There have been a flurry of polls following the announcement of the draft Brexit deal – all have tended to show a negative reaction. The most thorough were full length polls from YouGov for the Times and Survation for the Mail.

YouGov’s full length poll found that, based on what they had seen or heard about the deal, 15% of people supported it, 51% were opposed, 33% said don’t know (their snap poll earlier in the day had figures of 19% support, 42% opposed). Presenting people with a brief summary of what the deal actually entails makes little difference – by 50% to 19% people think it is a bad deal for Britain, by 45% to 28% people think it does not respect the result of the referendum. In Survation’s poll 61% said they had heard some details of the deal, and of those people who had heard at least something about the deal, 27% said they supported it, 49% were opposed.

YouGov asked people what should happen next – only 16% of people thought Britain should accept the deal as it is, 11% would prefer to reopen negotiations and seek a better deal, 19% to leave without a deal, 8% to have a referendum on the deal and 28% to just remain in the EU after all. In practice, of course, some of these options may not realistically be on the table. If people were forced to choose between the deal or leaving without one, 60% would choose the deal, 40% no deal. On the other hand, if the choice was between the deal and having a fresh referendum, people would prefer a new referendum by 56% to 44%.

Survation’s poll included some similar choices (though unlike the YouGov ones, they didn’t force a choice, people were able to say don’t know). If there was as referendum between the deal or remaining, people said they would prefer remain by 43% to 34%. If there was a referendum between the deal or no deal, people would prefer no deal by 34% to 32%… but with 34% don’t knows, who were largely remainers (and, if push comes to shove, I suspect may prefer a deal over no deal).

Turning to May’s own future, YouGov found that 33% of people think she should stay, 47% think she should resign. The figures in the Survation poll were very similar – 33% thought she should stay, 50% that she should go. Naturally there was more support among Tory voters, but even many Tory supporters think May should go (43% in the YouGov poll, 30% in the Survation poll).

There is, however, little optimism that a change of leader would produce a better outcome. In YouGov’s poll only 27% of people thought that a different Tory Prime Minister would be able to get a better deal (and only 19% thought that a Labour government under Jeremy Corbyn would get a better deal). They were a little more optimistic in the Survation poll, where 38% thought getting rid of May would increase the chances of a good deal.

In short, people don’t like the deal, but there is relatively optimism about the opportunities for anything better. If forced to choose, people would accept the deal rather than leave with no deal, but they’d also rather have a fresh referendum than accept this one. Whether public opinion really matters at this point is a different matter – this is one of those issues where Parliamentary arithmetic (and the internal politics of the Tory party) will be the actual deciding factors… they may be influenced by public opinion but, outside there being another referendum, public opinion is not going to be decisive.

199 Responses to “Polling on the draft Brexit deal”

1 2 3 4
  1. FPT

    This weekend feels like the intake of breath before the storm.

    Tory MPs will talking to people in their constituencies on whether to pull the trigger and either submit a letter to the 1922 committee, or whether to support TM or not should that happen. Many will be calculating whether the deal on the table, however flawed, is better then any other realistic possibility now. It’s no good pretending the deal is something totally different – we have what we have.

    Labour MPs have to consider if the present deal – one I think they would have got themselves, or something similar – is worth voting down. I read Caroline Flint’s article, and have some sympathy with her position. Of course, playing opposition politics tends to mean making life as hard as possible for the Government is the normal thing to do. However, there has probably never a been a parliamentary vote of this significance anyone’s lifetime. Crashing the deal could have a whole range very bad and unforeseen consequences. All MPs need to consider that above conevtional tribal politics.

    (I would add that playing with Brexit is happening across the house. It is the regrettable consequence of not ensuring Brexit negotiations were genuinely cross party, but left to party politics. There could been a cross party negotiating committee right from the start.)

    Parties are split. Parliament is split. The nation is split.

    Will getting rid of TM help? No. A leadership contest will simply waste time. TM isn’t the problem, the problem is squaring an impossible circle.

    Will a new GE fix things? No. That would be even worse, as tribalism would rise to the top, and there is no guarantee a new Parliament would be in a better position. My bet is we would have another, even more bitter, hung parliament.

    I think it leaves us where it’s up to whether we accept the deal. It’s not widely seen as good, but I’ve seen no sign that any other would be better accepted.

