The regular Ipsos MORI political monitor came out in today’s Evening Standard. Topline voting intention figures were CON 39%(+1), LAB 37%(-1), LDEM 13%(+3), UKIP 2%(-4). Fieldwork was Friday to Tuesday and changes are from MORI’s last poll in July (they take a month off for August).

As with other recent polls the Conservatives seem to have recovered a tiny lead since falling behind after the Davis & Johnson resignations. Worth noting is that 13% for the Liberal Democrats. This is the highest they have recorded in any poll since the general election. While one shouldn’t read too much into a single poll – especially one whose fieldwork overlapped with the Lib Dem party conference – the wider polling trend does suggest some uplift in Liberal Democrat support: six of the nine polls so far this month have the Liberal Democrats back up in double figures.

The poll also asked about confidence in the Brexit negotiations, finding predictably low figures. 28% of people said they were confident Theresa May would get a good deal for Britain in the Brexit negotiations, 70% were not.

There was, however, not much more confidence that alternative Prime Ministers would do any better. 28% were confident Jeremy Corbyn would get a good deal were he Prime Minister, 67% were not. If Boris Johnson was PM 33% would be confident he’d get a good deal, 64% would not.

Full details are here.


389 Responses to “Ipsos MORI/Standard – CON 39, LAB 37, LDEM 13, UKIP 2”

1 5 6 7 8
  1. @Oldnat – yes. my retrospective look back at Suez did also have in mind the idea that hard Brexit is likely to destroy the UK. As Suez hastened the loss of empire, so a hard Brexit will irrevocably change the UK.

    Posters may recall that I originally rejected the automatic assumption that a leave vote would lead to Scotland breaking away from rUK, which I think is still broadly correct in the case of a sensible Brexit deal. However, I had no conception that a Tory PM would really end up leaving without a deal, which in my view completely changes the dynamics for Scotland. I still feel very much that a no deal is only going to happen by a series of catastrophic accidents and remains highly unlikely, but there are too many very stupid people in senior positions within the Conservative Party for my liking to be completely sure of this.

    And then there is Northern Ireland. The whole Brexit affair has unleashed some remarkable polling evidence, which I think has been hugely underplayed in the mainland media. This indicates we are heading for a re-united Ireland. Indeed, this is now the expectation in nationalist communities and the south – perhaps not right now, but within sight of current generations. A variety of demographic, economic, social and political shifts are making the inconceivable become the expected, and a hard Brexit would give this drift of history a massive push. Already, many unionist business leaders are saying that hard Brexit would convert them to the cause of unification.

    The additional dynamic here is the geographic proximity of Scotland and Northern Ireland. An independent Scotland within the EU was disadvantaged by being so far on the fringes of Europe, with England in between. If Scotland and NI go together and restore their EU status, I can see a boom time again for Campbeltown and the South West ports. If one goes, they’ll both go.

    In some ways I am stunned that the hard Brexiters in Westminster have displayed such limited awareness or appreciation of the perilous nature of the union settlement, although the idiocy of such people does mitigate my level of surprise at their assertions.

    They do genuinely seem to either not understand or simply not care that their preferred course of action on the EU will break up the UK. It’s no longer a case of Little Englanders, rather than Littler Englanders. Tragic.

  2. May rebuffed at the Salzburg Conference, surprise, surprise! It was obvious that Chequers was a non-starter with the EU from the moment we got Barniers first reaction to the plan. I pointed this out at the time, and was told I was an idiot by Alec. Who’s the idiot now Alec?
    Hopefully May will eventually come to her senses and pursue a Canada style deal with the EU, but she should not move on the Irish Border question at all since the ERG group have already dealt with that. I don’t expect the EU to agree, so she should also ensure that over the next six months all the resources of Government are spent really preparing for no deal and an exit on WTO terms so that short term damage is minimised. Clearly such an exit is now favourite, I would suggest the likelihood of a WTO terms exit at about 90% now.

