There was a YouGov poll yesterday with some post-Florence EU questions, suggesting a pretty poor reception for Theresa May’s speech. The proportion thinking that the government are doing well at negotiating Brexit has fallen from 24% to 21% since last month, its lowest since January. 61% now think they are doing badly, including three-quarters of Remain voters and almost half of Leave voters.

The principle of a transition period is broadly accepted – 46% think it is a good idea, 26% a bad idea. The majority of the public also say it would be acceptable for such a deal to include remaining in the single market and/or freedom of movement for a transitional period. The tricker elements to sell to the public appear to be the juristiction of the European Court (by 43% to 35% people say this would be unacceptable for a transition period) and continuing to pay the EU during the transition period (38% acceptable, 42% unacceptable.) 62% of leave voters see paying a fee during a transition fee as unacceptable.

Whether they agree with it or not, 33% of people say that the Conservative party’s policy on Brexit is clear – 45% say it is unclear or confusing.

While people are not impressed by the government’s handling of Brexit, the public remain pretty evenly divided on whether or not to go. 44% still think Britain is right to leave, 45% that it’s wrong (typical of past months). Asked what they’d like the government to do on Brexit 40% think they should proceed with their current negotiating aims, 12% would prefer a softer Brexit, 18% would like another referendum to see if people still want to leave, 14% would like the government to halt Brexit.

Voting intention is CON 39%(-2), LAB 43%(+1), LDEM 7%(nc). Full tabs are here


102 Responses to “YouGov post-Florence polling on Brexit”

1 2 3
  1. Alec
    Just to be absolutely clear the following does remain my view:
    . Regaining our sovereignty which includes having control of our borders, and our Courts no longer subject to the ECJ……”
    So if a final deal is signed which does not allow me to say that has been achieved I will not support that deal or the Government signing it.
    We shall see what happens, but I have not changed my view. I suggest you drop the little snide comments they are not necessary as my position has not changed.

  2. Wow there we go, polling info on ECJ! Seems TOH is in the majority!

  3. No one is going to accept a ‘fee’. They might accept a a contribution to agreed purposes and agreement to meet our agreed obligations. But no one is really putting things this way.

    Whatever agreement we reach will have to have a) an agreed legal framework and b) an agreed mechanism for setting disputes. This applies to trade disputes. Would people accept it applying to disputes over free movement of labour?

  4. Other bits in YouGov we haven’t already discussed:

    How should HMG proceed with Brexit:

    – continue on current terms 40 (-2)
    – seek “softer” Brexit 12 (-1)
    – 2nd ref 18 (+1)
    – abandon and remain 14 (uc)
    – DK 16 (+3)

    current+soften and ignore DK = 62%

    for current terms alone CON are 80% (ignoring DK)
    for LAB only 45% are current+soften (ie 55% are 2nd ref or abandon and remain)

    2nd ref and abandon and remain obviously have some legal and technical issues but thats a fairly concerning poll for those with blind faith that the Brexit issue has gone away for LAB or wouldn’t be an issue in either a pre or post Mar’19 GE.

    I’ll concede a small drop in ‘continue as are’ but then when you look at how peeps view the negotiations as not going well that backs up other polls that show not a lot more CON VI is going to move over to LAB so where are the seat gains going to come from? Scotland?

  5. X-break on the ECJ bit (note this is just for transition!!):

    Abide by ECJ rulings:

    Total, (change), CON/LAB
    Acceptable 35, (-3), 17/54
    Not acceptable 43 (uc), 69/26
    DK 22 (+3), 14/21

    I’d be DK in this one as it depends on the package, but I don’t think anyone is surprised by the partisan split.

    80% of CON VI say ECJ not acceptable during transition versus only 33% for LAB

    and this is just during transition, which elsewhere in the tabs we find majority peeps wanting max of 2yrs!

  6. What I dislike about Yougov’s VI polling the way it lumps together Wales and the Midlands. I’m guessing Lab are ahead in Wales and behind in Midlands but you can’t really tell.

  7. @trevorwarne

    From previous thread, the European Court of Justice ( deciding on issues of EU law) and the European Court of Human Rights ( deciding on issues arising from the countries which are signatories to the European Convention of Human Rights) . The ECHR is not part of the EU.

  8. Its pretty pointless asking peope what sort of brexit they support – or dont support.
    We are talking about the complexities of unpicking decades of legal and trading rules and regulations. Most people eyes glaze other as soon as people start talking about “preferential tarrif rates”. They are have very little interest or understanding of the issues.

