Topic: Brexit: "Vultus inanis est et mori in fossa ego sum!"

[Trada]

The media & the Blairites in a bit of a spin because the EU have said Jeremys ideal is the way forward (its not the first time they have said this) they have to spin it as a Labour Uturn when its near enough the 6 tests Labour & members have been behind for 3 years.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

I don’t comment on this thread as I don’t agree with the majority of comments and can’t be bothered arguing all day on a forum. I do however read the comments and look forward to reading differing view's from mine and the debate’s that follow. As a member of the Labour Party for many years who has spent my adult life fighting racism,  I do take offence at being labelled a “racist crank”, perhaps you could explain why I have now become one.
For the record I am anti brexit but not a Blairite

its not a reference to all members, should be pretty obvious to be honest

While most people have a specific problem with Corbyn, this particular poster has an agenda against the Labour party, its members and its voters. But as long as he's against Corbyn, too, he has green light to offend anyone he likes, while you'll probably be reprimanded for using the term "Blairite".

awww you poor little victim

[Lush is the best medicine...]

A new party wouldn’t be centrist, it would be of the left.

But it wouldn’t be the regresssive left we see from the labour front bench, rather the progressive left that has helped British people of all social classes  prosper in the past.

yup, that’s why it’s badly needed

[ShakaHislop]

The media & the Blairites in a bit of a spin because the EU have said Jeremys ideal is the way forward (its not the first time they have said this) they have to spin it as a Labour Uturn when its near enough the 6 tests Labour & members have been behind for 3 years.

A view from Europe on it, via the Guardian's Brussels correspondent Jennifer Rankin

If Labour wants to be in the single market, it will have to sign up to EU state-aid rules.

Labour wants "close alignment with the single market, underpinned by “shared institutions”.

That sounds like Chequers, so the EU will say no.

Back to the old in-out choice. No cherry-picking, strictly no cake.

"Corbyn will have to come out of the closet and say we accept single market rules,” says the official.

I think that's something which Corbynistas get upset about hearing for some reason. But it's true. This doesn't make much sense unless you bash it against reality. And when you do that dear Leader will have to do more than hurriedly write to members that he's not ruling out a referendum. Think that's what the letter today is going to say - apparently lots of MPs and members not on the koolaid have been expressing an opinion on being asked to support the withdrawal agreement.

From last year

EU officials have privately rejected Labour's Brexit policy as unworkable 'cakeism'

However, a senior European Commission official involved in Brexit negotiations told BI that while Labour's policy has a better "starting point" than the UK government's, its goals amount to cherry-picking and would be rejected.

"The starting point is not a bad one in that amendment. It's one of alignment rather than divergence. It also proposes some form of customs union. That's much better. That's all good," the Commission official said.

"But the problem is, the single market is a legal order, so you can't pick and choose from it. It's like every other proposal we've had. We've been here before."

They added: "Labour's proposal frontloads the idea of possible divergence and frontloads the idea of not wholly accepting the four freedoms, specifically the free movement of people. It looks like exceptionalism."

https://www.businessinsider.com/senior-eu-figures-rubbish-labours-single-market-brexit-policy-2018-6?r=UK

[west_london_red]

Things are possibly more molten than they were in 1981 when the SDP was formed. Here are some reasons why (by no means definitive).

1. Back then the trade unions were still a massive presence in British society. Not one of them went over to the SDP. Today, they aren't so influential, and it's even possible, given McCluskey's overweening power, that some unions might decide to disaffiliate from the Labour Party if a more mainstream, pro-European social-democratic party came along. This is particularly so given the fact that most unions now are 'white-collar' or public sector unions, and not tied to the old and dying industrial heartlands. The TUC general council is also overwhelmingly pro-Remain.

2. People don't vote so much along class lines anymore. Back in 1981 the SDP knew, when it formed, that it was setting itself an Herculean task because Labour still commanded a vast, 'unthinking', working class vote. That's not so evident any more, especially with UKIP on the scene too. Labour's working class vote has never looked so soft. Plus the working-class vote is proportionally much lower than it was back in '81.

3. The SDP lacked a big issue in 1981. It had lots of little complaints (many of which, like de-selection, are now with us again). But there was no single, overarching, complaint. Today there is Brexit. That's the biggest political issue in the UK by some distance. Indeed, for many people, its become the ONLY issue. There's a massive constituency of at least 48 per cent (and maybe as much as 54 percent) who feel completely unrepresented in parliament. And because of it, people's political  loyalties are drifting. It's a great time to strike out and form a new party.