  3. May gave her verdict on Salzburg on Friday and took a formidable hard line for once, about time IMO. As she says we seem to have reached impasse and that means that leaving on WTO terms is even more likely. I don’t read UKPR in between weekends but I suspect more of the Remainders who post will be seeing leaving on WTO terms as a real possibility now. I also think there is less chance of a leadership challenge at the Tory party conference now. I suspect her Friday speech will go down a treat with most of the electorate, bearing in mind most have always been at best lukewarm to the EU all their lives. She certainly got good front page headlines.

  4. I see Anti-Brexit campaigners have been given permission after appeal to take their case to the ECJ as they seek a ruling on whether Article 50 can be halted. The cross-party group of politicians who brought the action argue that Article 50 can be revoked if MPs vote to do so. So typical of such undemocratic people who wish to defy the referendum result even at the last minute, that they take the matter to a foreign court. I am sure that whatever the answer from the ECJ, true democrats in Parliament will make sure that Article 50 is not revoked. Certainly, May has been quite clear that we would not revoke Article 50, and so to have Corbyn and McDonnell if I believe comments I saw on Saturday.
    If it was revoked we would cease to be a democratic country, IMO of course.

  5. Interesting piece in the DT on Friday about the IFT (UK) and Cato (US) Think Tanks text of an ambitious, US/UK FTA. The plan appears to give back control to consumers and businesses and remove it from bureaucrats and politicians. I’m all for that. I suspect Corbyn and his followers will not like the ideas :-)

  6. Interesting piece in the DT on Friday about the IFT (UK) and Cato (US) Think Tanks text of an ambitious, US/UK FTA. The plan appears to give back control to consumers and businesses and remove it from bureaucrats and politicians. I’m all for that. I suspect Corbyn and his followers will not like the ideas :-)

  7. I gather that the “Leave means Leave” rally at the University of Bolton was packed out and a great success with Nigel Farage, David Davis and Kate Hoey as the main speakers. Good to hear!

  8. How this plays in polling terms will be interesting – https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/sep/23/second-home-tax-labour-policy-double-council-tax-homelessness

    Personally, I think it’s long overdue, but those affected will make a huge noise, while those benefiting are often not on the electoral register.

    The article also highlights the issue of the ease of dodging the tax. This is where seeing Labour a a movement might just come in. Local’s pretty much know which homes are lived in and which are second homes, and I can foresee local Momentum individuals making sure that the right properties are correctly declared on their patch as part of campaigns to help the homeless.

  9. Well done Worcestershire for becoming T/20 Champs (very well led by M. Ali I thought) and to Kent and Warwickshire for being elevated to Div. 1 of the County Championship.

  10. R Huckle,

    The problem with your proposed ‘do you still want to leave or not’ question is that is leaves us with exactly the same difficulty as last time. It does not specify the means of leaving.

    Voters might honestly answer that they want to leave, but it might simultaneously be true they do not want any of the outcomes which you then list in the next part of your question. Nothing at all solved. (especially as the UK has no power to extend article 50, as per your second question. So you are suggesting a choice between an outcome many would see as bad and one which cannot be done!)

    There has to be a choice between possible outcomes, and the only likely ones at the moment are: walk away with no deal (we can simply do it), accept whatever has been negotiated (there will be something), or remain (eu has said it is agreeable).

    Norbold,
    “Well it went so well last time they did that….”

    Losing an election would immediately deliver a huge mess for labour to have to sort out and its no longer a tory problem. Tory party saved, unity breaks out again, just as would have happened had they been able to lose last time.

  11. @ DANNY
    “There has to be a choice between possible outcomes, and the only likely ones at the moment are: walk away with no deal (we can simply do it), accept whatever has been negotiated (there will be something), or remain (eu has said it is agreeable).”

    The Adonis trap. No, no, no is all I can say to such duplicitous nonsense!

    I accept that hard Remainers assumed that the Leave vote was soft and would melt away, but it’s remained so solid that you even admit that you can only possibly win a -theoretical -rigged referendum!