    I mean “should we pay the EU a big wedge of dosh to stay in the single market” – well blow me down if most people are opposed. I mean id rather not have to pay for my car insurance of my council tax.
    Its almost as if they dont have the slightest idea of what ” falling back onto WTO trade rules” actually means.
    When people can actually clearly see how a policy is affecting them directly (i.e. a hard border in Ireland) then you might have some sensible questions and answers.

  9. @ HIRETON – some confusion on the “c”? I’ve been talking about convention not court in my posts. I don’t represent HMG so can not comment on the other ECHR where c= court. It is a common confusion but I think I’ve been clear

  10. reggieside

    Your post said exactly the same things as mine in the last thread: the questions are utterly pointless.

    What, for example, is a “bad” deal? Are we supposed to be in 100% agreement as to what constitutes one and if so how would that work?

    Since it wouldn’t the question is, quite clearly, meaningless – as are most others.

    The word “fee” is equally stupid. I suppose that what we would be agreeing to to is continuing to pay for membership – utterly reasonable and only to be expected – but the wording makes it sound likes it’s an amount pulled out of the air.

    I really don’t see any point in detailed questions when virtually nobody [including, it would appear, the government] has any understanding of the actual details.

  11. 33% think the government policy on Brexit is clear

    45 % think the policy is unclear

    40% think the government should carry on doing what it is doing on negotiating aims

    ????

  12. Government policy is 100% clear but not achievable?

    Government policy is 100% unclear to themselves?

  13. @ SAM – the totals include big share of LAB. That should help you understand. Kudos to JC :)

  14. This:

    “The borough cited guidance from the London mayor, Sadiq Khan, which warns ballots “can risk turning a complex set of issues that affects different people in different ways over many years into a simple yes/no decision at a single point in time”.

    from Haringey, with regard to Corbyn’s idea of local ballots on housing, raises similar issues to my observations about polling questions.

    Basically not everything can be reduced to yes/no answers and it is not always – maybe not even often – that people who are not immersed in the detail have enough understanding to make the necessarily informed judgements.

    Many people would say that the EU referendum itself falls into that category…..

  15. I wonder how much credibility can be given to polling regarding a political leaders speech.
    It seems to me that certain factors come into play, for instance are people giving an opinion on the whole speech or the edited highlights on the news programs which sometimes omit the point the speaker was trying to make for a more sensational few lines .
    When people actually watch a major political figure making a speech, I suspect that in a conference senerio the majority who are watching on tv are pro the speaker, in something like brexit are the polled public giving an opinion on the content of the speech or how they personally feel about remain/leave argument regardless of content.
    I’m sure polling companies would say there particularly methodology removes such variances but still unless your actually watch the whole speech with an open mind other factors can and will distort your reaction to it.

  16. PAUL CROFT……There is a classic, ‘ yes, or no ‘ question; ” have you stopped beating your wife ? ” Perhaps, ” have you stopped hating the ludicrous EU ? ” might help. ;-)

  17. Paul croft

    It’s too complicated is a nice way for elites to keep control. Poor plebs don’t really understand but they can trust us to act in their interests, our bed sharing with developers is really not relevant.

    My view is that it was the best thing to come out of conference, corruption is rampant in local govt and this is a good way to tackle some of it.

  18. Danny

    You posted:

    “I am inclined to agee with Leavers who argue that a special deal for the Uk is impossible for this or that, or indeed many reasons. But whereas they feel this forces an immediate departure with no deal, others of a remain persuasion feel instead it just underlines the impracticality of Brexit and why it will have to be abandoned, because it is impossible to carry through.”

    Whilst in some way this gets to the heart of the Remain/Leave positions of some people, for me it doesn’t “force” an immediate departure. An immediate departure is what I would desire. There is no “force” about it.

  19. PR

    “corruption is rampant in local govt”

    I wouldn’t know whether it is or isn’t but if you have proof then perhaps you should report it?

  20. @trevorwarne

    Just to be clear, withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights and consequently the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights has nothing directly to do with the Brexit negotiations, EU citizens’ rights and the role of the ECJ.

  21. A referendum before March 2019 to confirm Brexit would be in the Tories interest, because it would either reaffirm desire of a majority to leave based on Governments current strategy or it would reject Brexit.

    If the country rejected Brexit because with more information, a majority have come to a different decision, then i don’t think this would be damaging to the Tories. Also i don’t think the country coming to a different decision would give other parties any boost. I don’t see Brexit Tories jumping ship and backing UKIP. The second referendum would be a final decision. If the EU wanted any new treaty there is already a referendum requirement.

