Conservatives Prepare "Secret Plot" To Oust UK's May If She Backs Off "Hard Brexit"

The walls are closing in on UK's embattled prime minister Theresa May, who after the disastrous outcome in the general election, and following a torrid week in which she faced fierce criticism for her handling of the Grenfell Tower catastrophe, in which 58 people are now presumed dead, is reportedly facing what the Telegraph calls a "secret plot" - well, not so secret any more - involving a "stalking horse" challenge to remove her as prime minister if she caves to Labour demands, and waters down the "Hard Brexit."

With the NYT reporting that "‘Soft Brexit’ Forces Rise in Britain on the Eve of Talks" scheduled for Monday, (despite 70% of Britons still supporting Brexit according to a Thursday YouGov poll), the Telegraph reports that according to leading Eurosceptic MPs they are prepared to mount an immediate leadership challenge if Mrs May deviates from her original plan. The British publication adds that "conservative MPs – including Cabinet ministers – have concluded that Mrs May cannot lead them into the next election and they are now discussing when she could go.

Fearing that the chorus of "soft Brexit" demands rising across the UK following May's sudden weakness, while Germany's economy minister Brigitte Zypries going so far as telling Reuters that an outright "reversal of Britain's decision to leave the European Union would be great," Eurosceptic MPs have warned that any attempt to keep Britain in the customs union and single market or any leeway for the European Court of Justice to retain an oversight function will trigger an “overnight” coup.

The plot has been likened to Sir Anthony Meyer’s 1989 challenge against Margaret Thatcher. One influential former minister said: “If we had a strong signal that she were backsliding I think she would be in major difficulty.


The point is she is not a unifying figure any more. She has really hacked off the parliamentary party for obvious reasons. So I’m afraid to say there is no goodwill towards her.”


They added: “What we would do is to put up a candidate to run against her, a stalking horse. You can imagine who would do it. It would be a rerun of the Margaret Thatcher scenario, with Anthony Meyer.

Another former minister told the Telegraph that “if she weakened on Brexit, the world would fall in… all hell would break loose.” Additionally, many other Eurosceptics have effectively made their support for May conditional on her fulfilling the terms set out in her Lancaster House speech, delivered in January, which was also reflected in the Tory manifesto.

To be sure, even if May relented to demands for a "Soft Brexit", it is unclear just how the UK could afford the €100 billion soft Brexit bill demanded by Brussels to arrange an amicable divorce; and as a reminder, in October, EU summit chair Donald Tusk said:

"The only real alternative to a 'hard Brexit' is 'no Brexit'." Pushing soft Brexit over hard is seen increasing the risk of replacing a smooth Brexit with rough.

But even if mutiny is averted this time, May's days could be numbered for a different reason altogether: her response to this week's tragic conflagration at the Grenfell Tower, where critics questioned why May failed to meet victims and relatives on her first visit to the Grenfell Tower – in contrast to Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader. As the Telegraph notes, "Damian Green, the First Secretary of State, defended Mrs May on Saturday, saying she was “distraught” about the blaze and said the criticism was “terribly unfair”."

But some Tories have admitted they are concerned about a “very serious” backlash and fear Mrs May’s image may have been damaged irrevocably.

Meanwhile, May has been scrambling to contain as much damage as possible: 

Mrs May last night attempted to stabilize her new Government – still less than a fortnight old – by announcing there would be no Queen’s Speech in 2018. The move, which will mean Parliament sitting for a two-year session rather than one, was framed as a way of ensuring Brexit-related laws are passed in time.


However, it also removes a critical vote that could have toppled the Government and comes as a crucial support deal with the Democratic Unionist Party has yet to be finalized.

All this is taking place as Brexit enters the spotlight when UK's David Davis, the Brexit Secretary,  goes to Brussels for the formal start of talks tomorrow.

A Cabinet row that has played out all week goes public on Sunday as Liam Fox and Boris Johnson issue a thinly veiled rebuttal of Philip Hammond’s views. Dr Fox, the International Trade Secretary, writes in The Telegraph that Britain must be able to sign free trade deals after Brexit – which means leaving the customs union.


“We want Britain to be able to negotiate its own trade agreements, and as we leave the European Union that is what we will do,” he writes. Mr Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, is expected to make public similar comments.


However, Mr Hammond, the Chancellor, will appear on BBC One’s Andrew Marr Show on Sunday to argue for a softer Brexit with an emphasis on maintaining free trade links with the EU.

