A brief note about the Survation poll in today’s Mail. A lot of responses to this have really got the wrong end of the stick – the Daily Mail have, quite obviously, written it up with a very pro-deal slant and have not focused upon elements of the poll showing support for no-deal or for a fresh referendum. Nevertheless, the core of the story – that more people said they wanted MPs to vote to support the deal than wanted MPs to reject it – is quite correct.

Firstly, lets us address social media claims that the poll actually showed opposition to the deal and that the Mail has lied about it. This is untrue. What actually happened is that when the Daily Mail front page was published yesterday Survation has not yet put up the full tables, so people looking for the full results on Survation’s website stumbled upon their previous poll for the Daily Mail, which had shown people opposed the deal. Today’s poll is different – and that’s the point of the Mail’s splash – the poll suggests public opinion has changed.

The two polls asked identical questions about support for the deal (so there’s no jiggery-pokery, so changing the wording – it’s a straight comparison).

Survation’s poll conducted on November 15th found that 61% of people had heard about the deal and of those people 27% supported it, 49% opposed it. The full tables for that poll are here (the chart that lots of people were posting on social media this morning was from this poll)

Survation’s new poll conducted on November 27th asked the same questions, and found 72% had now heard about the deal. Of those people 37% supported the deal (up 10), 35% opposed the deal (down 14). The full tables for that poll are here (Wednesday’s Daily Mail story is about this poll)

In the next question Survation asked how people wanted MPs to vote on the deal. 41% said they would like MPs to vote for the deal, 38% would like MPs to vote against the deal.

So far, so good. The poll shows a sharp increase in support for the deal since it was first announced – a fortnight ago the public were opposed by nearly 2-to-1, now it is pretty much neck-and-neck. While this is only a single poll and one shouldn’t read too much into it until there is other polling evidence to back it up, it does appear to be a very clear shift.

However, before one concludes that the public are now leaning in favour of the deal, it’s also worth looking at the other questions in the poll. The poll also repeated questions asking how people would vote in some hypothetical referendums. These suggests that people continue to prefer remaining in the EU to the deal (Remain 46%(+3), Leave with the deal 37%(+3)) and that in a choice between the deal or leaving without one, they’d go for no deal (No deal 41%(+7), deal 35%(+3)).

This leaves us in a bit of a quandary. People narrowly approve of the deal and think MPs should approve it… but they also prefer both of the two obvious alternatives to the deal. For the record, the poll also finds people in favour of a new referendum on the deal by 48% to 34%. It is hard to resist the conclusion that the public are as unclear as the political classes about their preferred way forward.

2,428 Responses to “Does Survation show the public warming towards the Brexit deal?”

1 2 3 49
  1. Great write-up. As AW says:

    “This leaves us in a bit of a quandary…It is hard to resist the conclusion that the public are as unclear as the political classes about their preferred way forward.”

  2. Ref. AW’s last para those 48/34 figures for and against a second referendum work out as 58.5% for and 41.5% against. That’s v near 60/40. If 52/48 was enough to send us down the leave path, why isn’t 58/42 enough to at least have another look at it?

  3. This seems another reflection of what we’ve already seen from the start.

    A considerable number of people in their ‘right thing to do’ frame of mind, would have some kind of compromise (go back far enough and this basically was where EFTA/norway style sat), however in the more self interested perspective the deal is still seen as pretty rubbish.

    What is typically impossible to tell from this is how much various sections of the population will actually begrudge each possible action if it’s actually taken.

    That effect was shown pretty well in the post referendum BES outputs which found a huge uptick in interest/support for the EU amongst remain voters after the referendum result.

    ” It is hard to resist the conclusion that the public are as unclear as the political classes about their preferred way forward.”

    Which is where direct democracy turns into the omnishambles we’re currently seeing. One of those groups is supposed to provide leadership from considered decisions based on the evidence provided to them by people who actually have time to do proper research/evidence production because that’s what they’re paid to do.

    The other group hasn’t, realistically, got a snowballs chance in hell of even scratching the surface on a question like this.

  4. @SDA

    “Why isn’t 58/42 enough to at least have another look at it?”

