The Prime Minister said in her recent statement to Parliament that MPs in the House of Commons had a “duty to listen to their constituents before taking a decision in the national interest”.
What an excellent idea!
With that, let’s turn our attention to New Polling Shows the Public Kicking Back Against Theresa May’s Brexit Deal.
The first question asked: “Whether or not you agree that the only options open to the UK now are Theresa May’s deal, no deal or no Brexit, out of those options only, which would you prefer as the outcome for Britain’s negotiations with the EU?” The responses were 25% for Theresa May’s deal; 32% for No Deal 32%, and 41% for No Brexit with the UK staying in the EU, with 3% Don’t Knows.
<When next asked to choose between Theresa May’s Deal or No Deal – and No Brexit– the responses hardened, delivering 57% for Leaving deal or no deal and 41% for No Brexit, with again 3% Don’t Knows.
Bottom Line
- Only 41% favored staying in the EU.
- Only 25% favored Theresa May’s plan.
- Only 32% favored hard Brexit.
Clearly, those polled do not want to stay in the EU. But they also do not like May’s plan.
Some Labour and some Tory MPs want a Norway or Canada option but the poll did not allow that.
Why? May ruled it out.
Binary Options
The Guardian reports Theresa May rules out Norway-style Brexit compromise with Labour.
Theresa May has ruled out any plan B involving a Norway-style compromise deal with the Labour party in order to deliver a parliamentary consensus on Brexit, saying the opposition party’s refusal to accept the backstop arrangement put the UK on a course for no deal.
Influential backbenchers, including former Tory minister Nick Boles and Labour’s Stephen Kinnock, have been developing a compromise proposal based on membership of the European Economic Area plus a negotiated customs union, believing it is the only version of Brexit that could attract enough Labour and Tory votes to deliver a parliamentary majority.
Some cabinet ministers are understood to be attracted to the plans as an alternative if May’s negotiated deal fails to pass the House of Commons.
In Bed with the EU
Meanwhile it is clear May has been in bed, politically speaking, with the EU. They both press for the same binary option. “No changes” to the deal.
Hypocrite of First Magnitude
May accuses Labour of doing anything to force another election.
Meanwhile, she is willing to screw her own constituents while hopping in bed with Michel Barnier and the EU to not have one.
Is there a practical difference?
Rotten Kettle of Fish
May tells the House of Commons they have a “duty to listen to their constituents before taking a decision in the national interest”.
This deal is such a rotten kettle of fish that even the public sees clearly sees it.
What an amazing hypocrite.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
Worst of all, the “no changes” option apparently only applies to the UK. France wants changes already.
Having read the discussion below, I’m not in the UK or British either. However, I find Brexit very interesting because the people spoke in a referendum opposed by most of the political elite and it remains to be seen if their will is carried out. Brexit is a litmus test for democracy generally and I wonder if the UK will pass that test. I like these posts.
Hi Sunny129,
Good name.
Just remember that {anything}-tyranny is the problem. While Anarcho-{anything-but-tyranny}, is the solution.
In a three-way choice with no majority, people can be against all three alternatives. I don’t see a poll that forces people to choose between May Brexit and hard Brexit.
That’s why legitimate government only concerns itself with legislating and enforcing things where opinion is darned near unanimous. Like bans on murder. And, “weeeellllll mayyyyybee” as Ron Paul put it, restrictions on ownership of nukes. Leaving anything even remotely controversial up to each individual.
This is also exactly analogous to, as well as borne out of the same concerns for, why legitimate justice systems require proof beyond reasonable doubt before intervening. Again simply punting on any case even remotely controversial.
Those two form necessary pillars of any free society.
While run amuck attempts by leeches to assign guilt, responsibility and liability for everything under the sun, by abuse of civil litigation bypassing the protections of the latter; as well as pretending that a process of simple majority lynch mob rule is somehow made legitimate by shrill’ly chanting “democraaciiii;” are both features of progressive, totalitarian terror states. And such states only.
Rational immigration law?
Start prosecuting the Employers employiong ILLEGALS with fine and jail time, FIRST!
How many employers have been fined/jail time? Almost NONE!
Hypocrisy is written all over this kind of argument! No jobs = No Illegals!
You’re expecting a UK government to actually govern properly. Don’t be silly.