  12. @ Alec

    “Radical Labour levy would double council tax on holiday homes”

    The local authority here in Gwynedd introduced a premium rate of council tax for holiday homes. The (predictable) response of the holiday home owners? They’ve registered their properties for business rates instead by stating they “let their properties” via well known letting websites etc….

    Result: they pay next to no tax on the property!

  13. @OLDNAT
    “It is regularly said that she has a C&S arrangement with the DUP, but it’s not really a C&S arrangement, since the DUP will desert in a moment if their terms aren’t met.”

    That doesn’t mean it isn’t a C&S agreement, it means it is a C&S agreement which in your opinion and based on your own view of the parties involved might not be honoured at some point.

    I don’t deny that your prejudice about the parties may be supportably justified by past events, and your opinion may be proved right by future events, but it’s still an opinion masquerading as fact.

    This is as a matter of recorded fact a minority government with a C&S arrangement. And in fact, more than a C&S arrangement, since the DUP also agreed “to support the government on legislation pertaining to the UK’s exit from the EU”. And so far, it has held. A lot longer than I expected it to certainly..

  14. The Other Howard,
    “May gave her verdict on Salzburg on Friday and took a formidable hard line for once, about time IMO.”

    Perhaps because of signs of faltering support from hard leavers?

    Many have suggested the rationale for chequers is that no deal or canada simply cannot work. But once you get round to the notion chequers cannot work either, then what is left? An election might become extremely attractive, and then any need for long term realism goes out the window in the face of the need to short term boulster support.

    If you want to win, that is.

    If May does call an election, that would in practice be the third referendum on Brexit so far. I wonder if we could stil have a fourth before the leaving date.

  15. The other Howard,
    “I gather that the “Leave means Leave” rally at the University of Bolton was packed out ”

    Had that been local to me I would have been interested to go. I wonder if other local remainers felt the same?

  16. @ DANNY

    “If May does call an election, that would in practice be the third referendum on Brexit so far. I wonder if we could stil have a fourth before the leaving date.”

    If May calls an election, the problem for her is that it won’t be about Brexit, just as last year.

    Labour will just get the sweet trolley manifesto out and happy days are here again as Diane promises 100,000 new Bobbies on the beat and Uncle John promises to wipe out your College debts!

  17. The Other Howard: May gave her verdict on Salzburg on Friday and took a formidable hard line for once, about time IMO. As she says we seem to have reached impasse and that means that leaving on WTO terms is even more likely. I don’t read UKPR in between weekends but I suspect more of the Remainders who post will be seeing leaving on WTO terms as a real possibility now. I also think there is less chance of a leadership challenge at the Tory party conference now. I suspect her Friday speech will go down a treat with most of the electorate, bearing in mind most have always been at best lukewarm to the EU all their lives. She certainly got good front page headlines.

    Apart from Suez, it’s Britain’s finest moment.

  18. @RH
    I can’t really see the point of your suggested second question, apart from highlighting the very few who would opt for ‘no deal’. If you think about it, say the fist vote was 50/50 then at least the 50% on the Remain side would presumably vote ‘extend’, as the least worst option. Even if Remain ended up at 40% that would still be a large number for ‘no deal’s to overcome with Leave extenders added.

  19. @DANNY
    “or remain (eu has said it is agreeable)”

    Thanks to the Court of Session referral to the CJEU, it may become academic what the Commission has said is agreeable of course.

    One of the reasons why I think the referral is potentially so explosive. It could blow what appears to be the Commission’s preferred outcome out of the water as well. Unlikely perhaps, given the court’s track record on following the politics as a general rule, but possible.

  20. DELTA poll done since Salzburg.

    Q1. Who do youthink is most to blame for the current situation with the Brexit negotiations?

    The EU leaders 44%
    Theresa May 35%
    Don’t know 21%

    Q2. Whatdo you thinkshould happen next?