4. Michael Foot wasn't popular, and Tony Benn was widely considered to be a threat, in 1981, but neither man was as shallow and lacking in personal achievement as Corbyn. Both, indeed, were heavyweights, who'd held ministerial office with some distinction. Neither was an anti-semite, or tolerant of anti-semites. Neither had a record of supporting terrorism against Britain. Also, there was Healey. And Callaghan was still a presence. Big men. The Labour front bench today is made up of nonentities, apart from Starmer. And Starmer is constantly sidelined and humiliated by the leadership. Christ, he might even be tempted to join a social-democratic breakaway.

5. The SDP was thinly spread. A bit of Warrington, a bit of Glasgow Hillhead, a bit of Lincoln. It lacked a centre. A new social-democratic party could make a big splash in London - and possibly Liverpool and Manchester too.

6. Scotland. Labour is fucked in Scotland and Corbyn's 'Little England' policy is making things worse. But the SNP isn't as popular as it was either. There's a great opportunity here, surely, for a new centre-left party.

I assume your not posting from a phone!

I’ll try and address best I can, but keep in mind I am making comparisons and hypothetical suggestions based on what I have read (I was only born in 82) so happy to be corrected.

1. I get your point but the large unions could just as easily force Corbyn out as they could disaffiliate, especially if they see no signs of a Labour government. Unite might get the headlines but they are not the only affiliated union, nor are they even the largest. And assuming Brexit does happen as we are not pretty much at the 11th hour, I fail to see the relevance of a Remain supporting TUC as we’ll be out.

2. Agree

3. Yes the new party would have a huge issue to get behind and we have seen how it’s helped UKIP and the SNP recently. But the Lib Dem’s are pretty much a single issue party now when it comes to Remain - but the results so far are modest. And again assuming we do Leave, the election after next (potentially 8 years after Brexit if we leave this March) I don’t think Remain will be the big issue to get behind.

4. Agree with most of that but I think that supports my argument that there is a post Corbyn future for the party because he’s not that good.

5. Not sure what you mean, a new party could be just as equally spread thin. Probably depends on who defects, where they represent and how popular they are.

6. Agree with Labours prospects being poor in Scotland but the SNP is a lot more popular even now then it was in the 80’s. And I suspect Leaving will encourage calls for independence and help the SNP rather then then a pro-EU and I presume pro-union stance of the new pay (which again is just the Lib Dem’s).

[Circa1892]

The media & the Blairites in a bit of a spin because the EU have said Jeremys ideal is the way forward (its not the first time they have said this) they have to spin it as a Labour Uturn when its near enough the 6 tests Labour & members have been behind for 3 years.

Where the fuck do you get this nonsense from?

[Sangria]

I assume your not posting from a phone!

I’ll try and address best I can, but keep in mind I am making comparisons and hypothetical suggestions based on what I have read (I was only born in 82) so happy to be corrected.

1. I get your point but the large unions could just as easily force Corbyn out as they could disaffiliate, especially if they see no signs of a Labour government. Unite might get the headlines but they are not the only affiliated union, nor are they even the largest. And assuming Brexit does happen as we are not pretty much at the 11th hour, I fail to see the relevance of a Remain supporting TUC as we’ll be out.

2. Agree

3. Yes the new party would have a huge issue to get behind and we have seen how it’s helped UKIP and the SNP recently. But the Lib Dem’s are pretty much a single issue party now when it comes to Remain - but the results so far are modest. And again assuming we do Leave, the election after next (potentially 8 years after Brexit if we leave this March) I don’t think Remain will be the big issue to get behind.

4. Agree with most of that but I think that supports my argument that there is a post Corbyn future for the party because he’s not that good.

5. Not sure what you mean, a new party could be just as equally spread thin. Probably depends on who defects, where they represent and how popular they are.

6. Agree with Labours prospects being poor in Scotland but the SNP is a lot more popular even now then it was in the 80’s. And I suspect Leaving will encourage calls for independence and help the SNP rather then then a pro-EU and I presume pro-union stance of the new pay (which again is just the Lib Dem’s).