    Because, as Anthony said, it’s just one poll. I also fear that another referendum will bring a bigger Leave win, the polls all showed Remain winning last time and the “shy” Leavers won the day. Leave has gathered a lot of new information in Government since the last referendum and will have 6 weeks or so to promote their views. I don’t think Remain has much new to offer other than putting more frighteners on the voting public if we leave, that simply didn’t work last time and I’m speaking as a Remainer.

    If it’s down to stick or twist with TM’s deal I would personally stick rather than risk a big Leave win and the consequences that will inevitably go with it.

  5. I commented on the poll in the last thread. Not the whole thing because I ran out of time, and AW is quite right, some of the answers appear contradictory.

    However, I noted that support for the May deal appeared to be coming from remainers, who while they want to remain as first choice, prefer the deal to no deal. This was evidenced from the polling results that support for MD was coming from labour/remainers/remain voting areas (particularly London).

    I observed that while this might mean a transfer majority for the deal, it could simultaneously mean we ended up with a result virtually no one was happy with. Long term this could be poison for politicians who waved it through.

    This is particularly true if we consider views on Brexit are significantly polarised on party lines. Although again, this has partly come about by voters migrating between parties, and they might migrate back.

    The problem is how do you view the acceptibility of a deal which is not so much less loved as less hated?

  6. @ Bantams

    “the polls all showed Remain winning last time”

    No, they didn’t.

    16 of the 32 polls conducted from 1-22 June 2016 showed Leave ahead, including two polling companies’ final polls.


  7. @ James E

    OK, not all polls pointed to a Remain win but of 168 polls from the time the wording of the referendum was confirmed only 55 reported a Leave lead. Bookies put Remain @ with about a 75% chance of winning and only 2 out of 6 on the day had a Leave lead.

    My point is, do you take the deal offered or do you risk something far more unpalatable if Leave wins again clearly which is what I suspect will happen?

  8. “Leave has gathered a lot of new information in Government since the last referendum and will have 6 weeks or so to promote their views.”

    That’s an interesting view. However, remain has also gathered much, much more information since then.

    I think most people can agree that the last referendum was an unsatisfactory affair, which neither side came out from with any credit. Few, I think, would argue against the perception that there were distortions and downright l!es on both sides, although I suspect there could still be endless (and somewhat pointless) debate on which side did more ly!ng, or more distorting.

    What I think is perhaps more fruitful is to assess the nature of the claims made by each side, and how these might relate to a second vote.

    In general terms, the main leave claims were process based, while many of the remain claims were outcome based. Leave promised an easy deal, no disruption, a compliant EU begging for our markets, queues of third country deals ready to go in March 2019, loads of cash for the NHS, nothing possible to go wrong.

    Remain by contrast promise economic armageddon if we didn’t vote to stay, and then a series of lurid and not so lurid predictions about what would happen if we left.

    Neither side would be able to completely escape their loss of credibility from the first referendum, but there is a case for arguing that leave would face the bigger problem. Their claims of process have been tested to total destruction over the last two and a half years and are now open to ridicule. What they promised never happened, and we now know much more clearly what the actual process of leaving is, where the power balance l!es, and what the trade-offs would be. The public has seen this, and sufficient of them are worried that they now favour either remain or the softest of exits.

    Remain also would have to overcome the fact that their post vote predictions are widely perceived to be false, but they are still able to look at future scenarios and warn of problems of outcomes, after being proved correct on the process. Here, they have been helped by events.

    The difficult process of negotiation has helped more of the public understand that the glib ‘everything will be fine’ optimism of the leavers was misplaced, and there seems to be widespread recognition that trade-offs are needed. This helps remain frame the debate in terms of proximity to the EU against economic damage – the central premise of the entire case for remain. This idea seems to be more clearly fixed in voters minds, helping to dull the credibility loss for remain after the first vote. They are also helped by the impression of the ERG as a busted flush, and the fact that the hard core leavers in Con ranks are an extreme minority.

    May is greatly helping remain in this context. The government now openly admits that there is no leaving option that makes us better off, and from May – who was seen as a flag bearer of leave at one point – adds credibility to this. The process has awoken other high profile areas – like fishing and Northern Irish businesses, for example – to a much clearer understanding of the risks and trade offs.