The biggest irony of all, perhaps, is that the UK political crisis is blowing up just as France is set to elect a government led by Emanuel Macron's party in a landslide in tomorrow's parliamentary elections, making France - the country which everyone was so worried about at the start of the year - the rock of establishment stability, even as the UK teeters on the edge.


unsafe-space-time HRClinton Sat, 06/17/2017 - 21:23 Permalink

I understand cunts need rulers. That's how they stay wet. I understand fags like to vote for fags so they can keep their ass plugged so it doesn't leak. They like authorities to authorize their sodomy and micromanage and steal from everyone including the ones who don't want or need rulers. Especially when you elect a female, then no one wins.  So all you fuckers who walk by a cop and don't feel like shooting the fag you are the ones on my list. See you in the revolution. 

In reply to by HRClinton

harrybrown Sat, 06/17/2017 - 19:52 Permalink

I can smell that little zionist bastard Soros in this somehwhere.... he's never far away when there's political turmoilDeath to the money changers....

Advoc8tr AlexCharting Sat, 06/17/2017 - 20:32 Permalink

All 'Prime' Ministers are selected in the Westminster parliamentry system used in Britain and Australia .. the people vote for their local representaives only .. the party that wins the majority then chooses it own leader. This leader then appoints all the cabinet positions.Leaders can be changed mid-term without any issue or consent from the voters.

In reply to by AlexCharting

Zepper Sat, 06/17/2017 - 21:17 Permalink

The secret plot is to make sure BREXIT never happens.... May is a fucking lying sack of shit, just like her German counterpart. It's the feminazi working together to fuck their people.

It's like the Republicans and Democrats here... they are making sure Trump does not last... People think the republicans are with Trump... You are all fucking idiots!

The republicans are like the defensive like of a football team... all they are doing is standing back allowing the tackle to happen... the only problem is that every person in the fucking stadium is going to know they threw the game. And we all know what happens to cheating lying pieces of shit when they are found out!!!!

WTFUD HonoraryCarioca Sun, 06/18/2017 - 02:54 Permalink

Good Thinking's HC but not on this occasion. May is desperate to cling onto Power even if it means resurrecting the Irish Republican Army (IRA). She decided on a snap election with the intent to not only put a nail in the coffin of The Labour Party but to quash dissent in her own party in what she hoped would be a resounding Mandate from the Peeps.

Like Boris the Fuckwit she's an Opportunist.

In reply to by HonoraryCarioca

Endgame Napoleon Zepper Sun, 06/18/2017 - 14:04 Permalink

The Swampians are part of the fake-feminist agenda. They benefit greatly from the dual, high earner, power-couple thing, throwing government cake to the working-mom absenteeism cliques at the bottom of the workforce, both the welfare-supported ones that lower wages for workers without access to welfare/taxfare and those reinforced and advantaged in the workforce by mandated-absenteeism privileges and spousal income.

It seems like May has more of a bureaucratic work background, not like Thatcher's small-business/politicking background. It is not whether someone is a woman or a mother who has experienced birth-canal exits, but whether her job experience and talent for the work, itself, are compatible with the position.

Who advised May not to visit victims' families at the morgue, following the Manchester mass murder by terrorists? Maybe, that person is not too good at PR, and maybe, May would realize that if she were more of a people person. Why in the world would she do the same thing when a bunch of people burned to death----ugghhh?

There is likely a controversy due to the fact that the government was subsidizing rent at $2,500/month for refugee "working families" to live in an expensive area of the city, while many British citizens struggle to afford rent, but empathy when a mass death by fire occurs overcomes justified resentment over unfairly valuing the citizens of other countries over your own citizens.

She should have visited those victims, too, without justifying the public housing. In fact, it would be a good chance for a "hardcore" conservative to criticize lazy public employees who were given plenty of warning by tenant complaints before that tragedy occurred. Where were they? Were they taking off from work, using kids as an excuse, with momma managers excusing it due to backscratching arrangements? You take off this week for baby, I'll take off next week for baby.

In Britain, there is an added layer of ceremonial public service, with a royal family that is paid by the taxpayers or has their ample expenses covered. Why don't Kate, William or Harry visit these terror and fire victims? They are all personable to the max. Trump and Melania visited the hospital when a congressman, police and a lobbyist were recently injured by a mass shooter.

In reply to by Zepper

Koba the Dread artichoke Sat, 06/17/2017 - 22:57 Permalink

Yes, New Artichoke, you are indeed really confused. The national UK government controls fire standards for building construction, building renovation and for fire safety. The national UK governement did not apply those standards to the building that burned. All of the outside sheathing (I believe it was) was made of a highly flammable material and the building went up in a blaze of flames once a fire started.