Corbyn doesn't have to be good. He just has to have the support of certain key figures, and their interest is in control of the Labour party, rather than outside metrics, and the members will fall in line, as Trada and others are demonstrating. And with the wide ranging negative effects of Brexit, and Corbyn and his inner circle supporting Brexit and consistently overriding opposition to it, there is little significant difference what shade of UKIP takes power. The sooner there is opposition to Brexit or a move to rejoin the EU, the better. Corbyn, like Frottage, is happy to take the money without doing the job. Fuck the far right and all those who facilitate the far right.

[Zeb]

Whose the Times reporter Zeb, Stanley Unwin

Ha. Caught me. Sorry deleted. Circular argument to get in and thread is testy enough. Had to google Stanley - shall investigate.

[Sangria]

The media & the Blairites in a bit of a spin because the EU have said Jeremys ideal is the way forward (its not the first time they have said this) they have to spin it as a Labour Uturn when its near enough the 6 tests Labour & members have been behind for 3 years.

Defending collaboration with the far right is the new Labour loyalty. If you're proper Labour, you must support jumping into bed with UKIP.

[oldfordie]

Ha. Caught me. Sorry deleted. Circular argument to get in and thread is testy enough. Had to google Stanley - shall investigate.

Showing my age.

[ShakaHislop]

EU figures rushing to praise Corbyn's letter is a bigger foot-in-mouth moment than Tusk's hell comment. We're now back into full "Remainers/soft Brexiteers see what they want to see in Labour policy" mode. Hopefully Barry Gardiner can be relied upon to fuck up again on the Sunday political shows and reveal it's cakey Norway minus FOM, so we can move on.

[Priest078]

Bravo to Owen Smith on radio 4 today .

[Zeb]

Showing my age.

Nah. If we'd have had a telly when I was a nipper then I'd probably have known him. Watching him reminds me of the Two Ronnies mispronunciation sketch. Anyways. Brexit. Ho hum.

----


Looks like May's 'revised deal' may not arrive in Parliament until 'late March'. (Guardian). 21st March is the date when we have absolutely no alternative but to beg the EU for an extension because we've totally run out of time to pass anything agreed after then. (source: Times' Sam Coates on twitter)

[Robinred]

Things are possibly more molten than they were in 1981 when the SDP was formed. Here are some reasons why (by no means definitive).

1. Back then the trade unions were still a massive presence in British society. Not one of them went over to the SDP. Today, they aren't so influential, and it's even possible, given McCluskey's overweening power, that some unions might decide to disaffiliate from the Labour Party if a more mainstream, pro-European social-democratic party came along. This is particularly so given the fact that most unions now are 'white-collar' or public sector unions, and not tied to the old and dying industrial heartlands. The TUC general council is also overwhelmingly pro-Remain.

2. People don't vote so much along class lines anymore. Back in 1981 the SDP knew, when it formed, that it was setting itself an Herculean task because Labour still commanded a vast, 'unthinking', working class vote. That's not so evident any more, especially with UKIP on the scene too. Labour's working class vote has never looked so soft. Plus the working-class vote is proportionally much lower than it was back in '81.

3. The SDP lacked a big issue in 1981. It had lots of little complaints (many of which, like de-selection, are now with us again). But there was no single, overarching, complaint. Today there is Brexit. That's the biggest political issue in the UK by some distance. Indeed, for many people, its become the ONLY issue. There's a massive constituency of at least 48 per cent (and maybe as much as 54 percent) who feel completely unrepresented in parliament. And because of it, people's political  loyalties are drifting. It's a great time to strike out and form a new party.

4. Michael Foot wasn't popular, and Tony Benn was widely considered to be a threat, in 1981, but neither man was as shallow and lacking in personal achievement as Corbyn. Both, indeed, were heavyweights, who'd held ministerial office with some distinction. Neither was an anti-semite, or tolerant of anti-semites. Neither had a record of supporting terrorism against Britain. Also, there was Healey. And Callaghan was still a presence. Big men. The Labour front bench today is made up of nonentities, apart from Starmer. And Starmer is constantly sidelined and humiliated by the leadership. Christ, he might even be tempted to join a social-democratic breakaway.

5. The SDP was thinly spread. A bit of Warrington, a bit of Glasgow Hillhead, a bit of Lincoln. It lacked a centre. A new social-democratic party could make a big splash in London - and possibly Liverpool and Manchester too.