    Abandon Brexit altogether 25%
    Try to get Chequers agreed 12%
    PM produce more acceptable plan 13%
    PM resign, new Tory PM 3%
    Delay A50 to give PM more time 3%
    Refuse to make more concessions, leave with no deal 24%

  21. “I gather that the “Leave means Leave” rally at the University of Bolton was packed out …with Nigel Farage, David Davis and Kate Hoey as the main speakers. Good to hear!

    In fact, very bad indeed to hear, I expect.

  22. @TOH – “It was obvious that Chequers was a non-starter with the EU from the moment we got Barniers first reaction to the plan. I pointed this out at the time, and was told I was an idiot by Alec. Who’s the idiot now Alec?”

    Again, your inability to understand detail shines through.

    May presented her Chequers plan back in July as her government’s negotiating strategy, and refused to state that there would be no further compromises from her as the negotiations progressed.

    Barnier said that there were good parts to the plan which could form the basis of agreements, but their remained some areas where agreement couldn’t be reached in the current format, and where further negotiation was necessary. You said that this was a rejection, which was incorrect.

    The EU proceeds to refine and soften their approach to checks on trade between NI and rUK, in an attempt to make progress. May then goes to Salzburg and demands that the EU accept her Chequers plan in full. The EU restates their objections to elements of the plan, and suggests that May needs to return to her starting position with Chequers, which was that it was a first move in a negotiation, and therefore liable to compromise.

    I think your misunderstanding here is that perhaps you don’t appreciate that Chequers was presented as an opening negotiation gambit, with the obvious corollary that the UK position would change as the negotiations proceeded.

    This remains the case, which is why May is trying to persuade the DUP to accept a compromise and has refused to withdraw Chequers. The overwhelming likelihood is that Chequers will still form the basis of an agreement, albeit with some substantial movement on the UK’s part.

  23. Alec,
    ” those affected will make a huge noise”
    But are likely to be tory voters already… (polling stats that home owners more likely to be tories, and the closer people are to being outright owners, as presumably people with second homes must be, the more likely to be tory voters)

    Jonesinbangor,

    My post listed the three options I see are achievable. If you think there are more alternative outcomes, what are they?

    ” you even admit that you can only possibly win a -theoretical -rigged referendum!”

    If you dont like the, question, how would you phrase it? A huge problem has been created for the nation bcause of a vote to leave in principle, but without an agreed route to carry this out. Its no good separating the two in voters minds, and giving them a choice betwen things which are impossible.

  24. Danny
    “Perhaps because of signs of faltering support from hard leavers?”

    I don’t accept the term hard leaver. We either leave or we don’t. Leaving the EU means meeting all of May’s original red lines as you well know.

    “But once you get round to the notion chequers cannot work either, then what is left?”

    The simplest and cleanest would be to leave with on WTO terms. I would prefer a Canada style deal but with the red lines fully met so no movement on NI/Eire border other than that suggested by ERG.

    “If May does call an election, that would in practice be the third referendum on Brexit so far. I wonder if we could still have a fourth before the leaving date.”

    Why would she call an election? The poll evidence indicates only a small majority for her at best? If you think that the 2017 election was a vote on Brexit then the outcome of the original referendum was confirmed by that election overwhelmingly as both major parties gave pledges to honour the referendum result.

    TO
    “Apart from Suez, it’s Britain’s finest moment.”

    If we stayed in the EU I would agree with you.

    Andy
    Many thanks for the details of the Deltapoll. Happy to see that statistically as many are happy to leave with no deal as want Brexit abandoned. Also, good to see the EU being seem as more to blame than the UK government. Not surprising IMO.

    NickP
    “In fact, very bad indeed to hear, I expect.”
    Only for those who want to stay as a vassal state of the EU, Nick :-)

  25. Peterw,
    “Thanks to the Court of Session referral to the CJEU, it may become academic what the Commission has said is agreeable of course.”