    If it is voted down, Parliament needs to consider it’s either no deal or a new Referendum. A new Referendum isn’t ideal, but if parliament is incapable of making a decision, it needs to go back to the people. I think a GE just mixes up the Brexit issue among domestic policies, whereas siphoning off the decision to a focused referendum is cleaner.

    A right old mess for sure, but I sincerely hope our politicians act like grown ups next week. If they don’t, for various tribal reasons, I fear a massive amount of damage that will take a long time to fix.

  2. Now the facts are known, it obviously makes sense to ask the people what they want:

    1. The deal
    2. No deal.
    3. Remain in the EU.

    Can’t really see why anyone has a genuine non-partisan problem with that.

  3. Thanks for the write up @AW.

    I think the polling is pointing to there being no chance of a no deal.

    Parliament will have to back TMs deal, or take it back to the people.

    It could ignore that, but if they did I would expect a massive, negative kick back.

    MPs are’t that stupid, are they?

  4. @David in France

    Now the facts are known, it obviously makes sense to ask the people what they want:
    1. The deal
    2. No deal.
    3. Remain in the EU.
    Can’t really see why anyone has a genuine non-partisan problem with that.

    I agree with you.

    However, there are folk who seem to have an issue with one democratic decision over-ruling a previous one.

    I don’t that argument myself.

  5. These are only first impressions clearly, but they offer some fairly stunning numbers for remainers and softer than soft Brexiters.

    Seeing the remain option clearly out in front in an open choice is pretty significant, although this must be hedged with the obvious observation that there is only one remain choice, so perhaps the comparison is a little unfair.

    However, those forced choice questions really do dig the knife into leave. 60/40 deal or no deal? Woe betide a government that takes us out on a no deal against the wishes of the 60%, especially considering that is only going to grow as the consequences of no deal become clearer. People in the leave camp talk about civil unrest if they don’t get their way. Well listen up, chaps – that would be nothing to what you would see if you tried to foist a no deal calamity on us. Anger is not an exclusive preserve of Brexiters.

    Then we have referendum or deal at 56/44, with remain 9% ahead of the deal in a referendum question.

    Pollingwise, the tide has definitively turned, it seems, with a growing margin looking to remain, and in favour of the options that could create the mechanism to deliver that.

    I’m with a few others in my assessment of this, in that I have yet to be convinced that the HoC has the balls to face down May’s deal. Conservative Brexiters are, by nature, a generally stupid lot, and so it is possible that they take the deal down and in doing so scupper Brexit entirely. The clever thing to do would be to support the deal in order to get us out, and then try to take over the future framework negotiations, with the backstop position that we could always walk away from everything under the Vienna Convention anyway.

    None of this is settled, and the future looks fascinating.

  6. We’ll reject this dealing Parliament and then May will face a no confidence vote as will the Government.

    Both May and the Government will survive and after Christmas this deal with some tweaks will come back to the house.

    The UK will then accept it after Parliament votes for it.

    Then the whole sorry process will start again over the Post transition future relationship.

    What that will be I am not sure but I suspect it will be fairly similar to the deal on offer now and that Brexiteers won’t like it!

    It will be a bit like the English Channel…it will divide us from the Continent but it won’t be that deep or wide. To far for all but a few to swim but easy for most to cross they want.


  7. @ COLIN – cut+paste from last thread. The only thing I’d add is the info on “caretaker” also from last thread. I don’t want SMogg as I know he is toxic to Soubs+co first off all and also to a large number of voters. Javid is my pick for “caretaker”.

    Anyway below was a response to a Remainer asking what a ‘managed no deal’ meant. Below is the cut+paste of my resply

    Smogg was quoted on Newsnight as favouring a ‘managed no deal’

    All the info is out there but I’ll offer a brief summary (please ask if you/others want any of it backed up – I’ll certainly try to respond to sensible questions)

    1/ We pay for transition to Dec’20 (as per Florence Speech)

    2/ We go back to Lancaster House and CON party manifesto (with a bit of realism)

    3/ We ask EC to “cut+paste” a chunk of the WA (agree what we can rather than nothing at all) and put that into an Association Agreement
    – if they refuse then we continue the unilateral No Deal implementation approach that they are beginning to reciprocate (visas, etc and new news on French customs today), we also pay zero and point out they’ve reneged on c2 of A50 (see EU in court)
    – if they accept then we use the implementation period to build up towards a FAIR and SYMMETRIC based FTA based on our current 100% alignment, desire for sovereignty and freedom to negotiate our own tariffs/TRQs and NTBs with other countries (use examples of TFA with NZ etc as evidence that this is something EC can easily accept – if they want continued v.low friction access to UK consumers)