6. Scotland. Labour is fucked in Scotland and Corbyn's 'Little England' policy is making things worse. But the SNP isn't as popular as it was either. There's a great opportunity here, surely, for a new centre-left party.



 

I actually agree with every word of that. But fuck me, it’s going to be intolerable in the short term, and maybe medium term too.

[TepidT2O]

Defending collaboration with the far right is the new Labour loyalty. If you're proper Labour, you must support jumping into bed with UKIP.

Jumping in bed with the Tories to facilitate a Tory Brexit. That’s what some see it as.

And give that the ******* *** ***** wouldn’t share a stage with Cameron during the referendum it’s odd that he might do now.

I’m not entirely convinced they are right though. I can see that having some influence on the deal might be useful for the country.

Of course, the worthless **** ****** has obviously missed the point that there is literally zero chance of this deal getting through Parliament.

[Alan_X]

Ha. Caught me. Sorry deleted. Circular argument to get in and thread is testy enough. Had to google Stanley - shall investigate.

Stanley Unwin was the narrator on The Small Faces classic album Ogdens Nutgone Flake. By chance monkeyharris (of this parish) and I were singing Happy Days Toy Town after the West Ham game the other night.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5pPCYlYWO6w

Can’t remember why.

[cloggypop]

I watched May on Ch4 news.

I’d like to think I have compassion. She’s in an impossible situation, and seeing her going through the same rigmarole is more than deja vu - it’s to be struck once again by how completely lacking in empathy or sympathy I remain.

Because that’s what by all accounts she believed, and campaigned for - Remain. So in a sense she is being even more disingenuous than Corbyn, because at least we always knew where he stood.

I’m in agreement with oldfordie about Owen Smith too - he’d have made a leader of the Labour Party I would have been comfortable with. I also think Yorky’s point about Milne has more than a grain of truth; his hand is all over the leadership’s blatant ignoring of conference policy.

That little cabal of self-serving Trots, Marxists and ideologues - Chakrabarti included - should pay a heavy price for their stupidity. The signs are that the young who flocked to Labour in the aftermath of Corbyn’s election have finally twigged, and they will. The country, in the meantime looks set to have a Tory Government for the foreseeable future.

What a shitshow.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/philip-may-theresa-may-paradise-papers-questions-to-answer-a8059996.html

[Yorkykopite]

I assume your not posting from a phone!

I’ll try and address best I can, but keep in mind I am making comparisons and hypothetical suggestions based on what I have read (I was only born in 82) so happy to be corrected.

1. I get your point but the large unions could just as easily force Corbyn out as they could disaffiliate, especially if they see no signs of a Labour government. Unite might get the headlines but they are not the only affiliated union, nor are they even the largest. And assuming Brexit does happen as we are not pretty much at the 11th hour, I fail to see the relevance of a Remain supporting TUC as we’ll be out.

2. Agree

3. Yes the new party would have a huge issue to get behind and we have seen how it’s helped UKIP and the SNP recently. But the Lib Dem’s are pretty much a single issue party now when it comes to Remain - but the results so far are modest. And again assuming we do Leave, the election after next (potentially 8 years after Brexit if we leave this March) I don’t think Remain will be the big issue to get behind.

4. Agree with most of that but I think that supports my argument that there is a post Corbyn future for the party because he’s not that good.

5. Not sure what you mean, a new party could be just as equally spread thin. Probably depends on who defects, where they represent and how popular they are.

6. Agree with Labours prospects being poor in Scotland but the SNP is a lot more popular even now then it was in the 80’s. And I suspect Leaving will encourage calls for independence and help the SNP rather then then a pro-EU and I presume pro-union stance of the new pay (which again is just the Lib Dem’s).

Thanks WLR. If you're on your phone that is heroic. If you aren't it's still pretty interesting.

Here's what I think in reply:

1. The unions have no power to change the leadership. Once they were the kingmakers in the Labour Party, but now that power resides in the individual membership. Ed Miliband's disastrous legacy. In the days when the unions controlled the Labour Party they were less likely to desert it. Also, McCluskey may have a big say in forming Labour Party policy, but the General Council no longer does. The party-union bond has loosened considerably and therefore it's less intimidating than it once would have been to set up an alternative social-democratic party to Labour.