    No. There has always been the option for the EU and UK to agree that the Uk stays a member. The withdrawal agreement would be that the UK stays in!

    The case is only about whether the Uk can unilaterally withdraw its notice to leave.

  26. The Other Howard,
    “I don’t accept the term hard leaver. We either leave or we don’t. ”

    Then you do not have the red lines May does. There are all sorts of variants on future relationships with the EU with us as non members, Norway for example, which May has ruled out by putting extra conditions in place which you do not recognise.

    “Why would she call an election? The poll evidence indicates only a small majority for her at best? ”

    If she loses outright…problem solved! If labour fails to endorse remain, they would lose and she could get a victory even on fewer votes than last time. If labour does endorse remain, she might get enough labour leavers jumping she that conservatives could win.

    Big difficulty would be tories would have to define their chosen oucome, and the party might not hold together to endorse that. But again, if that caused an electoral collapse and they lose, it solves the problem of how the tories deal with brexit. Next time out the party would have reunited in the face of whatever labour did to resolve Brexit, which would be bound to be unpopular with many

  27. Marr interview with Corbyn was…………..interesting.

  28. so labour will go for a 2nd ref as a manifesto commitment if conference votes for it (which they surely will) – game changer?

  29. @ GE – May and her team are right to consider a GE as possible in Nov and prepare for it. “Leaking” then denying that info serves two purposes:
    – CON Remain rebels are being told how high the stakes are
    – LAB conf frenzy as they get a sniff of the chance of power and will have to commit to an actual Brexit policy (as a govt in waiting you can’t have ambiguity on the issue that will cause the GE)

    @ OLDNAT – Well you didn’t call me a rac1st and I’ve been called a lot worse than ignorant. Gammon is my preferred “label” but I also liked Shrek (but with an English accent). Not really old enough to be a “coffin dodger” but most Remain need to have a single stereotype figure to despise and I do have a few grey hairs ;)

    Anyway, PETERW has corrected your ignorance on what C&S is.

    Quite surprised a NAT doesn’t understand how that works given the most likely route to IndyRef2 and YES is the SNP providing C&S to LAB post Brexit.

  30. I would like to add a little to Alec’s post on the Chequers plan.

    Not only was the Chequers plan, as submitted, unacceptable to the EU it should have been unacceptable to the UK. It was put forward to try to bridge two irreconcilable positions. That there be a hard Brexit with no adverse economic consequences to the UK.

    “But the idea that a service-based economy, with a large services trade surplus with the EU-27, would seek a deal that excluded services would be seen as crazy in any world other than the topsy-turvy one of Brexit. As would the idea of creating at enormous expense, in unknown timescales and with unknown efficacy a customs system to replicate something that already exists and works. There is no conceivable economic upside to this (certainly not in terms of the supposed benefit of an independent trade policy).”

    That is Chris Grey’s view of it.

    I doubt if what is happening between the EU and UK can be properly described as negotiation.The UK has not decided what it wants it seems. Chequers will not succeed in its present form, yet ,if it is the government’s intention to move towards a final position of a soft Brexit, it has done everything it can to impede progress towards that end.

    The EU is never going to weaken itself to accommodate a country that is leaving. It is solely interested in a Brexit that does the EU the least damage. There will be no negotiation of the EU’s red lines. It is for the UK to leave in a way that respects that.

  31. @ Colin – I am intrigued – care to elaborate?

  32. If Labour go for a 2nd ref having adamantly been against one, then surely that will not go down well in the 70% of their constituencies that voted leave.

    I would have imagined that they made all the gains in Remain areas that they possibly could in 2017, when it seems they were seen by the electorate as the Remain party. Any more switch now would be piling up more votes in those places.

    I cannot imagine this would improve their VI and the increased concentration might lose them seats on a similar vote share.

    Then again, if the alternative is a Hard Brexit, could they squeak in?