I have been following Brexit saga through many blogs. Each of the factions involved have their own agenda. Unfortunately every one of them want to have the ‘cake and eat it too’ ! this is manifested through all the revised statements from each party buy alas all of them clueless about the reality!
It is the same all over the West. The US Congress will not pass a rational immigration law. No one stops the flow of capital (as in plant and equipment) and intellectual property to Communist China as the hole in the economy is plastered over with freshly printed dollars. Obama helped to incite the upheavals in MENA that caused the flood of immigrants to the EU.
It is all about disrupting and destroying western culture to the point that nothing else is heard except the Gospel according to Brother Karl Marx(with interpretation). This is all about One World Socialist Government/One World Market. 80 years ago it was called Fascism. It is pervasive and more associated with economic class than political affiliation.
Prepare to be skinned to the bone.
The separatists who want out of the EU can talk all they want about Canada deals, or Canada Plus, or Norway deal, or whatever. The question is whether the other party to the negotiations — the EU — is prepared to put those deals on the table.
Under most of the proposed deals, the UK goes from a Bilateral Zero Tariff world with its main European trading partners, to a tariffed world. Some people would tell us that is a bad move. Consumers will be worse off, etc.
Looking down the road to a post-separation UK — the same feckless politicians who made such a mess of separation from the EU are supposed then to do a superb job of negotiating new trade agreements around the world? Seriously, what are the chances of them being able to do that successfully? What are the chances of the UK Political Class even being able to replace Mrs. May?
“..to a tariffed world.”
Nothing forces Britain to erect tariffs.
No politician will ever do a superior job of anything. Upside is, nothing of value can ever result of political machinations. So as long as brits grow up enough to keep politicians out of it, all of it, they’ll be just fine.
Just as is the case with Blackrock, Goldman, Ambulance chasers and the rest of the apes hailed as preservation worthy life forms by idiot progressives everywhere: None of what the undifferentiated mass of imbeciles called politicians can ever do, will ever be of any value. If anything they were capable of could, their imbecility would no longer be quite so undifferentiated. And they would be able to feed themselves without leeching on, and meddling in the lives of, others. The less dependence brits have on any of them, the better off Britain is. No different from all other peoples and countries.
Indeed! If someone made a toxic repellant called “Politicians-Be-Gone”, I for one would buy it by the case load. But in the real world, we are stuck with politicians in one form or another. As a side note, it is worth listening to Prof. Harl’s lectures on “The Vikings” in the Great Courses series. The Viking settlement of Iceland is one of very few examples of a society which deliberately did not form a political class. Yet even they ended up begging the King of Norway to rule them.
The UK separation from the EU is a classic example of Murphy’s Second Law — Once something has gone wrong, it will continue to get worse. Separation might be in the long-term best interests of the people of the UK, but the Brits stumbled into the process in a half-assed, poorly thought out manner. What else would you expect from London politicians?
“The UK separation from the EU is a classic example of Murphy’s Second Law — Once something has gone wrong, it will continue to get worse.”
But so is the EU. About the best example available of something that has gone wrong. And will continue to get worse.
Leaving the only answer to just get the heck away from things that has gone wrong: The EU, as well as the current process of sorta-kinda-maybe-in-a-way-could-have-been “separation.”
Just forget either one ever existed, and move on. Stick to the fundamentals. Freedom has never gone wrong. By definition.
Freedom has never gone wrong? When the UK had “freedom”, the UK Political Class pushed the UK into the EU. Sounds like freedom gone wrong. And after separation from the EU, that same UK Political Class will have freedom to make other wrong decisions.
If the choice is between dumb decisions made in Brussels and dumb decisions made in London … it is time to look for another alternative.
Whenever you think freedom has gone wrong, check your definition of freedom. Britain in the early 70s sure ain’t it by any reasonable definition.
We are in complete agreement about the inappropriateness of the word “freedom” to apply to the UK pre-joining the EU. That is why I cannot get too excited about UK separation from the EU. In or out, what difference does it make?
I don’t get why you care so much Mish… you’re not a brit, you’re not a european… what dog do you have in this fight? I can’t rassle up enough care to get so angry about it… what’s your trick?
I have another question for you Mish, how about another piece about how Russia/Trump claims are all false and it was just sour grapes Democrats peddling those tales? You were pretty clearly behind Trump in 2016… how about taking some responsibility for your little part in putting that felonious liar in the White House? How about retracting some of your stupid claims from that time?