    4/ For NI we propose the Island of Ireland is recognised (with WTO and bilaterally between UK and RoI) as a “biosecurity zone” with a “border zone” (all permissable using WTO and best practise WCO). That does require a bit of give from EC so if they refuse then we adopt an “open border” policy (as enshrined in EU Withdrawal Act) and rapidly work to get trusted trader, etc up and running (tolerating a modest amount of increased “smuggling” in the knowledge HMRC can go back 20yrs to collect tax).
    At risk of upsetting the DUP we agree away from border “Le Touquet+” arrangements as a backstop to kick in from Jan’21
    We should expect a backlash at WTO, but so should the EC/EU. Unilaterally we can agree new TRQs and new FTAs far easier than dragging the EC into it (S.Korea is the only EC deal I foresee any major issues with)
    If you want the quick infogram that is close to above then see “Amicable No Deal” in:

    November 16th, 2018 at 10:10 am


    Very difficult to argue an intellectual case against a 3 question Referendum.

    It certainly has the credibility which a mere vote NO-get a chaotic exit , would have.

    The problem is that we now know that the general public can never be given truly objective, factual honest assessments of these three options & their likely effects.

    The “campaign” would be dishonest & divisive from all three camps.It would be brutal & personal . It would finally destroy the idea of The Referendum in UK political life.

    The vote would therefore be uninformed & a complete gamble.

    This would indeed be a Hamiltonian “Tyranny of the Majority”.

    We know all this here on UKPR because we have spent two years explaining to each other why the public did not understand what they voted for in the first Referendum.

  9. Is there any mechanism by which the Conservative Party can elect a “caretaker” leader – as opposed to simply electing a leader? So far as I am aware, there isn’t.

  10. TW


    Who can guarantee that we will get that from EU.?

    To be honest most of it is beyond my ability to assess. What will the economic effects be?

    What will UK plc think & do?

    I take your point about the short first draft of the Political Framework. It is problematic -and doesn’t help in the trust stakes given the sodding NI backstop problem.

    But EU say they are redrafting & expanding it IN ORDER to allay fears about permanent backstop status.

    Any future relationship of any use at all to UK has to be agreed with the full hearted support & unity of BOTH parties.

    If you don’t believe the EU have any intention to use “best endeavours” to avoid the need for the backstop, and conclude a mutually beneficial post Brexit Trading ( & other) Arrangement, then your ideas have no chance anyway.

  11. Good write-up as always from AW. Folks should reread his final few sentences. I’ll copy+paste:

    “Whether public opinion really matters at this point is a different matter – this is one of those issues where Parliamentary arithmetic (and the internal politics of the Tory party) will be the actual deciding factors … they may be influenced by public opinion but, outside there being another referendum, public opinion is not going to be decisive.”

    So I’ll again challenge Remainers to say how this Ref will happen. Noting:

    – May doesn’t want it (nor would any new CON leader/PM), Corbyn only wants it after a GE (last time Cable asked it in HoC he got 11 votes!)
    – We don’t know if we can revoke A50 anyway (possible info coming soon after Nov27)
    – We have three options out there: Remain, EU deal, No Deal

    So Remainers please suggest how HoC will get to deciding to hold a new ref, then agree on the question (please state the question you’d ask and the boxes to tick, do you want to add 16/17y olds – how much debate time for that?), then run the campaign (mention which party is supporting which option) and then deal with the revoke issue (or should you ask that first). Please ensure to put in a realistic timeframe and remember the EP elections 26-29May and the requirement of a unanimous vote from EU27 to extend knowing they have offered us what is, for them, a fantastic deal (39bn for perma-transition and a scr3w you later PD for after 20XX)

    Feel free to refer to “How it Could Happen” from PeoplesVote plan – just add in some “realism” and timeline:

    Now consider who wins from further chaos – UK or Brussels? PeoplesVote backers = Best for Brussels!

  12. @TW

    All politicians are affected by public opinion.

    If it’s increasing the case that the public don’t like ‘no deal’ TM will find a way to avoid it. Only an ideological zealot would carry regardless. That she isn’t.

    Do bear in mind she adamantly against a GE. Until she changed her mind.

  13. To my mind, the DUP position is crucial now. I don’t see how they can vote for the agreement and therefore I don’t see how they can continue to support the government.