    As long as a second referendum was held in plenty of time before 29 March 2019, then Theresa May would be able to ask for revocation of A.50 by consent of the EU. This is likely to be accepted.

    I have not changed my mind that Brexit is unlikely, because between now and this time next year it will be very unpopular. You just have to look at issues such as Bombardier and suggestions of a trade war with the US. Free trade deals are not without difficulties and the UK might never regain any loss of trade to EU countries.

  22. @Paul Croft – the argument about complexity and ballots could equally be applied to general elections.

    With @Princess on this one. Redevelopment has too often been by and for business, not local people. Time to challenge out dated norms. Top marks from me to JC for this policy.

  23. R Huckle: A referendum before March 2019 to confirm Brexit would be in the Tories interest, because it would either reaffirm desire of a majority to leave based on Governments current strategy or it would reject Brexit.

    What about Boris getting his knife in? Damian Green has come out and said the TM is good for the next GE. So she isn’t that secure ….

  24. “If the country rejected Brexit because with more information, a majority have come to a different decision, then i don’t think this would be damaging to the Tories. ”

    That doesn’t ring true so long as a substantial majority of conservative voters continue to want Brexit.

    If the Conservative government not only fails to deliver what those supporters want but is also the active instrument of the device by means of which that failure is effected, there must be a downside surely?

    The question is thus whether the perception arises that Brexit will be so bad the hit they take for delivering Brexit will be greater than the hit they take for failing to deliver Brexit so that they go for the latter. There’s a big hit either way I think.

    It also follows I think that the only hypothetical scenario that allows them not to take a hit is to take credit for a successful Brexit. So long as they still believe that to be a possible outcome, that’s their only logical course to pursue. If (when if you prefer) they conclude it isn’t, they have no good option. They’re stuffed.

  25. NickP

    “What I dislike about Yougov’s VI polling the way it lumps together Wales and the Midlands. I’m guessing Lab are ahead in Wales and behind in Midlands but you can’t really tell.”

    Even if they were listed as separate crossbreaks, you still couldn’t tell – unless they were internally weighted to be representative of the demographics of these areas, and of sufficiently large size to reduce moe to acceptable levels.

    If you want to know how polling is picking up Welsh opinion, then look at the Welsh polls (similarly for Scotland, London and Northern Ireland),

    If you want to know about opinion in the Midlands of England, you’ll probably have to commission such a poll yourself – none of the polling companies (or more accurately their clients) seem interested in doing that.

    They prefer to poll on the basis of an entirely imaginary polity called “GB”.

  26. I should add that there is also the “damage limitation” option, which is to deliver a bad Brexit but successfully pin as much as possible of the blame for that badness elsewhere. This is what feels like the current plan A to me.

  27. MONOCHROME OCTOBER

    “R Huckle: A referendum before March 2019 to confirm Brexit would be in the Tories interest, because it would either reaffirm desire of a majority to leave based on Governments current strategy or it would reject Brexit.

    What about Boris getting his knife in? Damian Green has come out and said the TM is good for the next GE. So she isn’t that secure ….
    September 28th, 2017 at 10:36 pm”

    Do voters trust Boris given his conduct ? I think he would make the Tories less popular, if he became leader.

    Theresa May would win any leaders contest, if she faced a challenge. She might decide not to fight and let someone else take responsibility.

  28. alec

    “@Paul Croft – the argument about complexity and ballots could equally be applied to general elections.”

    I don’t see that at all [although I am all for a very straightforward form of PR.]

    In a General election most people vote in a – well – a “general” way, a sort of gut instinct thing perhaps, which is fine I suppose.

    But for something as complex as leaving our principal trading partners, with whom we have been closely linked for forty years, gut instinct can go wildly wrong and, has been widely observed, many voters voted to leave simply because they wanted to express dissatisfaction at something totally different to the question on the ballot paper.

    A simplistic referendum, vulnerable to biased newspaper propaganda, and based on 50% plus one vote to change the status quo was, quite simply, wrong.

    As for housing – I simply quoted Haringey [Labour] Council and observed that there are other views around on the housing subject. [As with most things I don’t see the point of acting as an armchair expert on stuff myself – not even armchairs.]

  29. @Paul Croft – my general default position is to try an develop local, democratic decisions as much as possible. If the issues are so complex, who is to say largely untrained and non expert councillors (with political axes to grind to boot) are any better than the voters at making decisions?