“I think the weakness of Mueller’s substantive findings are suggested by the fact that he has to resort to false statement prosecutions, which really shows that he didn’t start with very much, and that the very fact that he’s conducting an investigation has created these crimes,” said Dershowitz. “These are not crimes that had been committed prior to his appointment, they’re crimes that were committed as the result of his appointment, and that raises some questions about the role of special prosecutors in creating crimes, or creating opportunities for crimes to be committed.”
“In the end, I don’t think Mueller’s going to come up with very much, in terms of criminal conduct, that existed before he was appointed, and that’s pretty shocking,” he added.
Trump had a pipeline to wikileaks at the same time the Russians were feeding them stolen intel. Trump was negotiating a tower in Russia in 2016 while campaigning, and even after the election was stating he had no business in Russia and hadn’t talked to Russians in years. Baldfaced lies to the American people. Open your eyes, you have been deceived.
Here’s a real simple question… if there are no crimes prior to Mueller’s appointment, why are all of Trump’s staffers committing perjury? It makes no goddamn sense at all unless the alternative, telling the truth, is too damaging. Mueller will end up recommending impeachment. The rot is deep and even useful fools like Mish will eventually be forced to confront they got taken.
From what I have read in the UK Press Mueller has found diddly squat in what he is supposed to be investigating – Russia. One is beginning to think he couldn’t find the place on a map with or without the aid of a white stick and a guide dog. The President might have been looking to build or acquire a hotel or building in Moscow, but that was no crime. He held no office at the time. A more fruitful avenue for him might be the Clintons, but that wont serve the real purpose of course.
They’ve spent over 2 years to get to a point that could have been arrived at in 2 months.
Lack of planning for no deal is almost as if the establishment wanted to offer no real exit option & over-ride the referendum result. Hoping older voters died off and others changed their minds.
Who knows what is for the best?
Expect fewer plebicites in future, the plebs opinion is of no value except when it lines up with that of the establishment.
“……. almost as if the establishment wanted to offer no real exit option & over-ride the referendum ……”
There is no ‘almost’ about it. You only have to glance at what has happened over the two year time-line to see that May never intended to deliver Brexit. Just the news headlines are sufficient. It has also become clear to me that the Davies negotiating team was never actually negotiating, even if they didn’t know it. May was the only one ‘negotiating’, secretly via Olly Robbins and other Civil Servants. Although the correct word would be conspiring rather than negotiating.
It is all part of the plan. Cameron thought he would win the Referendum so didn’t do any planning just in case he didn’t. He sodded off at the first opportunity. Gove and Johnson fell out, or rather Gove stabbed Boris in the back and we ended up with the Remainiac May as Prime Minister. She never intended to fore fill the peoples instruction because, like the rest of the establishment, she thinks we Leave voters are all thick, racists, ill-informed etc. So what did she do ? Easy, effectively destroyed the negotiation and created the worst deal you could ever not imagine. How ANY self respecting, honourable of the people (and Crown) could agree to such drivel is beyond all comprehension, but she did. The whole of the political class in the UK (and it seems they share these traits with their counterparts across Europe) have treated the people with contempt. Perhaps what is needed is a few heads over Traitor’s Gate and then they might do as they are told. Politicians should always fear the people not treat them with contempt.
Personally I find the Erdogan Solution to be most attractive at the moment. Arrest the entire top three echelons of all those in or around government, then investigate to find out exactly what they have done wrong.
NEVER GIVE POWER TO ANYONE EAGER TO HAVE IT. IT USUALLY MEANS THEY HAVE NO IDEA OF THE RESPONSIBILITY IT ENTAILS ELSE THEY WOULDN’T BE SO KEEN.
I daren’t express what I really think of Blair/Brown as the primary architects. They should have had a plebiscite on the Lisbon Treaty and controlled the flow of people.
What did we do to deserve them?
Karma indeed.
To add insult to injury it was followed by Cameron/May.
God help us.
The Best, always and everywhere, for all but a few privileged leeches, always has been, and always will be the Jefferson Deal: “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations-entangling alliances with none.”
IOW, for brits to grow up and do their own trade deals, with whomever trading partner anywhere on planet earth, or beyond, they may care to. Letting the idiots with nothing more productive to do than run around pretending to “make deals” for someone else, do the only thing their meager competences qualifies them to do: Go pound sand.
“What we really need is a do-over!”