Joe_ Public wrote: » We are really specifically talking about the 19 lab mps who wrote to Johnson recently outlining their case for a deal. Obviously it's only speculation as to how many will cave but if Johnson is relying on them then he has merely an outside chsnce. Think that much is fairly clear.
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: » Seems there might be some truth to it.https://twitter.com/markdevenport/status/1184791671327936513 According to the UK government there will be an alternative process if Stormont isn't sitting. Maybe I'm interpreting it wrong but it sounds like if unionists have the numbers to get to the 46 majority mark in Stormont in a future election then they would have the potential to determine what happens, even if Stormont were to be brought down again?
munstermagic11 wrote: » They were last time as well. How did those votes go?
Varta wrote: » I think you are taking an ideological stance. It is a fact that a huge number of Labour constituencies are pro brexit. Objectively, this could be a deciding factor.
Varta wrote: » Watch the herd move.
farmchoice wrote: » the vote will be on Saturday most likely as of now it does not look good for johnson, he doesn't have the dup, a number of ex tory mp's will continue to vote against him and in the last little while Ian Duncan smith has come out against the deal apparently which means more ERG will follow. this will leave him any where between 10 and 50 short. what might pass though is amendment to hold a second referendum.
Beechwoodspark wrote: » So is boris resigned to losing the HOC vote? I mean, on face value, Arlene and co are saying no. So he can’t get it through. What’s his motive?
Varta wrote: » As I have said, their backs were not against the wall at that time.
farmchoice wrote: » i'm really not i'm basing my position purely on what those mp's have done repeatedly when faced with this exact situation. the talk of 15-18 labour rebels is based on wishful thinking by right wing commentators, those numbers have been bandied about before every vote and have never materialized.
LuckyLloyd wrote: » In reality, the majority of people and therefore representatives in NI will be happy with what has been proposed and it’s highly unlikely we end up in such a scenario.
Bambi wrote: » Leo has gone from "No hard border in Ireland" to "No hard border in Ireland unless the NI assembly says there is" Fairly spectacular reversal.
LuckyLloyd wrote: » Take a step back from this for a second: if a majority in the assembly wish to step out of the provisions that would indicate something fundamentally wrong with the arrangement. And if that happens everyone has two years to figure that out in line with the GFA. In reality, the majority of people and therefore representatives in NI will be happy with what has been proposed and it’s highly unlikely we end up in such a scenario. In many respects, this is a good thing as a definite complacency had taken hold regarding the peace process. NI needs constant work, constant dialogue, constant reaffirmations of consent on all sides for decades to come before we can truly put the past to bed.
farmchoice wrote: » well their backs are probably less against the wall this time as the benn act pretty much guarantees an extension.
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: » Can't see the DUP ever being happy this. After all, the majority of NI were happy with the GFA and that didn't matter a jot to them. And I wouldn't be confident the UUP will differ substantially to them if the majority of unionists indicate strong opposition to this, which is looking likely. I don't see this as a good thing at all. It plunges NI into a continuing cycle of arguments about the EU, borders and regulations. It will exacerbate the differences between unionism and nationalism. Perhaps it won't matter in the long run as a border poll might not be far off.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » Why didn't they pass May's deal, which was a better deal than this one? 1st meaningful vote on 15th January 2018, 3 Labour MPs voted for it. 2nd meaningful vote on 12th March, again 3 Labour votes. 3rd meaningful vote on 29th March, 5 Labour votes.
Varta wrote: » Take a moment to review the behaviour of the opposition Government over the past year or so. They have been all over the place, squabbling amongst themselves.
golfball37 wrote: » I hope this gets passed in the HOC. Whilst Brexit is bad for Ireland it would be ridiculous and make a laugh of democracy if Britain didn't leave the EU after the result in 2016.
VinLieger wrote: » I disagree if anything this gives moderates on both sides the badly needed middle ground of something they can both agree on to finally shift NI politics away from the extremes of both sides. That is part of why the DUP hate it it loosens their grips on the protestant vote pool because people simply will not want to vote for a party that is pro a hard border when voting them in very possibly could lead to one.
funkey_monkey wrote: » This dropping of the backstop and replacement with a vote is an awful idea - I'm not sure how Leo and the EU agreed to it. Apart from the instability it causes for business - which they stated the first time this proposal was mooted - I just can't see it being a good idea.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » On the ground, the situation has gone from "Hard border in Ireland on 1st November until the UK are so humiliated in trade talks that they concede some sort of backstop, which might take 10 years or never happen" to "No hard border in Ireland for 7 years, and then only if MLAs take leave of their senses".
Bambi wrote: » Highly unlikely doesn't cut it when it comes the putting a hard border on this Island