48 Letters Reached

[Kromovaracun]

May now faces a vote of confidence in her leadership of the Tory party this evening.

If she loses, then the wider party membership (such as there are any...) gets to vote. Unless, of course, anyone runs unopposed.

Predictions? Hopes? Fears?

[ludwig]

//.....make it absolutely clear from the outset that if a leaving deal suitable to the UK was not reached we would leave without one. That option should always have been on the table (and suitable preparations made to cope with it) but it never has been. You cannot expect successful negotiations to ensue when one side knows that the other will not, under any circumstances, play its trump card. //

Exactly NJ. The irony is of course that preparing for no deal would have ensured we got a good deal, whereas insisting all along we didn't need to think about it because we'd obviously get a good deal, has made it more likely we'll leave without one.

[jim360]

I still don't see how that can have improved our negotiating position. Threatening to jump off the cliff if we aren't given a rope does not make us look stronger.

And, besides, Theresa May certainly tried that at the start. "No deal is better than a bad deal". That line has got lost since, not because Theresa May is weak (or at least not only because of that), but because it is, and always has been, a lie. Leaving the EU with nothing to replace it is an economic and political disaster.

The EU, at least, has always known this, even if some on AB have not.

[emmie]

she will cling on to power, i am pretty sure of that, no one seems to want the job at any rate. 48 letters indeed but who would be forthcoming as leader.

[naomi24]

I think this vote is yet another farce, intended solely to endorse her position as Prime Minister. No one else wants job.

[mushroom25]

interesting tweet reported in the twittersphere this morning:-

Jacob Rees-Mog:-
"We need a new leader"

reply:-
"You had a vote two years ago. She won. You can't just ask for another one because you don't like the result.

May means May"

[youngmafbog]

//I still don't see how that can have improved our negotiating position. //

Really? I had you down as someone with a fair bit of nouse but now I can see negotiating is not your strength.

Perhaps you would like to buy this 20 year old car I have to hand for £5K with only 10 miles on it!

[jim360]

The point is that threatening to trigger an economic downturn that, at the very least, pulls the UK down as well isn't a threat worth making, and that's what almost everyone accepts No Deal would end up meaning. There's more than just the economic effects to consider, as well.

Sure, you could have tried that, and see how it works, but since it amounts to, from the EU's perspective at least, threatening to shoot ourselves if we don't get our way, I think it justified to dismiss it as a reasonable posture that would have strengthened our hand.

[jim360]

If Naomi's post is to be taken seriously, doesn't that effectively mean that Jacob Rees-Mogg, Bill Cash etc, are deep-cover Remainers?

[naomi24]

Why would it, Jim?

[jim360]

Which of my two posts are you referring to?

[emmie]

jim
no i don't believe they are, JRM has openly stated his case. But Mrs May will likely get the votes she needs, so another wasted time, effort

[naomi24]

Jim, the one where you asked, //If Naomi's post is to be taken seriously, doesn't that effectively mean that Jacob Rees-Mogg, Bill Cash etc, are deep-cover Remainers? //

[jim360]

I just figured that JRM et al probably intend the vote to be a chance to change the leadership, rather than to shore up Theresa May's position. If, after all, it *is* to support Theresa May by ensuring that she wins a confidence vote, as you say, then does that intention extend to all the 48+ rebels -- and, if so, does that mean that they actually support the deal?

Or, put another way, why are you so cynical about the vote itself being called?

[naomi24]

Jim, //JRM et al probably intend the vote to be a chance to change the leadership//

They may well intend that but I don't think there are enough 'et als', so to speak, to support them

//why are you so cynical about the vote itself being called? //

Because, with her coming in for so much criticism, I think it's a ploy to demonstrate that her position as leader has the endorsement of the majority of the party.

[jim360]

OK. In that case, I agree with you on the first point, but on the second, the vote has to be called according to the Conservative Party's own rules. Nobody, then, other than the rebels who called this thing, had any say in the timing of this vote. Certainly Theresa May didn't.

I agree that it will probably end up benefitting her, but that's because her enemies are incompetent rather than because she's clever.

[emmie]

its worse than a playground scuffle, at least out of that one gets some winner, out of this no one wins.

[naomi24]

Jim, //Nobody, then, other than the rebels who called this thing, had any say in the timing of this vote. //

I think you're missing the point. JRM et al started the ball rolling - and the Remainers jumped on the bandwagon in order to secure Mrs May's position.

[jim360]

Oh, now I see what you're getting at.

No. That really *is* clutching at straws.

[naomi24]

Clutching at straws? No, Jim. You're too trusting. It's the obvious way to secure her position. But we'll see. Don't forget the letter writers will be voting in a secret ballot.

[naomi24]

Quite amusing really, Jim. You trust the Conservatives more than I do! ;o)