    On balance, therefore, I would conclude that both remain and leave have gathered more information since the last vote, and both have been exposed to some fairly grim public examinations – but that it is the leave assumptions that have taken a much more serious battering than the central concepts of the remain camp.

    Leave set so much store in process, and have been found wanting at every stage. Remain gambled on the economic trade offs, which although never materialised in the immediate vote aftermath, has now become established as the main judgement of Brexit.

    The debate is now being conducted almost exclusively on remain terms, which bodes well if we were to get a second vote.

  9. Would more remainers move in to the accepting column if the relationship was closer still and how many leavers would move to no-deal if this occurred.

    I think this is where we are heading, Boles, Stamer (mayb even Gove with most PLP and PCP on board.

    Just Hard Brexit (80 MPs perhaps) and Hard Remain maybe 100 chasing a second ref (and that includes SNP and 11 x LDs) would be against a closer post Brexit future relationship Political Declaration.

    I think the county could live with it as well (Scotland would depend on the SNP position and NI on their parties of course).

    How do we get there though? mmmm is a toughy!!

  10. @ Bantams

    “.. if Leave wins again clearly which is what I suspect will happen?”

    All recent polls put Remain ahead – typically with a lead of 6 to 10 points (so around 54:46). So even if you compare recent polls with those in the run up to 23 June 2016 (which averaged a narrow 2 point lead for Remain), there has been a swing in public opinion.

    It’s worth bearing in mind that the referendum was difficult for the pollsters as they had no baseline of a previous vote – but now do. So we should be able to have greater confidence in the figures they produce now. If you want to see how the public’s view has shifted, the standard YouGov question which has run since summer 2016 on whether the UK was right or wrong to leave gives a clear picture:


  11. @ Alec

    If Remain are going to have a chance of winning they have to stop scaremongering and put a positive spin of the benefits of staying in the EU, something they singularly failed to do first time around. The final decision was only partially to do with economics and immigration, a lot of other issues played on the minds of the voters.

    The fact that the debate has been heavily biased in favour of Remain for months worries me as to why the poll lead isn’t huge right now as it should be. Once Leave get their arguments into the public domain the polls will inevitably start to shift the other way and I’m worried Remain haven’t got much new to offer in reply.

  12. @ James E

    54 to 46 – only 5 people in 100 need to change their minds and it either turns everything on its head or it turns into a rout. I would be interested to know if any certainty polls have been done and how many people are in the DK or could change their mind bracket.

  13. @ Bantams

    I’m not the first person on this site to doubt your credentials as someone who claims to have been a Remain supporter, and having checked back to when A50 was triggered, it’s clear that my suspicions (and those of others) are justified.


    “When Merkel starts flexing her muscles like this so early it suggests to me that we need to be out sooner rather than later, the Weatherspoon owner on Sky suggested he preferred no deal.
    March 29th, 2017 at 8:41 pm”

  14. I wouldn’t want to bet good money (or even sterling) on how this will all turn out, since there are still a number of branches in the way ahead.

    Which branches are taken will determine the destination.

    December 5th – Advocate-General makes statement at the ECJ. While not the final confirmation, it should make it clear if the ECJ have

    1. accepted/rejected the arguments of the Council, Commission ands UK that the ECJ should kick the judgement far down the road, and not bother their pretty little heads about it (seems unlikely that the ECJ will be bossed around- eg Madison v Marbury).

    2. unless the ECJ ducks the issue completely – found that revocation is/is not possible, and if it is, under what conditions.

    December 11th – If revocation is legal, then MPs have other options (depending on how the Advocate General has indicated it would have to happen), to supporting the deal, or crashing out with no deal. These might include one or more of –

    1. instructing the UK Government to either
    (a) revoke A50
    (b)remove many of its red lines and follow the SNP suggested compromise (as fleshed out by Nick Boles)

    2. instructing the UK Government to ask for an extension to the A50 time limit to accommodate either a
    (a) 2nd EU referendum
    (b) UK General Election

    In a couple of weeks, we should have some greater clarity.

  15. ON – I am for 1 (b) in a way the Labour, SNP, ideally DUP (adds legitimacy) and hopefully over half of Tory MPs can support.