    So if the DUP withdraw support, Labour will table a motion of no confidence and we can expect a general election in January.

    The only way out is if the Conservatives have a leadership election. Then the DUP might continue to support the government to find out what the new leader says.

  14. As regard to timelines, I’m quite sure if parliament decided on a referendum, the EU would permit an extension of the withdrawal date to permit it.

  15. Colin,

    Depending on how it’s put, a three-option referendum could fail to be even the “tyranny of the majority”, e.g. if “Remain” gets 45%, “No Deal” gets 30%, and “Deal” gets 25%.

    Anyway, I doubt that the EU leaders are interested in extending time for a new referendum, not least because it could raise the spectre of further negotiations, and they seem to be happy with the Deal as it is.

  16. Hal – The DUP would have to vote against the Government in a VOC, abstaining would not be enough as long as all Tory MPs supported, personally I can’t see the DUP doing that.

    Trev – I think it was just rushed English (I do that far too often myself so not a dig) but your ”Corbyn only wants it (second ref) after a GE” is inaccurate of course.

    Corbyn won’t call for a second ref until after a GE call has been declined by the Government; and, even then it is only an option.

    My understanding is that Labour would make the call or more likely and preferably, support a call from a Tory back-bencher, Greening/Woolaston for example within a month of a GE being declined. A possible second attempt to get he deal through after xmas (as per Peter Cairns) depending on the shape of any first defeat may affect the timings of course.

  17. A rather interesting article in today’s FT on the views of the “common people” of Dronfield (Derbyshire) on Brexit.

    There is no majority for any solution.

  18. I said it weeks back, a three cornered referendum can’t work.

    I’m a Remainer, but offering a ‘deal’ and a ‘no deal’ option’ risks splitting the Leave vote and gifting the result to Remain.

    It needs to be seen to be as fair as possible and even offering transferable votes or similar complicates matters and some voters might not understand and get confused.

    Any referendum has to be reduced to a binary choice and with Remain looking to be a current public favourite I doubt it can be left out.

  19. @SAM

    Thanks for the link in the previous thread. Brilliant show.

  20. Suggesting that the public couldn’t understand preferential voting strikes me as a little patronising. Some countries run their entire democracy on it and seem to cope without legions of confused voters (also stormont).

  21. From FO minster Alistair Burt:

    “Be very clear. If an agreed deal on leaving between the Govt and the EU is voted down by purist Brexiteers, do not be surprised if consensus on accepting the result of the Referendum by Remain voting MPs breaks down. Parliament will not support no deal.”

    That seems pretty much a straightforward bottom line to me.

    If – IF – this goes so badly wrong [from a Tory/TOH perspective] that we remain in the EU and Labour formed a government, the turmoil in the Conservative Party would be incredible – and could end in it splitting.

    [Fingers crossed…]

  22. So if TM lost confidence vote and faced leadership challenge and lost Tory leadership. She would not be compelled to resign as Prime Minister. She could lead a government of national unity with support from Labour/ Tory loyalists/ Lib Dems and propose second referendum on her deal with Remain and no deal options and delay Article 50.

  23. Peter C
    Looks like a good system!

  24. @JamesB

    With only 3 options the Supplementary Vote is sufficient (as used by Londoners to elect the Mayor); you don’t even need to ask people to rank the options numerically.


    I take the view that because if Parliament accepts the deal then there is no need to put it to the Country for approval; so likewise if Parliament rejects the deal it should not be put to the Country either. We need to remember that the electorate cannot be considered to be competent to make a decision on a 585-page treaty (I wouldn’t even want to assume that all UKPR readers are competent, regardless of their Leave/Remain position); that is Parliament’s role. So the only decision that is needed in a People’s Vote is between withdrawing the Article 50 notification and remaing in the EU and leaving with no deal.

  25. Second referendum has to be either binary choice selected by parliament, with remain an absolutely essential option, or a threeway choice, which really has to include a transferable vote system to be fair to leave.

    I don’t see a problem with the public understanding this, but I do sympathize with @Colin over the dread of the campaign. Some words of optimism on this, and one suggestion to ease the tension.

    Firstly, this time leave have a record to defend, and barefaced ly!ing will be more difficult for them. Secondly, remain have a record to defend, and barefaced ly!ing will be more difficult for them. Thirdly, there is a deal to focus on, along with a clearer idea of the alternative leave options. The debate should be better.

    Nonetheless, a new vote would still depend on politicians behaving themselves. Some would, others wouldn’t, but I can foresee a big role for Theresa May, and this is therefore my suggestion.

