Westminstenders: Welcome to 2019

[RedToothBrush]

Welcome to 2019.

Bit of a different thread starter; instead of me speculating what are your predictions for the coming year politically? Will be interesting to see how people are viewing things right now.

How is Brexit going to play out?

Who is going to be framed as the scapegoat for whatever scenario you think likely?

What are going to be the biggest political issues that the media / politicians push (as opposed to what the real issues are)?

What is going to be the most shocking thing that will happen either here or abroad?

What will happen with Trump?

Who will be the next Tory leader and when?

Whats on the cards for the various political parties in general?

Tomorrow, there will be 84 days to Brexit, i.e. 12 weeks
Tick Tock

So far, there are no moves from either the Tory or Labour side to ask for a vote on Revoke
Maybe if we had another 2 years ....

There is probably considerable support in the PLP for a PV, because ¾ of Labour members want this, according to latest poll.
However, they are understandably unwilling to get May out of a jam while taking the blame.
So it would need to be an all-party agreement

Noone seems willing yet to advocate Revoke without the political cover of a PV first

Of course there aren’t. The next vote is on the WA. If that goes through, Revoke is off the table. If it doesn’t, the next issues are a vote on the alternatives and extension.

Extension would be granted on GE or PV, which pushes the Revoke question aside for the time being.

I’m not sure why you’re going on as if a vote on Revoke might be imminent.

Tamara Cohen @ tamcohen
It escalates: Sajid Javid has written to the defence Gavin Williamson requesting a Royal Navy vessel for the Channel, @SkyNews can confirm. This is after two more cutters also requested. It's as if there's some manoeuvring going on....

Stewart Mcdonald MP @ stewartmcdonald
This whole situation has been perversely blown out of proportion. The Home Secretary requesting the deployment of the Royal Navy escalates it to a new level of absurd political grandstanding. What next? HMS Vanguard in the English Channel by Sunday?

www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-latest-theresa-may-could-suspend-meaningful-vote-for-second-time-if-she-looks-likely-to-lose-a4029231.html

David Davis: PM could suspend vote on Brexit deal for a second time

Theresa May could delay the “meaningful vote” on her Brexit deal for a second time if she looks likely to lose it, David Davis has said.

The former Brexit Secretary’s remarks came as the Prime Minister prepared to meet EU leaders and seek “clarifications” to help persuade MPs to back her proposals.

The vote on Mrs May’s deal, which was delayed at the last minute in December, is currently scheduled for the week beginning January 14.

But Mr Davis, in a column for the Daily Telegraph, speculated that it could be put off if Mrs May was likely to lose.

Under pressure: Theresa May (Eddie Keogh/Reuters)

He said: "The Withdrawal Agreement does not respect the referendum result. That is why the meaningful vote had to be delayed and one wonders if even the January vote will go ahead.

"Attempts to frighten MPs into supporting it are unlikely to work, because voting down this substandard deal will not result in no Brexit."

Urging Mrs May to take her time to get a better deal, he added: "We know that the EU is worried about the loss of the £39 billion 'divorce' payment if there is no deal... so this is the moment to be hard-nosed about these issues.

"The more we prepare to leave the EU without a deal, the more likely a good deal becomes.”

Theresa May calls on MPs to back Brexit deal in New Year message

Mrs May is expected to speak this week to EU leaders including German chancellor Angela Merkel, Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte and European Council president Donald Tusk in an attempt to break the Brexitlogjam, the Financial Times reported.

A Downing Street source said talks between Mrs May's negotiators and their counterparts in Brussels have continued over the Christmas period.

Mr Davis insisted a deal will be reached "at the eleventh hour" because the EU is worried about losing the £39 billion "divorce payment" that would come with a Brexit deal.

Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, speaking in Singapore, said cancelling Brexit through a second EU referendum would have "devastating" social consequences, while a no-deal exit would cause economic disruption.

He predicted the Government would "find a way" of getting the 585-page withdrawal agreement approved by Parliament.

Do we need reminding about David Davis's record when he was negotiating?

Why would a second (third) EU referendum have devastating consequences? The Leavers expect to win, so will get their 2016 decision confirmed. If not, it will be the will of the 2019 electorate.