    I understand the point about Brexit and GEs though.

    One illuminating thought as relates to housing redevelopment: it’s a pretty good bet that had the council had to get the approval of Grenfell Tower residents for their plans, the cladding would have been ditched and the sprinklers put in.

  30. Looking at the “How should HMG proceed with Brexit:” question I note that with the options given:

    – continue on current terms
    – rethink and seek “softer” Brexit
    – 2nd ref to check
    – abandon process and remain

    this is unusual in that all three alternatives are on the same side of the default option, all being “softer”.

    It’s not hard to postulate parallel “harder” options for balance (rethink and seek “harder” Brexit and abandon process and leave immediately are obvious more or less exact reverse positions at least).

    Their omission seems to leave the question fundamentally loaded and the response data accordingly susceptible to bias. I haven’t quite got my head round which way this loading might bias the response data, but potentially bias them it surely must.

    This question is not being asked for the first time. Is there an earlier thread where some explanation/ comment is given to allay my fears?

  31. Paul croft

    Yeah Haringey Council has lots of problems, the police should investigate the council leaders. I know the local labour party wants to replace them, that’s part of the whole battle about reselections. My view is it’s crooks trying to hold on to their positions of power.

  32. Scotland is lucky that they have two left wing parties, if one of them gets corrupted people can always vote for the other one. Haringey seems to have a choice between Tory crooks or labour crooks. That’s why party democracy is so important.

  33. Why wasn’t there an option for a ‘harder’ Brexit? I would take this to mean walking away from the negotiations now? I’m not saying whether this would be a good idea or not, but it might be the view of some voters.

    G’night all.

  34. But maybe I do see ‘crooks in every nook’

  35. @peterw

    I also think “continue on current terms” would be open to a wide interpretation of what that means in reality.

  36. Princess Rachel

    I think it’s one of those inevitable processes in polities where one group is cemented in power. Gradually, regardless of the original honourable intentions of whatever group is in power, they are taken over by those who see influence within that group as an easy way to make money.

    It really doesn’t matter what the persuasion of the governing group is – if they (and their officials) recognise that the only way forward for themselves is to serve the interests of the dominant group, then corruption is inevitable.

    Holyrood’s AMS system meant that having a majority by a single party was a very unusual event. STV for councils makes it much less certain as to which group will be exercising power.

    PR doesn’t remove corruption, but it makes accessing its benefits a lot more complex! :-)

  37. PeterW,
    “whether the perception arises that Brexit will be so bad the hit they take for delivering Brexit will be greater than the hit they take for failing to deliver Brexit”

    But also one needs to consider whether the group which gets their way will remain loyal to the tories once it has been delivered. It isnt necessarily just the disappointed/betrayed who will be jumping ship. The conservatives could envisage labour leaning voters who however currently support conservative to get brexit, but then want the corbyn version.

    Just saw a little of Question time. Theres a lot of angry people out there somewhere.

    1) support hard Brexit. Great if it works for the economy, tories heros. Doesnt work: remainers think you betrayed the nations, leavers think they have been betrayed personally.
    2) special deal. As 1, but I dont see it happening without compromises which will upset someone.
    3) menu option norway/efta, whatever. Economy continues uninterrupted but sovereignty issues remain. However, Uk service sector might still take a hit. Leave feel betrayed regardless of outcome. Remain think we are in a worse position than before.
    4) cancel Brexit. Everyone thinks the tories are idiots. leave incandescent. Remainers trust in conservatives heavily undermined.

    The tories are not acting as if they believe there will be a good economic outcome from leaving the EU at (1). If they thought there would, there really isnt any problem in just getting on with it it and basking in the glory in 5 years at the next election. A strong win at the recent election would have given cover for hard brexit which went wrong, and again calling the election suggests they did not believe it will go well so cover was needed to make this a viable option.

    They seem to think at least (2) is necessary, however small the chance of achieving it. If you can get the perks of membership without the troublesome issues, problem solved.

    If 2) becomes clearly impossible, then we consider (3). A transitional deal as per (3) at least could kick the can down the road past the next election. But if a transition deal locks the Uk into eventually leaving on bad terms, then the harm to the party will run and run.

    4) Potential for short term pain, long term gain, but the spin needs to be just right. Need to go through the other options first to demonstrate that they are unworkable.

