb it down that much.
Ive aired my views on whether compromise should be required but I’ll go with this.....if Remain had won 52:48 I’m pretty certain they (we) wouldn’t have said “You know what, it’s so close let’s compromise. We’ll leave the EU and join EFTA”.

The analogy simplifies the situation. In what significant way does it miss the point? What is your view of the most reasonable choice?

What you speculate might have happened had the Brexit vote gone another way is another point entirely.

This argument on what would have happened if the leave campaign had won is doing the rounds at the moment. It’s missing the point as the remain vote was for the status quo, not for further integration.

The leave vote however was for something that was never clearly defined and seemed to change almost daily.

Hence all this bloody confusion.

You might want a quick edit

[Mellsblue]

I know the current political class isn’t the sharpest but we surely don’t need to dumb it down that much.
Ive aired my views on whether compromise should be required but I’ll go with this.....if Remain had won 52:48 I’m pretty certain they (we) wouldn’t have said “You know what, it’s so close let’s compromise. We’ll leave the EU and join EFTA”.

The analogy simplifies the situation. In what significant way does it miss the point? What is your view of the most reasonable choice?

What you speculate might have happened had the Brexit vote gone another way is another point entirely.

This argument on what would have happened if the leave campaign had won is doing the rounds at the moment. It’s missing the point as the remain vote was for the status quo, not for further integration.

The remain vote however was for something that was never clearly defined and seemed to change almost daily.

Hence all this bloody confusion.

Yeah but 48% don’t to be in the EU so where’s the compromise. 48% don’t want to eat curry. What are they to eat? Of the entire electorate only 37% voted to remain. I demand another referendum without the lies that after a vote to leave the housing market would crash and we’d be plunged into a recession. I want a People’s Vote.
I’m obviously playing devils advocate but you get my point.

[Puja]

The analogy simplifies the situation. In what significant way does it miss the point? What is your view of the most reasonable choice?

What you speculate might have happened had the Brexit vote gone another way is another point entirely.

This argument on what would have happened if the leave campaign had won is doing the rounds at the moment. It’s missing the point as the remain vote was for the status quo, not for further integration.

The remain vote however was for something that was never clearly defined and seemed to change almost daily.

Hence all this bloody confusion.

Yeah but 48% don’t to be in the EU so where’s the compromise. 48% don’t want to eat curry. What are they to eat? Of the entire electorate only 37% voted to remain. I demand another referendum without the lies that after a vote to leave the housing market would crash and we’d be plunged into a recession. I want a People’s Vote.
I’m obviously playing devils advocate but you get my point.

In which case, Cameron goes back to the EU and negotiates further opt-outs from integration with the ammunition of, "That was close." We don't say, "The people voted for Brexit, so we must deliver," and launch ourselves into Schengen, Euro, and Euro Army to honour the referendum.

Compromise.

Puja

[Mellsblue]

This argument on what would have happened if the leave campaign had won is doing the rounds at the moment. It’s missing the point as the remain vote was for the status quo, not for further integration.

The remain vote however was for something that was never clearly defined and seemed to change almost daily.

Hence all this bloody confusion.

Yeah but 48% don’t to be in the EU so where’s the compromise. 48% don’t want to eat curry. What are they to eat? Of the entire electorate only 37% voted to remain. I demand another referendum without the lies that after a vote to leave the housing market would crash and we’d be plunged into a recession. I want a People’s Vote.
I’m obviously playing devils advocate but you get my point.

In which case, Cameron goes back to the EU and negotiates further opt-outs from integration with the ammunition of, "That was close." We don't say, "The people voted for Brexit, so we must deliver," and launch ourselves into Schengen, Euro, and Euro Army to honour the referendum.

Compromise.

Puja

You honestly think Remain campaign would’ve voluntarily compromised?!?!?
The Remain campaign didn’t stand on Schengen etc etc so I don’t see the relevance.
Anyhoo. Sunday afternoon is the only time I have when not running my kids to various sports or coaching other peoples kids rugby. I’ll see you all tomorrow to bemoan losing the Ashes. Again.

Disappointed nobody has congratulated Rudd on staying in office and holding her nose long enough to finish vital work.