Daily Mash, more in tune with reality than mainstream media as ever (eg DT thinking David Davis credible in any of his utterances)
www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/sajid-javids-guide-to-making-up-your-own-crisis-20190103180935

Sorry not Torygraph but ES.

ok, so the military come into the channel. Then what? They can't patrol French waters, they can't return people to France, they can't (thank God) shoot them down. Surely all they can do is rescue them and bring them here. Once they are here they can then apply for asylum.

Tatiana With only 12 weeks left, any solution needs to be pretty damn imminent.

I think a GE unlikely - unless the WA is passed, the DUP won't want one as they look likely to lose seats
and the Tories won't either, with 57 of their seats having majoriities under 4k.
Polls indicate just another hung Parliament would result, i.e. more time wasted

Also, the EU might even refuse an extension if both parties have Brexit in their manifesto - and I'm not sure if May has sufficient power left to force the WA into the Tory manifesto.

A PV is more likely, if MPs get stuck - but then enough of them would need to insist / vote on Remain being a PV option.

All depends on what, if anything, MPs decide to do as the clock runs out to No Deal.

kitten I think the Navy can legally return people who sailed from a safe country, regardless of where they originally came from months ago.

Oybbk exactly. It's expensive and pointless posturing on the tax payer. For Tory party internal fighting.

{ok, so the military come into the channel. Then what? They can't patrol French waters, they can't return people to France, they can't (thank God) shoot them down. Surely all they can do is rescue them and bring them here. Once they are here they can then apply for asylum.}
Why stop there? As they are often young and fit potential workers the UK Gov could pay them £30K a year to pick fruit and veg unless they happen to be rather more skilled. Obviously a vast oversimplification but in countries where they come from there are no social services so not working at something means they starve. They are no less people than Jocasta at number 35 Margate Road.

At least anyone they pick up will go throgh the legal procedures in the UK, rather than just sneaking in anonymously and then fending for themselves,
which has a much higher chance of leading to crime

{Also, the EU might even refuse an extension if both parties have Brexit in their manifesto}
On the basis that WA and no deal are both forms of exiting an extension is not needed as the EU already have their 'no deal' contingency plan in the bag, and apart from that if WA goes through they will sit down calmly with a cup of coffee and start proper departure negotiations.

I don't think any political party is in favour of just ignoring this situation - great way to let the EDL etc stoke up panic -
and unfortunately, we don't seem to have many non-military vessels suitable

Leclerc The EU regard No Deal as the worst possible outcome
They'll take it though if the alternative is abandoning Ireland, or the SM principles

However, those contingency plans are for an emergency they hope won't happen

Their favourite option is still Revoke, imo,
with WA a distant second - the E27 leaders, like Merkel, when signing said they weren't celebrating because it was a tragedy

DD is talking his usual thick as mince bollocks about the 39 billion:

part of that is payment for transition, which is obviously not needed if there isn't one.

The part that is for past obligations is probably legally enforceable at the ICJ and will certainly be among the preconditions before the EU start negotiating any post-Brexit deal.

In fact, after a No Deal Brexit, the UK will have to sign up to the same obligations in the WA,
but will thereafter be negotiating from a position of a collapsing economy, rather than within a transition period in which things mostly stay the same.

{and unfortunately, we don't seem to have many non-military vessels suitable}
I would expect there are but using the military has an advantage that their rules of engagement and those taken by the sailors involved are different to a civilian force. Another layer of responsibility which takes it further from government, someone else to blame if there are mishaps.

I thought the Dublin convention allows for the return to a safe eu country, the return of refugees?
If it doesn't, i don't see how a Navy boat picking up refugees is any more able to sail into a French port and return peoples back to where they've sailed from, than a border force boat.

I just don't see how Macron can (electorally) allow the return of peoples picked up in UK territorial waters.

We can only presume that Javid and Mr Macron discussed more than is being speculated about on an internet chat forum.

With only 12 weeks left, any solution needs to be pretty damn imminent.

Imminent as in tomorrow or next week. We’re all aware there is time pressure and limited options.

The discussion of Revoke arose wrt the question of who now has the capacity to make it happen, post art50 court cases, not whether it was likely to happen tomorrow.

All depends on what, if anything, MPs decide to do as the clock runs out to No Deal.

Precisely. For the moment, everything hangs on the outcome of the WA.

{Precisely. For the moment, everything hangs on the outcome of the WA.}
Presuming you mean the vote for acceptance of the WA.
The one that D Davies is suggesting gets put back again so that Mrs May can be told a few more times by the EU that all the available cards are on the table, take it or leave it.