  38. Danny

    “Just saw a little of Question time. Theres a lot of angry people out there somewhere”

    And the BBC actively seeks them out! QT may be England’s “flagship political programme (albeit outsourced to the BBC Scotland budget) but it is rather “Mary Rose” in its impact.

  39. @Roger Mexico – May 42.4% vs Merkel 33% Perceived Strength vs Actual Strength

    From the past thread: I think you’ve summed up the issues pretty well. Essentially the German’s have Hobson’s Choice with the CDU. However, that doesn’t mean she will be able to get her policies through the Bundestag. And even trying to reconcile the so-called Jamaica Coalition makes a probable legislative agenda look like it could fit on a postcard! (Maybe not such a bad thing!)

    Possibles:

    1) Jamaica Coalition
    2) CDU-FDP (with SDP support on Confidence Issues)
    3) New Election

    The first one has the distinct possibility of falling apart down the road and the 2nd one can only survive until the SDP see a political advantage – so I would be surprised if this Bundestag goes its full term.

    @Danny “Perhaps because Merkel got her 33% Under proportional representation rather than in a two horse race?”

    But that strengthens May compared to Merkel in actual strength terms. The Tories have over 49% of the seats in the HoC.

  40. I also saw an audience thing about Brexit. The panel were all free market types but the audience were split between anti immigrant Brexit and anti globalisation Brexit. If Brexit does happen then what happens next is really up in the air and it’s a good chance that the three Brexit monkeys won’t be happy with the outcome.

  41. @PeterW “I should add that there is also the “damage limitation” option, which is to deliver a bad Brexit but successfully pin as much as possible of the blame for that badness elsewhere. This is what feels like the current plan A to me.”

    I agree that will be the strategy if there is no deal.

    I could have written Barnier’s speech for him after TM’s Florence one.

    At the end of the day, if the EU won’t budge from their 60-100+ Billion and ECJ control over rights the chances for a no-deal are high indeed.

  42. Danny

    As with many posters you confuse tories with leavers. This is a government with a majority of remain orientated ministers and probably a majority of remain orientated members. It would be odd if ministers who campaigned under project fear now believe in project sunshine.Gloomy Hammond is probably nearest the soul of the Tory parliamentary party.

    Incidentally, based on past form, TM would take the UK out of the EU and the customs Union and then sign up the UK to almost the exact same by treaties. This is what she did at the HO . I think that in her miind this would be honouring the referendum but limiting economic damage.

  43. members= mp’s

  44. @Sea Change – “At the end of the day, if the EU won’t budge from their 60-100+ Billion and ECJ control over rights the chances for a no-deal are high indeed.”

    I think this illustrates the problem of perception. Technically the EU hasn’t named a figure, and therefore they don’t have a position to budge from. The situation is very clear – the UK has said it will honour it’s obligations, which they have accepted extend further than the 2020 budget period, but have refused to say what they think these obligations are.

    On the money, it’s clearly the UK that needs to budge from it’s position – any sensible person looking in on this from outside could see that. It is impossible to have a negotiation unless both sides get onto the pitch to play. Endlessly repeating some inane sentiment about honouring you obligations is pointless until you state clearly what you believe those obligations are. This is the sticking point, with the actual,monetary value of these (which will change over time with currency movements anyway) the result, not the cause.

  45. R Huckle: MONOCHROME OCTOBER

    “R Huckle: A referendum before March 2019 to confirm Brexit would be in the Tories interest, because it would either reaffirm desire of a majority to leave based on Governments current strategy or it would reject Brexit.

    What about Boris getting his knife in? Damian Green has come out and said the TM is good for the next GE. So she isn’t that secure ….
    September 28th, 2017 at 10:36 pm”

    Do voters trust Boris given his conduct ? I think he would make the Tories less popular, if he became leader.

    Theresa May would win any leaders contest, if she faced a challenge. She might decide not to fight and let someone else take responsibility.

    It only matters that the voters don’t trust Boris in the sense that Boris is fully aware that is only support is with more hardline leavers. If Boris did benefit from putting the knife in, he would not want to upset his core support with another referendum.

    I am not sure TM would fight another leader contest. The very fact that it happened would mean that she would lose more credibility – would she win a Corbyn sized endorsement from the party in the country?

  46. @SAM

    Voter can say contradictory things, for example they rail against unemployment benefit and believe that it is a huge proportion of the welfare budget and then when they find out how much it is and the proportion of the welfare budget it represents they are left with two thing either doubling down on the issue (which is often the case) or adjusting their view which is something that does not happen often

    People voted leave based on a set of assumptions. If these assumptions do not come to pass I suspect they will be unhappy but at this point I believe the rhetoric has been such that they will perceive that they are backing down. It is seen as a war.