3. The Lib Dems are not a bellwether. They carry too much baggage. People, especially young people, remember their perfidy when Clegg joined the Coalition and they haven't forgotten this. But, amongst older people, the Lib Dems are just too....I can think of a million words to describe them, none of them flattering.

4. If Corbyn goes, what's to stop the Tradas of the world electing Richard Burgon instead? This is a new party with a vast new membership (even if if it is losing some of them). Many of them are way, way to the Left and - like Trada - don't have a particular tradition of voting Labour and know anything about the labour movement and what it used to stand for. This membership has immense power when it comes to choosing a leader. It didn't choose Owen Smith. It's now trying to deselect Luciana Berger, Jess Phillips and Stella Creasy plus whatever Jews it can get its hands on. They're mad.

5. I mean that a new party could start with a regional base and a machine. That base could be London, where voters are multi-ethnic, forward looking and pro-European. But the same is true of most of the metropolitan centres and big university towns. New parties need strong regional identities out of which to grow and expand. That's what the Labour Party had in Edwardian Britain, when it began to challenge the Liberals from the West Riding, East Lancashire, East London and the coalfields. The old SDP wasn't attached to anything.

6. The SNP is certainly more popular than it was in the 1980s. But that's my point. The massive Scottish vote for Labour under Thatcherism acted as a deterrent to Labour MPs thinking of jumping ship. No longer.

Another point. The SDP failed to break the mould. But people tend to forget how close they came to doing so. In 1983 they almost surpassed Labour in the popular vote. A few extra points and they'd have done so, taking hundreds of Labour seats with them.

[Zeb]

Stanley Unwin was the narrator on The Small Faces classic album Ogdens Nutgone Flake. By chance monkeyharris (of this parish) and I were singing Happy Days Toy Town after the West Ham game the other night.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5pPCYlYWO6w

Can’t remember why.

[TepidT2O]

The SDP had a fair compliment of Euro skeptics in and amongst them.

It’s an interesting comparison with today’s potential break away groups.  Both are equally against at the dreadfully poor leadership and regressive politics, but today’s group would. (I assume) be almost entirely pro European.

[ShakaHislop]

Nah. If we'd have had a telly when I was a nipper then I'd probably have known him. Watching him reminds me of the Two Ronnies mispronunciation sketch. Anyways. Brexit. Ho hum.

----


Looks like May's 'revised deal' may not arrive in Parliament until 'late March'. (Guardian). 21st March is the date when we have absolutely no alternative but to beg the EU for an extension because we've totally run out of time to pass anything agreed after then. (source: Times' Sam Coates on twitter)

Only if Parliament allows her to do so. If MPs fail to take their 2nd opportunity to take control of the process next week, then it undermines the credibility of those who will try to argue they had no choice but to accept the deal.

[Yorkykopite]

The SDP had a fair compliment of Euro skeptics in and amongst them.

It’s an interesting comparison with today’s potential break away groups.  Both are equally against at the dreadfully poor leadership and regressive politics, but today’s group would. (I assume) be almost entirely pro European.

Yes, there'd be no point if it wasn't.

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

just a bunch of racist cranks

?

[Robinred]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/philip-may-theresa-may-paradise-papers-questions-to-answer-a8059996.html

But the Mays go to church and everything...

[Lush is the best medicine...]

?

the anti semitism that’s a massive problem in the party

[Zeb]

Only if Parliament allows her to do so. If MPs fail to take their 2nd opportunity to take control of the process next week, then it undermines the credibility of those who will try to argue they had no choice but to accept the deal.

Good point. It's almost as if that late a date for her to come back with something kind of forces that decision. Not to be overly conspiratorial about the EU marking things out with a big neon X and arrows pointing towards it.

[west_london_red]

Thanks WLR. If you're on your phone that is heroic. If you aren't it's still pretty interesting.

Here's what I think in reply:

1. The unions have no power to change the leadership. Once they were the kingmakers in the Labour Party, but now that power resides in the individual membership. Ed Miliband's disastrous legacy. In the days when the unions controlled the Labour Party they were less likely to desert it. Also, McCluskey may have a big say in forming Labour Party policy, but the General Council no longer does. The party-union bond has loosened considerably and therefore it's less intimidating than it once would have been to set up an alternative social-democratic party to Labour.

3. The Lib Dems are not a bellwether. They carry too much baggage. People, especially young people, remember their perfidy when Clegg joined the Coalition and they haven't forgotten this. But, amongst older people, the Lib Dems are just too....I can think of a million words to describe them, none of them flattering.