  33. @ ANDY – Deltapoll are usually commissioned by a Leave group and Q2 suggests this is the case:

    The only clear “Remainy” option is:
    Abandon Brexit altogether 25%

    You then have a few non-starters or fudges:
    Try to get Chequers agreed 12%
    Delay A50 to give PM more time 3%

    You then have the “Leave” options but they spread them out, in rough order of Clean(ness):
    PM produce more acceptable plan 13%
    PM resign, new Tory PM 3%
    Refuse to make more concessions, leave with no deal 24%

    IMHO it makes the poll of limited value in knowing public opinion. What we need is polls with very limited options (or some kind of STV). A few forced binary questions would be even better.

    n=639 poll(s) in HoC with single binary questions will be coming up soon that might result in a GE and it would be nice to see the X-breaks on forced binary questions such as:
    – BrINO v No Deal
    – New Ref v No Deal
    (the exact question of the New Ref would have to be clarified of course)

    I think this will set a floor for “No Deal” from which CON could build. Polls suggest “Basic Deal” is better than “No Deal” so it will come down to turning the electorates view on what “No Deal” means and trying to get a few things like flights agreed. “No” sounds a little too negative ;)

    Also a lot of DKs of folks understanding of CU, etc – explaining why that would create a “vassal state” with British jobs continuing to go to E.Europe should help with marginal voters in marginal seats. Ongoing payment to EU another issue folks would need to hear!

    Finally, folks also currently think the economy is going to be much worse, etc. so again we have a potential “floor” in place if CON can provide “strong mitigation” policies and remove non-Brexit issues from the debate (ie ensure folks know the NHS money will not come from tax increases; get real with Housing; regional infrastructure; investment fund to replace EIB; etc; etc )

    This is all possible if May wants to “Save Theresa” and turn the CON conf into a positive forward looking debate

    (apologies, I launched into a bit of party political broadcast at the end there)

  34. COLIN
    I got the sense that Corbyn was still clinging to some wriggleroom about a second referendum on Marr and that he’s still hoping to fudge it somehow.

  35. The Other [email protected]: “Apart from Suez, it’s Britain’s finest moment.”

    If we stayed in the EU I would agree with you.

    Ever the brexiter, seeking a route to agreement.

  36. TW

    “but most Remain need to have a single stereotype figure to despise”

    I really hope that was intended as a joke. Dripping with so much irony it’s left a puddle on the floor.

  37. Alec

    I thought a great deal about your post. I think the fundamental problem between us is that you get lost in the detail whereas i see the situation with clarity. I guess as a scientist by education I have an analytical mind which allows me to do that.

    Anyway i am happy for others to judge who is correct about May’s Chequers plan on trading with the EU. I think is as dead as the Dodo you apparently don’t despite what the EU leaders have said.

    TO

    Since you are clearly a Europhile i would have thought touché a more appropriate response. :-)

  38. I have read research somewhere that 36% of the people that voted Labour in 2017 voted Leave the year before. That to further confuse matters, most of them live in swing seats currently held by tLabour in places like the eastand west Midlands and if only a tenth of them dumped Labour because it changed position, Labour would be in serious trouble.

    I think the party hierarchy are very aware of this and believe that they will fudge the Peoples Vote malarky, adopting a position of something along the lines of adopting a second vote as a manifesto pledge in the event of a general election, when the odds on there being an election before we leave the EU are slim at best.

  39. @ Andrew Myers

    Unfortunately the LP think their membership reflects the view of their parliamentary constituents on voting for another referendum, I’m not sure they’re right.

    The way that Brussels has behaved in this unfortunate tragedy won’t have gone unnoticed by “soft” remainers like myself who are finding the scales falling from our eyes just now. I predicted a leave win last time despite all the calls otherwise and I suspect it will be more emphatic if repeated.

  40. @Trevor, thete cant be multiple Remain options. Remain is Remain. There cant be Remain but Leave a bit because thats a leave option.

  41. @Trevor, thete cant be multiple Remain options. Remain is Remain. There cant be Remain but Leave a bit because thats a leave option.