    May is uniquely placed to act as a neutral, prepared to deliver whatever the public decide they want. She has negotiated a deal which she thinks meets the demands of the original referendum, but she has been honest enough to agree that it isn’t perfect. It is the best she thinks we can get.

    She could, theoretically, declare her government officially neutral in the second referendum, taking on the role of providing informed comment, and policing inaccuracies and l!es from the official campaigns.

    I can understand that for many, presenting May as the neutral arbiter of this debate might still be a conceptual stretch too far, but having watched her perform throughout the tidal wave of batterings she has taken over the last 48hrs, I suspect she might just be able to pull something like this off.

    Either way, a second referendum needs a government in place that could enact whatever would be required immediately after the result. We couldn’t tolerate a government being closely associated with one option, getting defeated, and then falling, just when we need effective and fast moving governance at a time of potential crisis.

  26. Apparently, the DUP will vote against the brexit deal in Parliament and then end support for the government if it passes. So any election might be in February.

  27. Alec and others – the Electoral Commission can’t or wont approve a 3-way ref with AV.

    Pete W pointed out on the previous thread that the HOC can over-ride that with primary rushed through legislation but as others have said the politics mean a binary choice is the only workable option and remain would have to be one of the them. Would the other be some deal or no deal is the question to be decided in such an eventuality.

    NB) Following the PMs ‘no deal at all’ remark and Caroline Flints piece we now have operation this deal or second ref and with the threat of remain in full flight with Alistair Burts comments.

    ERG went too early and are forcing other sceptical Tory MPs to back the PM or not and if they back her they have to support the deal; they should have waited until after the first vote on Dec 11th (I think) and kept playing the ball instead of the women until then.

  28. @ Hal

    Just to stress Jim Jam’s point:

    “The DUP would have to vote against the Government in a VOC, abstaining would not be enough as long as all Tory MPs supported, personally I can’t see the DUP doing that.”

    It’s not even clear if they would abstain. Breaking the C&S doesn’t mean they won’t vote for the government, just that they are not obliged to vote for the government. OK, it might look a bit strange to officially break C&S, then vote to support in a confidence motion, but DUP don’t care much about looks I think. And as many have pointed out before, they really aren’t likely to want to help Corbyn into power. Was a C&S agreement needed at all? Well maybe, but not obvious.

  29. So if 25.1% back no deal, 25% back the deal, and 49.9% back remain, but the 25% prefer no deal to remain, we get no deal?


  30. Incidentally, the predictions of a recession after the 2016 vote have done an awful job of making many people discount the probability of a recession with no deal.

    It’s as though David Cameron and George Osborne, with their very expensive educations, never heard the story about the boy who cried wolf…

  31. Leftie Liberal,

    So you’d be willing to accept a no deal Brexit, even when there was a deal that the UK government and the EU was willing to do? Even at the cost of thousands and thousands of jobs as a result of your preferred referendum option?


  32. @jamese

    I don’t know whether the Tory Party has a mechanism for appointing an interim leader but the Queen can certainly choose a PM who may or may not turn out to be interim.

    One of the dogs yet to bark in the disintegration of the UK as a functioning state is the role which “the Crown” may yet be called upon to play in ensuring that HM Government continues whatever the Tory Party decides to do regarding its leader.

  33. Suppose that Brexiters boycott a second referendum, because it’s e.g. “Remain or no deal”, so that Remain wins with 98% of 48% = 45.6% of the total electorate. What happens then? Is parliament seriously going to revoke Article 50?

    Grasping for straws in the wind, I think Remain vs. Deal might be the least awful option.

  34. @R&D – that Burt quote is pretty clear. For the first time, the hard Brexiter no dealers are being faced down. They have been outflanked, and if the deal is rejected, it seems pretty certain we’ll either stay of have a second vote.

    I think you and I agreed a long time ago that May was angling to defeat the hard Brexiters, and leaving them only weeks to face the consequences of a hard Brexit was part of this.


    A pity that the AV referendum didn’t get approval, but it’s a simple enough system, in this case for anyone who can count up to 3.

    Remainer 2nd preferences would go overwhelmingly to the EU deal.

    If no deal isn’t on the ballot then the ultra Cons would whine indefinitely, and if no deal won then we would be rid of them forever.