4. If Corbyn goes, what's to stop the Tradas of the world electing Richard Burgon instead? This is a new party with a vast new membership (even if if it is losing some of them). Many of them are way, way to the Left and - like Trada - don't have a particular tradition of voting Labour and know anything about the labour movement and what it used to stand for. This membership has immense power when it comes to choosing a leader. It didn't choose Owen Smith. It's now trying to deselect Luciana Berger, Jess Phillips and Stella Creasy plus whatever Jews it can get its hands on. They're mad.

5. I mean that a new party could start with a regional base and a machine. That base could be London, where voters are multi-ethnic, forward looking and pro-European. But the same is true of most of the metropolitan centres and big university towns. New parties need strong regional identities out of which to grow and expand. That's what the Labour Party had in Edwardian Britain, when it began to challenge the Liberals from the West Riding, East Lancashire, East London and the coalfields. The old SDP wasn't attached to anything.

6. The SNP is certainly more popular than it was in the 1980s. But that's my point. The massive Scottish vote for Labour under Thatcherism acted as a deterrent to Labour MPs thinking of jumping ship. No longer.

Another point. The SDP failed to break the mould. But people tend to forget how close they came to doing so. In 1983 they almost surpassed Labour in the popular vote. A few extra points and they'd have done so, taking hundreds of Labour seats with them.

Yup, if I am on RAWK I am always on the phone!

Anyway, on to the subject at hand!

1. Official power of the unions is undoubtedly curbed but they still contribute significantly in terms of cash, facilities and people to the party so there is significant influence there. Which also raises another issue for me over this new party - whose going to fund it? I would assume it’s going to be Remain supporting large donors which raises its own questions for me, who these people are, what’s their source of wealth etc

3. Yes, the Lib Dem’s are very tainted but they seem very keen on a Labour split and working with them. At a minimum there will have to some alliance otherwise your just going to split the vote, but form an alliance and this new party can easily be tainted by association (plus carry some baggage for how they voted while still in Labour)

4. But what’s stopping a decent (obviously depends on how you define decent) leader replacing Corbyn? Other then Brexit my concerns about Corbyn are not his politics, just the baggage and constant distractions. Not sure what suggests a vast membership to this new party, its popular in certain circles but just as others are guilty of that could well be an echo chamber rather then what’s actually there untapped.

5. I get that, but most of the strongest Remain voting areas are the ones with the most popular Labour MPs. David Lammy, Chukka Umana, even Corbyn represent very strong Remain constituencies. Unless they can be convinced to defect, the new party needs to defeat them which is a huge ask.

The main issue for me takes me back to what I have said earlier, once Brexit is done and dusted it’s too late to form a Remain party, the horse will already have bolted. And by then I suspect a lot of people will just be sick of the whole thing, Brexit, Remain, the EU, UKIP, all of it and just want a break from it all. Brexit/Remain fatigue is a very real danger.

[ShakaHislop]

Stephen Hammond: Minister hints he could resign to vote against no-deal Brexit

A minister has hinted he could resign to vote against a no-deal Brexit in the Commons next week.

Stephen Hammond said he would be "clear where my responsibilities lie" if it transpires that 14 February is the last opportunity to vote against Britain leaving the EU without an agreement.

The Wimbledon MP, who is a health minister, was a vocal backbench opponent of such a scenario until being given a government role in November.

A cross-party plan to delay Brexit by extending Article 50 and avoid no deal in the process is expected to be voted on again.

The amendment, spearheaded by Labour MP Yvette Cooper and Conservative MP Nick Boles, was defeated by 23 votes last week.

When asked if he would resign to back a similar amendment next week, Mr Hammond told The House magazine: "We will all have to look into our conscience at that stage.

"But I don't think anyone can doubt my principles and what my view would be if that is the last opportunity.

"I'm pretty clear where my responsibilities lie, much as I love this job, much as I think the NHS is a wonderful, wonderful institution.

"I'm also very clear that as members of parliament we have a moral duty to our country and our constituencies. If you look at my record over the last year, no one can question my moral view on that."

Mr Hammond said he was still "hopeful" that Mrs May would be able to agree a deal with the EU.

But he added that if this does not happen by next week, the votes on 14 February would give MPs "the opportunity to ensure that no deal doesn't happen by mistake".