  42. But Labour will omit Remain if there is a second referendum supposedly. This suggests approve/disapprove options (of St Theresa’s plan).

    Jolly nice. It seems politicians are chosen from people at the end of the queue when God distributed brain.

  43. @ Bantams

    “Unfortunately the LP think their membership reflects the view of their parliamentary constituents on voting for another referendum, I’m not sure they’re right.”

    I’m not so sure about that. I think they’re worried about exactly what you imply, that the membership definitely do not reflect the ‘average’ constituent. But on the other hand, they do believe they have to listen to the membership. Which is admirable in many ways, though not necessarily the path to glory.

    I had this discussion with my brother a couple of years ago now, at a point when he was a keen Momentum member. It seems that to many of them, being true to democratic principles and campaigning for the right causes is more important than actually winning. If the result is a smaller, but more focussed PLP, that’s a price that’s worth paying. Not an attitude that you’ll find common in career politicians, and as I said above, maybe not the path to glory, but it’s difficult to say that it’s ‘wrong’.

  44. Laszlo

    Imagine if Treeza doesn’t actually get a deal, I suppose he would be pushing for a referendum rejecting Treeza’s no deal and replacing it with Jezza’s no deal.

    Would make for the dullest gameshow ever “No deal or no deal”. The biggest laugh will come when the UK is forced to open the box.

    To be fair, it’s union leaders who would be at the end of the brain queue considering it was McCluskey who made that proposal. Although I’m sure there would be a big fight for last place between the lot of them.

    The levels of absurdity that Brexit is hitting is highly entertaining.

  45. @Danny

    “If you dont like the, question, how would you phrase it? A huge problem has been created for the nation bcause of a vote to leave in principle, but without an agreed route to carry this out. Its no good separating the two in voters minds, and giving them a choice betwen things which are impossible.”

    The answer is that there isn’t a feasible question anymore.

    I suppose you could ask” Should the UK Government go cap in hand to Europe and explain that as a nation we’ve decided we want to now stay, then beg if we can. And apologise for the turmoil we’ve caused? Yes or No”

    Or the People’s Vote question vote could be
    “In June 2016 the UK voted to leave the UK. HM Government have now agreed a deal with the EU that compromise the best available deal. Do you agree the UK should agree to these terms or leave with no deal and trade with the EU on World Trade Organisation terms only. YES OR No”

  46. Right on cue Mr McCluskey:
    “Brexit: New referendum must exclude any option to remain in EU, says Len McCluskey”

  47. Raab spoke a lot of fudge and being a little misquoted.

    So ahead of tomorrows (re)release of Canada+(++) and for those that missed the original DexEU very detailed “trailer” back in July, below is my “inspired” guess of the “tricky bit”

    The importance of MaxFac for GB-Ireland

    Background:
    1/ Both sides have been using NI-RoI border as a proxy battle for the future arrangements:
    a/ EC want CU+SM+ECJ for whole UK and know May is tied to NI via DUP
    b/ UK want all UK-EU borders to be as friction-free as possible and if MaxFac is accepted for NI-RoI and GB-Ireland then it also has to be accepted for all UK-EU borders (EC very precious about all 27 being treated equal!)

    2/ MaxFac is nothing new. WTO/WCO require countries to move towards it. UK is 97% there with non-EU and currently 100% aligned to EU. CDS will be ready in time for the declaration aspects but roll out to every user will take a while. The technology is available and HMRC are ready for the customs declaration aspect but without mutual recognition it is unrealistic for the extra technology and staffing to be operational before 30Mar’19, and even transition to Dec’20 will be tight, even if we “crash” the implementation. Netherlands might be ready but no way UK, RoI, Belgium or France will be.
    Some modest “fudge” would be useful all round!