[Puja]

Yeah but 48% don’t to be in the EU so where’s the compromise. 48% don’t want to eat curry. What are they to eat? Of the entire electorate only 37% voted to remain. I demand another referendum without the lies that after a vote to leave the housing market would crash and we’d be plunged into a recession. I want a People’s Vote.
I’m obviously playing devils advocate but you get my point.

In which case, Cameron goes back to the EU and negotiates further opt-outs from integration with the ammunition of, "That was close." We don't say, "The people voted for Brexit, so we must deliver," and launch ourselves into Schengen, Euro, and Euro Army to honour the referendum.

Compromise.

Puja

You honestly think Remain campaign would’ve voluntarily compromised?!?!?
The Remain campaign didn’t stand on Schengen etc etc so I don’t see the relevance.
Anyhoo. Sunday afternoon is the only time I have when not running my kids to various sports or coaching other peoples kids rugby. I’ll see you all tomorrow to bemoan losing the Ashes. Again.

Disappointed nobody has congratulated Rudd on staying in office and holding her nose long enough to finish vital work.

The Leave campaign didn't stand on No Deal though.

Enjoy your afternoon off.

Puja

[Digby]

Disappointed nobody has congratulated Rudd on staying in office and holding her nose long enough to finish vital work.

Look, I know the people she was working to help can be poo flingers, but it's not nice to note she had to hold her breath around them!

[Lizard]

So I see that someone has leaked the Tory’s WhatsApp chat about BoJo ignoring or circumventing the law requiring him to seek an extension (absent a deal).

I’ve also seen some expert comment confirming my view that civil court action and possible contempt of court proceedings would be the way this is enforced.

So what do we think Boris will do:
1. Ask the Queen not to sign the Bill?
2. Ignore the law and try to drag any court proceedings out until after Oct 31st?
3. Claim technical compliance either the law while undermining its intent - possibly by sending the letter as required but then immediately calling the EU and asking them to ignore the letter.

[Lizard]

I’m just waiting for the Queen to do a televised address that begins, “Whilst One has not traditionally used the Tower of London in the manner of One’s predecessors...”

[Stom]

I’m up for giving it a go!!

I’m sure it will. I think something along the lines of Common Market 2.0 would be acceptable. It is pretty much what the official Leave campaign stood on and gets you out of most of the mechanisms and institutions that piss people off, ie the ones I listed when showing WT I didn’t think Norway = brino. My disagreement with you was that you couldn’t leave the EU but stay in the CU, SM, CAP, CFP etc etc and please most/enough/plenty Leavers. Another good thing about Common Market 2.0 is that it keeps freedom of movement which is the thing that seems to have emotionally affected people the most. Stom is rightly worried about it and it’s causing my mother in law (and therefore my wife and therefore me), and all the other expats she knows in France, a lot of stress.

Before anyone picks me up on the fact that I’ve argued there should be no need for compromise. I still believe that if you lose a vote (which I did) then you lose, and I still believe that Canada++ would be closest to what Leave campaigned on. Admittedly, there is ambiguity on whether that included staying in the SM depending on who you listened to!! However, if Canada++ isn’t acceptable, and it may have now been ruled out unilaterally and seemingly out of nowhere by Macron, and freedom of movement is, rightly, such a big concern then I think Common Market 2.0 should tick enough of the boxes for Leavers. Plus, as mentioned above, there were those such as Hannan who said that Brexit didn’t mean leaving the SM. Though, a lot of Leavers think he’s an idiot and thoroughly wrong on every other point he makes!

Al that must gives us at least enough for another page

To be honest, although my preferred soft Brexit would be what you call Brino, I guess joining EFTA would be fairly acceptable... other than the Northern Ireland issue - I don't know enough about the issue to know if anything other than the CU and hence open border would keep the Good Friday Agreement functioning (clearly May was unable to find such a solution).

On the matter of compromise, consider this, the curry house analogy:

29 people are planning to go out for an office celebration. They take a vote on whether or not to go to the local Indian restaurant. The result is 15 for and 14 against (that's 52:48 ). So Indian it is.

On approaching the restaurant, the holder of the social fund announces that, as money is tight everyone will have to have the same meal. So the question is, what should the meal be?

In particular, would it be reasonable to order 29 servings of extra strength vindaloo?
The 14 who were against curry would almost certainly not like this but indeed how many of the 15 would in all honesty prefer a mild dish? Indeed who knows how many, if any, of the group would actually like the strongest possible curry, since no one was ever asked this?