Mr Hammond said: "I have no doubt that many of my colleagues and I will take that opportunity if that appears to be the eventuality."

https://news.sky.com/story/stephen-hammond-minister-hints-he-could-resign-to-vote-against-no-deal-brexit-11630892

[Sangria]

Yup, if I am on RAWK I am always on the phone!

Anyway, on to the subject at hand!

1. Official power of the unions is undoubtedly curbed but they still contribute significantly in terms of cash, facilities and people to the party so there is significant influence there. Which also raises another issue for me over this new party - whose going to fund it? I would assume it’s going to be Remain supporting large donors which raises its own questions for me, who these people are, what’s their source of wealth etc

3. Yes, the Lib Dem’s are very tainted but they seem very keen on a Labour split and working with them. At a minimum there will have to some alliance otherwise your just going to split the vote, but form an alliance and this new party can easily be tainted by association (plus carry some baggage for how they voted while still in Labour)

4. But what’s stopping a decent (obviously depends on how you define decent) leader replacing Corbyn? Other then Brexit my concerns about Corbyn are not his politics, just the baggage and constant distractions. Not sure what suggests a vast membership to this new party, its popular in certain circles but just as others are guilty of that could well be an echo chamber rather then what’s actually there untapped.

5. I get that, but most of the strongest Remain voting areas are the ones with the most popular Labour MPs. David Lammy, Chukka Umana, even Corbyn represent very strong Remain constituencies. Unless they can be convinced to defect, the new party needs to defeat them which is a huge ask.

The main issue for me takes me back to what I have said earlier, once Brexit is done and dusted it’s too late to form a Remain party, the horse will already have bolted. And by then I suspect a lot of people will just be sick of the whole thing, Brexit, Remain, the EU, UKIP, all of it and just want a break from it all. Brexit/Remain fatigue is a very real danger.

Then let Corbynite Labour continue to compete for kipper votes as he's directed them to do. I and probably many others will vote for whichever new party created to push for rejoining the EU. Our wish to remain is not represented by the main parties, both of which are competing to cater for the kipper tendency.

[cloggypop]

But the Mays go to church and everything...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/02/tax-havens-theresa-may-backing-british-dependencies

[BobOnATank]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/02/tax-havens-theresa-may-backing-british-dependencies

Blimey, but not surprising 

Tax Justice Network chief executive Alex Cobham says Europe could take similar action if provoked. British banks could be denied the passporting rights that allow them to trade in Europe. For this reason, he believes the regulation free, low-tax paradise that some Brexiters dream of is a receding prospect. “Withholding passporting rights would be a relatively light sanction and easy to agree but the impact for the UK would be enormous,” says Cobham. “This is probably the last time that the UK can play the role of major blocker.”

[surfer. Fuck you generator.]

Blimey, but not surprising 

It seems to be something the Guardian are pushing - the angle about tax havens and the super rich pushing for Brexit and Trump as a wider part of an attack on controls. There was another article there yesterday linking these things together:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/feb/07/why-the-wealthy-back-trump-and-brexit

[goalrushatgoodison]

Just on the comparisons between SDP and the suggestions of a new party now.

I recognise that your memory can play tricks on you but my recollection is that three, at least, of the Gang of Four were household names before rather than after the internal Labour Party strife. In that regard I always felt a lot of the appeal of the SDP came from the stature of their leadership and accordingly their prospects were intertwined with those of that leadership. I don't think such recognisable names exist now in the current Labour fold.

The flip side of this is that if a new party could gain traction ( and Brexit would certainly be a good vehicle for this) the abscence of a strong personality focus on their origins, could make them more sustainable in the long run.

[No666]

I suspect the lack of baggage might be as much of a benefit as a negative. Indeed, they'd have to try to stop Blair from endorsing them.

[KillieRed]

Why does any one take any note what Trada posts. Hes clearly a troll, just put him on ignore

He`s not, he believes what he`s saying.

[KillieRed]

6. Scotland. Labour is fucked in Scotland and Corbyn's 'Little England' policy is making things worse. But the SNP isn't as popular as it was either. There's a great opportunity here, surely, for a new centre-left party.