    3/ The “dead” bits of Chequers from both EC and CON-Leave perspective are the “common rulebook” for goods and FCA (NCP2). If May “evolve”s those parts then May might find something she can sell to both EC and HoC (95% CON MPs and enough LAB-Leave)

    No cherry picking
    Again a proxy battle as EU have bent/changed the rules on many issues in the past when they’ve wanted to or needed to – the issue currently is that they neither want to or feel they need to.
    May has finally stopped compromising and EU can’t pick the “common rulebook” cherry from Chequers and then insist on their terms for everything else.

    So how can this be “fudged”? Plan A, with backstop Plan B

    A/ Previous EU deals have given various time periods for “adjusting” to the agreed deal. Brexit is the reverse process but allowing a say 6year period to adjust would not be unprecedented and wrapped in a trade or association agreement it would satisfy WTO. We would have to agree to “common rulebook” and a sham arbitration panel for that period though (but May has already offered as much via Chequers)
    Strap MaxFac with a 6y adjustment on a CETA+ deal and this is Plan A.

    B/ Backstop. This is the “open border” issue I’ve mentioned before where by UK unilaterally recognise EU standards and would not impose any additional customs checks on GB-Ireland border or UK-EU border (none required for the biosecurity zone on island of Ireland). To give this any hope of EC accepting it, we need to offer them a “Le Touquet+” style agreement (ie RoI+other EU will be allowed UK-EU approved customs checks conducted on GB mainland or in NI, but away from the border – this keeps GB treatment same as NI, a key requirement for DUP and hence also May).
    Barnier and ERG have floated “trial balloons” quite close to this and the “no deal” plans contain the unilateral recognition aspect already.
    Get Gove to shut up about “fixing it later” and maybe this is the backstop “fudge” to strap to WTO after Jan’21 if we can’t finalise CETA+ during transition.

    This all rests of the EC feeling they NEED to offer some “fudge” and flexibility. Now May has stopped playing nice maybe they’ll decide taking the money and fudge is better than risking a “no deal” outcome leading into May’19 EP elections?

    or maybe not? The point is we have to give them the ultimatum and make them turn down a revised very generous offer (try to feed Tusk some insta photo ops!)

    The DUP agreed to ERG’s original NI plan, this is simply an “evolved” version which hopefully May takes as an “evolved” form of Chequers.

    DUP might not buy it and the GE risk is still there but presented as a final ultimatum A or B then CON have a strong chance going into a GE. LAB might well be tied to a 2nd ref backing BrINO by midweek so Remain will be divided.

    It’s time to play 3D chess not 1D Chequers ;)

  48. @ ANDY – I agree “Remain is Remain” but

    “Abandon Brexit altogether” has serious wording bias issues

    I don’t think there is time for a new ref and certainly not a Corbyn fudge (ie GE then maybe a new ref with wording TBA by a hung parliament but oops too late as we’ve passed 29Mar’19 and it’s April Fool’s day on Remain)

    However, any Remainer going down that list would be looking for something that at least pretended to be democratic and Cable told them a new ref could be held in a matter of weeks (which has given Corbyn the fudge he needs)

    I also note the total sums to 80, ie DK = 20

    The poll isn’t up on Deltapolls website yet but I’ll be curious to see the x-breaks. I’m guessing the DK are coming from LAB and Remain (hopefully they’ll show x-breaks for both)

    P.S. Of course Remain are biasing their poll wording as well. B4B have been caught out “optimising” the question to come up with “PeoplesVote” which even Queen Gina told LDEM conf was being deceitful (or words to that effect). Again this offers Corbyn fudge – a GE being PeoplesVote3 (Leave 2-0 ahead after the EUref1 and 2017GE)

  49. Trevor, a new referendum cant be held in a matter of weeks. The law governing referenda in the UK stipulates a 10 week campaign period for starters.

    Personally, I reckon the window for a second referendum closed a few weeks ago.

  50. New Opinium Poll out.

    CON 37
    LAB 39
    LD 9
    UKIP 8

    (stale link to last poll so not sure on the changes)
    https://www.opinium.co.uk/political-polling-18th-september-2018-2/

1 5 6 7 8