    LDs irrelevant imo, let them push to revocation if they wish via ref 2 with a few Tory MPs and 50 or so Labour ones. Their stance may help bring leavers on board as a worry for them if the revised deal fails to pass.

  16. NB) 1 (b) may require an extension of a perhaps 3 months which I believe would be forthcoming.

  17. @ James E

    I am often a big critic of the way the EU operates and don’t hold back if I don’t agree with something like the way German dominance turns a lot of EU policy to their benefit but when the chips are down I would still vote to Remain as it’s better being inside the tent peeing out than the opposite. It’s important if a second referendum comes to pass that Remain have some new fresh arguments to bring forward but what are they? Maybe I’m just a Remainmoaner :)

  18. I find the thought of another referendum thoroughly depressing and profoundly undemocratic.
    The result of the first vote has not been enacted yet and for the supporters of another plebiscite to say that people have changed their mind and didn’t know what they were voting for is a patronising disgrace. Can these people not see that to have another vote would be utterly damaging to our democracy?
    I believe that , if another vote came to pass, it could unleash some extremely unpleasant forces across the country.
    Parliament asked the people to vote, the people gave their decision, and the parliamentarians now need to carry out the decision the people made. Indeed, last year both maor parties – who got over 80% of the votes cast – said they would respect the referendum result.
    Parliamentarians must do their job. The “peoples vote” organisation is led by such luminaries as Alistair Campbell and Tony Blair whose scant regard for democracy is well known. It is simply not good enough that these people agitate to make the people vote again because the bottom line is they don’t like what the people told them to do in 2016.
    In some ways, it doesn’t matter which way another vote would go – this is not Greece or France or Ireland. When the British people are asked to make a decision by their representatives, it must be acted upon.

  19. Alec @ 3.08 pm makes a strong case for Remain winning in any new referendum and in continued polling.

    There is just one thing I could add, that austerity is hurting even more than two years ago. So any extra financial loss to average voters will be felt even more keenly. And there is no sign of an early end to austerity, with the financial outlook now being gloomier than in the pre-budget weeks.

  20. Hugo:

    The referendum was purely advisory, as we were told repeatedly. And the people made several decisionS that David Cameron promised to respect for each polity.

    I find it depressing that you have forgotten the basics, and have no respect for our democratic decisionS.

  21. @SDA – “Why isn’t 58/42 enough to at least have another look at it?”

    Did you miss the Gina Miller case? Parliament is sovereign ;)

    However, it is worth looking at the LAB X-breaks, LAB conf mumble policy and McDonnell’s comments today.

    I very much doubt CCHQ have in any way planned this but no CON leader is going to want a new GE with LAB having an “ambiguous” policy on Brexit.

  22. Jim Jam

    I agree that 1(b) would probably need an A50 extension.

    Hopefully, Labour will take a position on the actual issues, and not simply abstain on December 11th.

    DUP (hopefully including its MPs – but that’s not guaranteed!) should support any proposal that doesn’t further differentiate NI and GB.

    Sturgeon says SNP will support whichever of the Norway++ or 2nd EUref that can get a majority of MP support. A new UK GE she thinks is unlikely anyway, although in party terms, polling would suggest SNP gains.

  23. Trevor, re ‘LAB conf mumble policy’.

    Does not help when it is misreported in the so-called quality press!!

    In the Guardian article posted on the last thread reporting McDonnell’s comments they said.

    ”Those comments sparked concern at the Labour’s conference in September, where delegates voted overwhelmingly to commit the party to seeking a new referendum if it could not force a general election.”

    The Guardian is of course wrong as the composite does not commit Labour to seeking a new referendum, it merely keeps all options on the table including a possible second ref.

    It is clear Labour would upon a GE being refused would first seek a revised deal either from this Government or via themselves ruling as a minority temporarily.

    Only when all options have been exhausted will they ‘reluctantly’ move to demanding a second ref having tried very hard to avoid.

    The significance of McDonnell’s comments is not around the ordering of positions, which is unchanged, but that he contends that remain would have to be an option; that is new from him.

  24. Daywel

    Not so.

    We were told repeatedly that the government would act upon the people’s decision.