There`s been hardly any movement from any party since GE2017 according to this:

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/how-would-you-be-likely-to-vote-in-a-uk-general-election-asked-since-2017-gener#line

The Tories gained seats by weaponizing sectarianism, Labour helped them and hurt themselves when Kezia Dugdale publicly stated that people should vote Tory instead of the more progressive SNP. Now they are two dogs fighting over the same unionist bone. Bizarrely more people seem to still want to stay in the union than leave it. I`d guess that Sturgeon et al are waiting to see what the fall-out of Brexit is before pulling the trigger.

[Yorkykopite]

Just on the comparisons between SDP and the suggestions of a new party now.

I recognise that your memory can play tricks on you but my recollection is that three, at least, of the Gang of Four were household names before rather than after the internal Labour Party strife. In that regard I always felt a lot of the appeal of the SDP came from the stature of their leadership and accordingly their prospects were intertwined with those of that leadership. I don't think such recognisable names exist now in the current Labour fold.

The flip side of this is that if a new party could gain traction ( and Brexit would certainly be a good vehicle for this) the abscence of a strong personality focus on their origins, could make them more sustainable in the long run.

Yes, that's probably right. Three of the four were household names (I'm not sure that William Rodgers was) and that gave them heft. There's a lot of talent in the PLP at the moment (none of it Corbynite and some of it in danger of de-selection) but it's fair to say that Hilary Benn, Owen Smith, Cooper, Creasy, Phillips, Lammy, Chukka, Berger etc do not possess the experience or stature that Roy Jenkins, David Owen and Shirley Williams did in '81. They'd have to form the nucleus of any new party I think.

My own hope would be that David Miliband would come back into British politics - pretty much as Roy Jenkins came back from Europe in '81 - but I recognise that the four letters that make up the word 'Iraq' are enough to end any political discussion for some people.

[Zeb]

John Curtice has it that 'remain' is leading 'leave' 54:46, which is a 1% shift to 'remain' since October. Difference to referendum result is being driven by the views of those who did not vote in 2016 (for whatever reason) although there's a slight weakening of the 'leave' vote which seems to match with belief in the economic benefits of Brexit (!) weakening.

Cautionary note he gives worth quoting too.

Nobody should assert on the basis of the analysis in this blog that it is now clear that the outcome of a second referendum would be different from that of the first. Given the potential difficulties that faces all polling, the Remain lead is both too narrow and too reliant on the views of those who did not vote in June 2016 (who might or might not vote in another ballot) for anything other than caution to be the order of the day. Even if the polls are entirely accurate, such a narrow lead might still be overturned if Leave were to fight the better campaign – as they are widely adjudged to have done in 2016.

That said, it looks though there has been a modest but discernible softening of the Leave vote. As a result, those who wish to question whether Brexit does still represent ‘the will of the people’ do now have rather more evidence with which to back their argument. In the meantime, it might at least be thought somewhat ironic that doubts about Brexit appear to have grown in the minds of some Leave voters just as the scheduled date for the UK’s departure is coming into sight.

NatCen

[Fortneef]

I want a second referendum even if Leave are in the lead.

I want the Leavers to have to take responsibility, and vote for a specific Leave Deal, and if it all turns to shit, then it's their fault for voting for it.
Not the "political elites" fault for failing to negotiate their Brexit fantasy. No "stab in the back" myth.  The voters fault. 

[redbyrdz]

John Curtice has it that 'remain' is leading 'leave' 54:46, which is a 1% shift to 'remain' since October. Difference to referendum result is being driven by the views of those who did not vote in 2016 (for whatever reason) although there's a slight weakening of the 'leave' vote which seems to match with belief in the economic benefits of Brexit (!) weakening.

Cautionary note he gives worth quoting too.

NatCen

I am always surprised that support for leave is so strong. Its blindingly obvious it will be bad for everybody, so what is it that so many people are prepared to suffer for? Surely a large group of the leave supporters must realise that, but are prepared to pay the price. What for?

There is an American political scientist (Fukuyama) who argues it is all about identity, that the middle classes feel their identity (which in this case is their feeling of being British) is under threat. I would argue that in contrast to most Brits, many Europeans have developed a 'European' identity. Because of this new identity, they don't fear the loss of their old national identity as much. This development has been supported by the governments and media of those countries, while it has been actively undermined in the UK. An exception are probably the young British, who largely also feel European first. If this is true, then the way to strengthen the remain vote is to support the development of a European identity (as in British-in-Europe), more than economical arguments.