Surely, I would argue, it is more likely to be acceptable to the majority if a mild curry is chosen.

(To take the analogy further, onto other issues:
After they are told they must all have the same dish, someone says, "Hold on. Do we really want to have a curry after all (now that we appreciate the details of the idea)? Would anyone fancy a pizza instead, next door? Can we have another show of hands, just to make sure what we really want before it's too late?")

I know the current political class isn’t the sharpest but we surely don’t need to dumb it down that much.
Ive aired my views on whether compromise should be required but I’ll go with this.....if Remain had won 52:48 I’m pretty certain they (we) wouldn’t have said “You know what, it’s so close let’s compromise. We’ll leave the EU and join EFTA”.

If the first ref had been a true "people's vote" and not political maneaovering that backfired, it could have had a follow up...

Because most of us remain voters don't love the EU, we just think it's better in than out. There are many things wrong with it and moving to make changes to that could have been an amazing opportunity to bring together both sides...

Except the raving loonies...

[Banquo]

So I see that someone has leaked the Tory’s WhatsApp chat about BoJo ignoring or circumventing the law requiring him to seek an extension (absent a deal).

I’ve also seen some expert comment confirming my view that civil court action and possible contempt of court proceedings would be the way this is enforced.

So what do we think Boris will do:
1. Ask the Queen not to sign the Bill?
2. Ignore the law and try to drag any court proceedings out until after Oct 31st?
3. Claim technical compliance either the law while undermining its intent - possibly by sending the letter as required but then immediately calling the EU and asking them to ignore the letter.

I think they will be looking for holes in the legislation.

[Digby]

Damn, I thought we could have got at least a couple more pages out of that.

A soft Brexit won't satisfy all leavers but it might well satisfy enough of them.

I’m up for giving it a go!!

I’m sure it will. I think something along the lines of Common Market 2.0 would be acceptable. It is pretty much what the official Leave campaign stood on and gets you out of most of the mechanisms and institutions that piss people off, ie the ones I listed when showing WT I didn’t think Norway = brino. My disagreement with you was that you couldn’t leave the EU but stay in the CU, SM, CAP, CFP etc etc and please most/enough/plenty Leavers. Another good thing about Common Market 2.0 is that it keeps freedom of movement which is the thing that seems to have emotionally affected people the most. Stom is rightly worried about it and it’s causing my mother in law (and therefore my wife and therefore me), and all the other expats she knows in France, a lot of stress.

Before anyone picks me up on the fact that I’ve argued there should be no need for compromise. I still believe that if you lose a vote (which I did) then you lose, and I still believe that Canada++ would be closest to what Leave campaigned on. Admittedly, there is ambiguity on whether that included staying in the SM depending on who you listened to!! However, if Canada++ isn’t acceptable, and it may have now been ruled out unilaterally and seemingly out of nowhere by Macron, and freedom of movement is, rightly, such a big concern then I think Common Market 2.0 should tick enough of the boxes for Leavers. Plus, as mentioned above, there were those such as Hannan who said that Brexit didn’t mean leaving the SM. Though, a lot of Leavers think he’s an idiot and thoroughly wrong on every other point he makes!

Al that must gives us at least enough for another page

To be honest, although my preferred soft Brexit would be what you call Brino, I guess joining EFTA would be fairly acceptable... other than the Northern Ireland issue - I don't know enough about the issue to know if anything other than the CU and hence open border would keep the Good Friday Agreement functioning (clearly May was unable to find such a solution).

On the matter of compromise, consider this, the curry house analogy:

29 people are planning to go out for an office celebration. They take a vote on whether or not to go to the local Indian restaurant. The result is 15 for and 14 against (that's 52:48 ). So Indian it is.

On approaching the restaurant, the holder of the social fund announces that, as money is tight everyone will have to have the same meal. So the question is, what should the meal be?

In particular, would it be reasonable to order 29 servings of extra strength vindaloo?
The 14 who were against curry would almost certainly not like this but indeed how many of the 15 would in all honesty prefer a mild dish? Indeed who knows how many, if any, of the group would actually like the strongest possible curry, since no one was ever asked this?

Surely, I would argue, it is more likely to be acceptable to the majority if a mild curry is chosen.