    The turnout was the biggest in our nation’s history.

    We were told repeatedly that a vote to leave would mean leaving the single market and customs union and all EU institutions.

    We were told repeatedly that we would be economically worse off.

    And the people voted to leave.

    Your amnesia is depressing.

  25. @ ON – thank you for the ECJ info.

    @ JJ – Timing wise, assuming May loses on 11Dec, then do you think Corbyn gives it a few days before calling HoC confidence vote?

    13-14: Dec is EU Council meeting (possible she is sent back to try again?)

    See if CON call a leadership challenge (ie CON MPs do part of LAB’s work for them)?

    However, whatever happens in Brussels and whatever happens inside CON surely by 17Dec LAB will have to call a confidence vote in HoC?

    Two possibilities there but let’s assume Turkeys don’t vote for Xmas and DUP either back CON or abstain and CON hold on to power

    Before Xmas recess then LAB official policy must be to support a new ref?

    There is this minority govt possibility (coalition of the Remain-Centre) but that seems like LDEM wishful thinking to me (although if SNP sneak IndyRef2 back in as a price to join then OK)

    Anyway, do you see any way Corbyn can keep ducking PeoplesVote after 17(ish) Dec?

    That then begs the question what does Corbyn support in a PeoplesVote! By then it will not be a “question for the future”.

    I can see why Corbyn wants to wait on the ECJ info and the Meaningful Vote but unless ECJ completely and totally shut the door then I can’t see the PeoplesVote folks giving up (e.g. if we can’t unilaterally revoke we can still ask for unanimous permission to revoke and EU have said they want us to Remain right?!?)

  26. Prof Armstrong of Cambridge Uni (Prof of European Law, so will know a damn sight more than me!) has an observation on the Advocate-General’s Opinion being delivered on 5th December.

    I think that means we will get CJEU judgment before 11 Dec. Court can’t leave uncertainty based on AG opinion without itself deciding which way it’s going to go.

  27. HUGO

    I have considerable sympathy with the view you express.

    But it seems that momentum might be with Ref2.because Parliament will probably not approve the WA +PD proposed by the EU’s 28 Leaders.

    Parliament has no consensus on an alternative Brexit, and in any case there is no indication that the EU 27 have the inclination or the time to discuss an alternative. Their representatives have stated, in terms, that the WA + PD is the only arrangement available.

    What the mechanism for getting to Ref2 is-or indeed whether it can be held prior to March 29th is unclear to me. It will undoubtedly be promoted primarily as an attempt to reverse the first Brexit Vote & one could hardly criticise a weary electorate for providing such a majority this time. If they do, the process required to gain the acceptance of EU27 to revocation and/or readmittance is opaque to me.

    Which thought prompts consideration of the terms of UK’s continuing membership – I have in mind our existing Budget Rebate & Opt out from Eurozone membership.

    I do not expect Ref2 questions to put those two features of our existing membership before the Electorate as available caveats.

    Therefore I expect the Campaign which ensues for Ref2 to be as cynically uninformative & manipulative and as plagued by unscrupulous evasion by both sides as was the first Referendum.

    If Remain wins , UK’s failed attempt to leave the EU will be the centrepiece of an EU pr blitz to deter any future attempt by a member to leave .

    UK will need to produce a PM of stature & respect who can engage positively with EU’s ongoing development & reform , whilst promoting the role & purpose of member states in the way that Netherlands’ PM is currently doing.

    Failure to produce such an individual in UK politics will see UK ignored in Brussels & facing fractious political & social division at home.

  28. John McDonnell being more explicit on Labour support for another referendum:

    BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg asked the shadow chancellor: “It is inevitable that if a vote of no confidence didn’t bring down the government and a general election, it is inevitable – to use that word that you just used – that there’d be another vote?” McDonnell replied:

    That’s right. Our policy is if we can’t get a general election, then the other option which we’ve kept on the table is a people’s vote.


  29. Mcdonells latest comments a couple of hours ago shows a definite strengthening of is move to a referendum if there is no General Election

    ‘We want a deal that will protect jobs and the economy. If we can’t achieve that – the government can’t achieve that – we should have a general election but that’s very difficult to do because of the nature of the legislation that David Cameron brought forward.