    I suspect that having been sold a simple idea of leaving would be easy and finding out it is not easy I am suspecting some Leavers are finding this difficult to square. It also means that Leave politiican are having to sell a positive message literally saying it is going to be great. I think the problem with that is just looking over the pond at the US where ‘great’ meet reality.

    I am sure we will survive Brexit (hard or soft) I think it would add to the lost decade which has made large proportions of the country unhappy. I think of brexit as a test by spouse, she buys a kitten and you hate kittens, she says if you love me you accept the kitten and there is your dilemma. The political class given the situation would prefer not to have Brexit but UK electorate needs brexit to show they are our politicians since that is what it is all about in the end.

    I think it is misguided BUT I do understand.

    @PRINCESS RACHEL

    Brexit was a perfect storm of opposites trying to push for power. You had the free market right and the anti immigration blocks. once brexit is done that will be the new front.

  47. Sea Change: At the end of the day, if the EU won’t budge from their 60-100+ Billion and ECJ control over rights the chances for a no-deal are high indeed.

    There are things more important than money. I think that, although the EU will not be a soft touch, they will be more concerned about the hygiene of not having a financial settlement which goes rancid and remains a running sore long after brexit.

    They want agreement on what headings should go in the spreadsheet and they want a discussion about breaking down the RAL [whatever that is]. My own feeling is that they would turn down a lump sum offer which is 5 billion more than their own reckoning of the spreadsheet and insist that all the headings in the spreadsheet are completed.

  48. @TREVOR WARNE

    In fairness on current terms Tories under 40 and labour over 40% suggests they may have the votes and seats considering that at the end of play Labour were 2.4% behind.

    If they swap places in terms of the Tories not getting more than 40 and labour getting 42% then I suspect that Labour forms the next government.

    Brexit is important but it will be a done deal and then it will be about other things and if you look at why people are voting Tory brexit comes up much higher in there issues than it does for Labour voters. I accept Brexit is a very partisan issue but let me give you an example of a partisan issue that went away as soon as it was implemented National Minimum Wage. In truth the NMW is so buried in the psyche of the UK electorate it is now as British as
    the Queen. So invoking it becomes meaningless

    I suspect by 2019 Brexit will not be the most important thing and by that time I reckon if the Tories do not have a counter to the anti austerity they are pretty much lost. since as I see it they will be doing austerity for ever but will be trying to disguise it because of the fact that they believe that Tory voters will not move to labour

  49. Sea Change,
    “But that strengthens May compared to Merkel in actual strength terms. The Tories have over 49% of the seats in the HoC.”

    No, it makes her position worse. It means May has power to act and therefore the people who voted for her expect her to act. But still the majority of the population do not support her. So she has no excuse not to push through Brexit.

    It is an unusual problem for a government to have the power to push through a programme it has promised, but which it does not believe in. Ok, maybe thats not so very unusual but in this case clearly one which it believes will be economically disastrous.

    I find myself reaching for the posthumous biographies of the politicians now involved, to read about what they really thought of their predicament. Which is what I would do studying the politics of WW1. But they arent there. Modern world being what it is, someone might help their pension plan by writing this soon enough so I get to read it, but not this year.

    We have had a years delay on brexit already, and another 2 years is now being proposed. Expect this to be stretched out beyond the next scheduled election. The only reason for not getting on with Brexit when the tories already had the power to do so before the last election is because they do not believe it can work. They cannot go forward, they cannot retreat. That was exactly the ‘Norway option’ and why Norway is stuck half in and half out.

    May needed big support from the nation so she could hope to ride out the economic disaster. Yes, blame the voters. Or she needed to lose. Both were possible solutions to the tories predicament. What they got was a further weakened position.

  50. It looks as though DD has conceded UK will contribute to RAL-to be quantified after the Tory Conference. Added to the continuing Budget contribution already conceded points to £40 bn to £50bn.

    If DD concedes ground on legal underpinning of EU citizens’ rights which looks like superior rights to those of the rest of us-there could be trouble at t’mill. :-)

    That “message” from Damien Green was a bit odd-is it a communication that TM intends to fight the next GE.? If that poll of Con Members putting Boris as best replacement is right then it is best she does carry on if she can. Corbyn would destroy Boris-correction Boris would destroy himself-the Ben Stokes of Team Tory.

1 2 3