(To take the analogy further, onto other issues:
After they are told they must all have the same dish, someone says, "Hold on. Do we really want to have a curry after all (now that we appreciate the details of the idea)? Would anyone fancy a pizza instead, next door? Can we have another show of hands, just to make sure what we really want before it's too late?")

Okay, but how many of those who didn't want curry if actually having to go for a curry would want a hot curry even if they'd rather had a steak or pizza?

And further how many want spicy in addition to hot, and I am drawing a distinction between spicy and hot, how many want seafood or vegetarian, how many want pork only to find owing to ownership of who makes most curries pork isn't an option, how many want a wet or dry curry, or want rice, naan or a roti, who wants a curry swimming with ghee and who wants less oily, or those wanting rice who wants plain Vs flavoured, who wants beer, or if wanting beer do you want a curry house that serves its own beer or to find a bring a bottle place...?

And who in the name of all that's holy wants that weird pot of green yoghurt?

[Puja]

Question for the brains trust: Given that Boris is actively and openly looking for ways to avoid asking for an extension, is not the next move to wait until he does dodge it and then call no confidence in him? At that point, there's surely the votes in the house for a GNU that can go and ask for an extension, followed by an election.

Puja

[Digby]

I still can't see a GNU happening, Corbyn's insistence he lead any such effort will undermine it before it starts. Whether Corbyn is intentionally undermining it in the hope he can see Brexit happen and not get blamed for it I don't know, but without him taking a backwards step I don't see where a GNU would get the votes from, one might fall short anyway if enough pro Brexit Labour rebels didn't get behind a non Corbyn option to lead a GNU even if Corbyn did the decent thing and went out back to shoot himself in the head

[Puja]

I still can't see a GNU happening, Corbyn's insistence he lead any such effort will undermine it before it starts. Whether Corbyn is intentionally undermining it in the hope he can see Brexit happen and not get blamed for it I don't know, but without him taking a backwards step I don't see where a GNU would get the votes from, one might fall short anyway if enough pro Brexit Labour rebels didn't get behind a non Corbyn option to lead a GNU even if Corbyn did the decent thing and went out back to shoot himself in the head

If it's a choice between that and No Deal, surely there'd be enough willing to hold their noses and do it. Or, if he fails, any other MP could put themselves up as an alternative option and, while they'd fail without Labour support, not supporting a last chance to prevent No Deal would see it publically become Labour's fault and they can't afford that.

I'm slightly worried that we may ask for an extension and get told to get knotted by the EU, especially if one of Boris's close friends on the more authoritarian side of the continent takes umbrage that he's been ousted. In that situation we could end up with a GNU of dubious support panicking about whether to No Deal or pull Article 50 in the last few days.

Puja

[Digby]

I still can't see a GNU happening, Corbyn's insistence he lead any such effort will undermine it before it starts. Whether Corbyn is intentionally undermining it in the hope he can see Brexit happen and not get blamed for it I don't know, but without him taking a backwards step I don't see where a GNU would get the votes from, one might fall short anyway if enough pro Brexit Labour rebels didn't get behind a non Corbyn option to lead a GNU even if Corbyn did the decent thing and went out back to shoot himself in the head

If it's a choice between that and No Deal, surely there'd be enough willing to hold their noses and do it. Or, if he fails, any other MP could put themselves up as an alternative option and, while they'd fail without Labour support, not supporting a last chance to prevent No Deal would see it publically become Labour's fault and they can't afford that.

I'm slightly worried that we may ask for an extension and get told to get knotted by the EU, especially if one of Boris's close friends on the more authoritarian side of the continent takes umbrage that he's been ousted. In that situation we could end up with a GNU of dubious support panicking about whether to No Deal or pull Article 50 in the last few days.

Puja

I don't know if they would hold their noses when it comes to Corbyn, it's a big ask too when he's going to be seen as an equal danger. I do think the EU will play ball unless someone like Orban sticks in a veto.

That does leave us some chance to revoke A50, but that could get even messier, and we're already into constitutional peril

[Son of Mathonwy]

Hopefully they would be willing to hold their noses over Corbyn. After all a GNU would be a very fragile thing - they could pull the plug on it if Corbyn overstepped in any way.

It would be preferable to have a more neutral/less divisive leader of course.

On this point, does anyone know if there has to be a single leader - is joint leadership a possibility?