    If that’s not possible, we’ll be calling upon the government then to join us in a public vote. It’s difficult to judge each stage, but that’s the sequence I think that we’ll inevitably go through over this period.’

  30. @Hal

    beat me to it

  31. Hugo:

    Did you receive the literature sent to us in Scotland? And if you didn`t, why be so arrogant as to know what it said? .

    “”The turn-out was the biggest in our nation`s history”” Which nation are you talking about, presumably England?

    Again you are either intentionally or inadvertently stirring up anger, when sensible people ought to be compromising.

  32. Wow, Carney is feeding Project Fear steroids. You’ll note the less than subtle way the bank stress tests have been “linked” to the Brexit forecasts.

    Eat your heart out George Osborne!

  33. DAVWEL

    @”Which nation are you talking about, presumably England?”

    Don’t be silly.

    He is talking about the country referred to in the Referendum Question of 2016.

    It was ” Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”

  34. So with two weeks to the meaningful vote the Government has Launched “Project Fretful”

    -4% for the deal -10% for no deal backed by -8% right away for no deal from the BOE.

    We’re gone from;

    “No Deal is Better than a Bad Deal” to

    “The Best Deal is a Bad Deal but it’s better than No Deal!”

    It’s like the scene in Blazing Saddles where the Sheriff holds back the mob trying to lynch him by putting a gun to his own head and threatening to shoot!

    By the weekend I expect to see drone footage of a tanker on the M25 reportedly on it’s way to oil the hinges on the gates of hell!


  35. Labour would offer to rule as a minority as a step to demonstrate they have exhausted all possibilities but as some of us have been posting from time to time McDonnell is key and he is signaling a second ref more likely.

    IMO this is to encourage soft Brexit support in to supporting a softer Brexit option with the threat of no Brexit via ref 2 if they don’t.

    Trev – If a narrow defeat Corbyn will not call a VOC as that might nudge some anti-Deal Tories (esp remain ones) towards supporting at the second attempt after some tinkering/clarifications!

    I think waiting until Mrs May has had a second bash if she does is worthwhile as the Tories may save Labour a job by triggering a conf vot for May after the first loss.

    A Labour call for a VOC as the Tories are fighting amongst themselves at this time etc etc is a much stronger narrative.

  36. From Guardian Live Feed of the BoE Stress Test Report, financial stability report and its analysis on the impact of Brexit

    Governor Mark Carney is speaking to reporters now, explaining that today’s Brexit scenarios show ‘what could happen, not what is going to happen’.

    And they are certainly testing.

    As the Press Association explains:

    In the event of a disorderly no deal, no transition Brexit, Britain’s GDP could fall by 8% from its level in the first quarter of 2019, according to analysis of a worst case scenario by the Bank.

    The unemployment rate would rise 7.5% and inflation would surge 6.5%. House prices are forecast to decline 30%, while commercial property prices are set to fall 48%. The pound would fall by 25% to less than parity against both the US dollar and the euro.

    Looks like HMG are going to really turn the screw on MPs over the coming weeks to make sure “No Deal” is not an option.

  37. Jim Jam,
    “Would more remainers move in to the accepting column if the relationship was closer still and how many leavers would move to no-deal if this occurred.”

    I think here you are mixing up two different things with ‘accepting’.

    In politics, say there are two sides, one wants higher tax and one lower. One side wins an election and carries out their policy. But next time, the other side wins and applies theirs. So with Brexit. Polling suggests most people are unconverted and still believe as they did at the referendum. In normal politics, people accept an outcome because every few years there will be another chance.

    If a poll says a lot of remainers prefer deal, it doesnt mean they accept that outcome. It still means they want another chance to overturn the result. The national disaster here was a narrow win.

    Personally, and as a remainer, I am not sure that closer helps.Sure, it will help the economy, but I think closeness is inevitable whatever the starting point now. But leaving the EU drives a cart and horse through UK world soft power, which none of these deals or no deals mitigate.

    The May deal acknowledges that the Uk cannot afford to break trade relations to the EU. CANNOT AFFORD TO. But it is willing to sacrifice Uk soft power.