    @”Anyway, I doubt that the EU leaders are interested in extending time for a new referendum, ”

    I agree

  37. Just to make the weekend a little more nervous for the Tories, Opinium in the Observer shows Tories down 5 points to 36 and Labour up 2 points to 39 compared to last month (fieldwork starting 14 November):

  38. Bill Patrick: So if 25.1% back no deal, 25% back the deal, and 49.9% back remain, but the 25% prefer no deal to remain, we get no deal?

    Quite. My vote would be remain. My second choice would be no deal. I would be very unhappy at no deal vs remain, but less unhappy than with the deal as currently formulated. It offers few of the advantages of EU membership and a lot of the disadvantages. Likewise for brexiters, it offers none of the alleged benefits of leaving.

    No deal offers amuch cleaner way back and on a shorter time scale than May’s deal.

  39. Jim Jam: Alec and others – the Electoral Commission can’t or wont approve a 3-way ref with AV.

    Why not? Any link to anything from them on this?

  40. I presume the effort is going into not allowing any amendments to the debate (all the other noise is smoke and mirrors)

    Vote for the deal, or vote no deal and certain doom…..who would want to take the blame for a chaotic no deal exit?

  41. @ Hireton

    Thanks for the Opinium poll – I had wondered if it was just a coincidence that we’d had a couple of polls looking better for Labour, and this one seems to confirm that the 2-3 point the Tories appeared to have opened up has now closed. An average of all polls so far this month must be level pegging (or very close to that).

    As for my “Caretaker” leader question: it still stands. I was hoping that a Trevor might answer as one of them is so fond of speculating about possible “caretaker” Tory leaders.

  42. Well here’s some fun from Britain Elects:

    Westminster voting intentiomn:

    LAB: 39% (+2)
    CON: 36% (-5)
    UKIP: 8% (+2)
    LDEM: 7% (-1)
    GRN: 3% (-)

    via @OpiniumReseach, 14 Nov
    Chgs. w/ 11 Oct

    Westminster voting intention:

    CON: 40%
    LAB: 40%
    LDEM: 8%
    UKIP: 5%
    GRN: 3%

    via @Panelbase, 02 – 07 Nov
    First w/ pollster since 2017


  43. Bill Patrick,
    45.6% of the electorate is a lot more than backed Leave the first time round, so I don’t really get your argument

    However despite being a Remainer I never subscribed to the “only 37% of the electorate voted leave” argument. People are allowed to abstain..

    However under the extraordinarily undemocratic trade union legislation the vote would be thrown out because of a turnout <50%… So I suppose there is precedent, even if we would hev no local government and no mayor of London if that precedent were generally applied to democracy..

  44. Re. the electoral commission and a three way referendum:

    There would have to be legislation for a referendum anyway. The voting system and question would surely be defined in that, just as last time? The Electoral Commission looks after a diverse set of voting systems in Britain with no problem – it does not have a view on them, but does as Parliament tells it.

    I agree that the timeline is short enough without having to argue about a new voting system however..

  45. I can’t see a problem with a 3 way AV style referendum. Parliament could legislate for it if it wanted to. I also think the public would get it too – we do for EU elections, and in some Scottish elections I think?

    The other way is simple too. Parliament votes on TM’s deal. If it wins, it happens. If it loses, Parliament the quickly calls a referendum on no deal vs remain.

    We can put satellites into space (and even change the time on our cookers – just), so we can sort out a referendum surely?

  46. @Colin

    “@”Anyway, I doubt that the EU leaders are interested in extending time for a new referendum, ”

    I agree”

    Not what it says here…

    I guess journalists actually talking to people in Brussels can be safely ignored though..

  47. ANDREW111


    If his sources reflect the Council consensus, then I stand corrected.

  48. @ALEC

    They have been outflanked, and if the deal is rejected, it seems pretty certain we’ll either stay of have a second vote.

    Got on the nail.

    They have also look to be in trouble with the No Confidence vote.

    From the Daily Mail*

    Brexiteer coup ‘is STILL 11 letters short’ despite 23 MPs going public: Whips battle to crush ‘reckless’ plot to topple the PM – but Tory rebels insist they will have the 48 letters needed next week

    *Only look at in on a basis of know thy enemy

  49. If there was to be a referendum, I’d expect a 2 question referendum.
    Q1: Remain/leave
    Q2: Deal/No Deal

    Voters must answer both questions for their vote to be valid (To avoid voters shirking their responsibilities)

    If Q1 remain wins, then Q2 doesn’t matter.

1 2 3 4