    Incidentally, I think the May deal is designed by the Uk side so that the final outcome would be both CU and SM membership, and bells and whistles too. Talk about EEA/Norway now might be seen as trying to get a harder brexit than May envisages.

    “Remain by contrast promise economic armageddon”
    They didnt. They were careful not to. I recall Cameron being interviewed about their deliberate choice to be restrained in their predictions, and argument on this site that their predictions have come true.

    I would also not predict economic armageddon, but I noticed the chancellor this morning discussing his limited predictions of decline following brexit appeard to concentrate solely on the implications for added trade barriers.

    I continue to argue the real threat will be industry departing the UK, because it is no longer sensible for EU industries to base here. This will be a slow business over years. Official estimates seem to ignore it totally.

  38. JamesE
    I have long thought that old Bantams is a cottage industry bot, a la the Trevors.
    He’s very quick with the statistical rebuttals, having made an initial outrageously incorrect claim.

  39. @ RJW

    LOL! Just because I’m not a brown nose remainer like a few others on here and what’s the “outrageously incorrect claim” I’m supposed to have made so I can rebut it immediately? :)

  40. Oldnat,
    “In a couple of weeks, we should have some greater clarity.”

    Funny this should come about through repeated efforts by different non government groups to try to clarify the situation, while the government resisted permitting it.

    Jim Jam,
    “let them push to revocation if they wish”

    As 50%+ of voters wish? You propose the politicians should oppose the people?

  41. Colin

    There is no necessary equivalence (or difference) between the terms “nation”, “country”, “kingdom” etc..

    Frequently one has to look at the context to determine what the user intends (if they have any intention at all).

    For example, it is only the context in which the referendum question was put, that one can infer that the “United Kingdom” referred to in that question was the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and not the United Kingdom of Denmark – or, indeed, an album by an American indie rock band (whatever that is!)

  42. Re: ECJ judgment

    It is worthwhile to reflect that decisions of Advocates General is rejected by the full Court in about 30% of cases.

    The decision of the full Court is the binding decision in EU law.

  43. Jim Jam et al.,

    Labour only get to form a minority administration if this is supported by the DUP. The context in which this would happen would be if Parliament somehow (maybe after several attempts) approves May’s WA, which is the RUP’s red line. (It would be ironic if a Labour rebellion supporting May’s plan actually led to a Labour government!).

    The price of DUP support would of course be to stop the WA being implemented. If the EU aren’t going to renegotiate, that only leaves revocation of A50 and staying in the EU. I don’t suppose the DUP would support Labour having a referendum that might lead to the WA being agreed. And Labour are not going to do No Deal.

  44. Bah. DUP not RUP.

  45. WB61

    Thanks for that re the Advocate General.

    Do you have information for those cases in which all the justices were empanelled?

  46. Danny,

    You might be right about the minimal impact of a softer Brexit than May’s on remain acquiescence, I was posing a question to which I don’t know the answer.

    Re pushing for revocation I am referring to the period after the deal being rejected on Dec 11th or early Jan, assuming that happens.

  47. Thinking about it some more, I suppose there is nothing to stop the DUP supporting a minority Labour government having a Remain vs NoDeal referendum, since the DUP are comfortable with both outcomes.

    It would be pretty high stakes poker for Labour, though.

  48. Hal

    “Labour only get to form a minority administration if this is supported by the DUP.”

    No. In the current Parliament, they get to be a minority administration if more MPs are willing to support them in a confidence vote or not oppose them in a confidence vote (depending on the relevant stage of FTPA proceedings) than for any other possible administration.

  49. I found it profoundly disappointing watching the vox pop on Channel 4 News from Builth Wells yesterday evening. After the last 2.5 years of negotiation and pragmatic engagement, more or less, there was still a young woman promoting unicorns and suggesting that if we all closed our eyes and believed really hard everything would be honey and roses. You just wonder where such people have been hiding since 2016, they clearly don’t understand reality.

  50. OldNat,

    I am assuming that no Tory MPs will support a Labour government. I think that’s a safe assumption.

    And if the DUP abstain, the Tories would win a confidence vote.

    And obviously if there’s a general election it could be different. But no-one is expecting a general election, not even John McDonnell.

1 2 3 49