In reply to by artichoke

truthordare Koba the Dread Sun, 06/18/2017 - 01:22 Permalink

Plus, it is expected that the head of Government attends the scene of any National disaster and consoles the survivors and families who lost loved ones even if, as in this case, she doesnt really give a rats ass. The Government failed in their management of the building upgrades, then, when it went tits up they failed again in their handling of the Public trauma, which is ironic really because they are becoming quite the experts in "crisis management solutions" where terrorist drills and state sponsored false flags are concerned.

In reply to by Koba the Dread

hibou-Owl Koba the Dread Sun, 06/18/2017 - 02:46 Permalink

And she rules over the corrupt pricks that let it happen.

EPS has been on the insurance companies audits for decades, but its cheaper. So how got the backhanders when it was used?????
The reason May didn't address the people at the fire, is because she would have got strung up.

I'm fighting a similar issue in France, insurance companies have paid off the legal experts, installer in liquidation but CEO now in jail, and the electrical supply company lied about the non conformance on the transformers. Electrical inspector signed off installation after three attempts, but 16 non conformance still exist.(corruption)

Same shit different bat channel.

In reply to by Koba the Dread

Victor999 Koba the Dread Sun, 06/18/2017 - 03:25 Permalink

Again, "New" Koba the Dread, you speak too quickly and certainly not precisely.  The question put to the central government in the UK is not whether the local council followed established regulations but were the regulatioins strict enough to prevent the fire.  A review had been taken of fire regulations in 2009 as a result of another serious tower fire and sat on the government's desk until now with no action being taken.  The Tory government is ideologically set against new regulations, even if they prevent such accidents as these.  I think most people, except you perhaps, understand that the current regulations were probably strictly adhered to, but that they were not enough, and had the government acted on the review this incideent might never have happened.

In reply to by Koba the Dread

Sandmann Victor999 Sun, 06/18/2017 - 04:30 Permalink

There is nowhere to house these people. London is a very congested housing market and it would have been far better to leave these buildings without cladding. The major 2010 fire in this tower was dealt with BEFORE the cladding.How long does ferro-concrete last ? Will these towers stand 100 years before the steel cores rust away ? How long is a house in England expected to last ? 200 years and 50 mortgage financing rounds ? Maybe these buildings should all have been torn down 10 years ago and the people re-housed in Newcastle ?How much does a building like this cost  a) to tear down  b) to build ? 

In reply to by Victor999

Endgame Napoleon Sandmann Sun, 06/18/2017 - 14:25 Permalink

Oh, well, she should still show up for the ceremonial parts of that job or do another job that more detail-oreirnted or policy construction-oriented and less people-facing. It is like when others always show up for the frilly or baby show-off family-pageantry parts, but not the tragic, depressing parts. Diana would have shown up at the sad morgue and the fire scene, as well as the baby show-off and opulent events. That is why the people liked her.

In reply to by Sandmann

JohnGaltUk Cordeezy Fri, 07/07/2017 - 08:03 Permalink

Why is even May getting involved with this pond life crap. A building full of free loading losers whom put their misguided trust in local civil servants  is just a dumb thing to do. Darwin was right.This is a local issue and she she should have never turned up to visit the so called victims. Hey prime minister wanna go met some losers that chose to live in a dangerous building?

In reply to by Cordeezy

artichoke Sat, 06/17/2017 - 21:59 Permalink

How can the PM decide where there's a Queen's Speech?  I thought the Queen voluntarily opened Parliament each year.  Now the PM decides to extend the session another year? 

Koba the Dread artichoke Sat, 06/17/2017 - 23:05 Permalink

Yes, New Artichoke, you are indeed really confused. Like, Wow! The "Queen's Speech" is a technical term for the speech the queen, or in other times, the king, gives at the opening of Parliament. You are right that Theresa May cannot control all the speeches the queen gives. She may give a speech anywhere else she wants on any topic she chooses. Theoretically, she also could barge into Parliament and give a speech any time she wanted, but tradition says she will not do so.By not dissolving this year's Parliament, by calling for a two year Parliament, Theresa May avoids having the queen give an opening speech to a new Parliament by simply not having a new Parliament next year.You know, sport, that wasn't too hard to figure out. Perhaps your confusion is based on bone laziness. Perhaps I'm a chump for doing your work for you.

In reply to by artichoke

Victor999 Koba the Dread Sun, 06/18/2017 - 03:14 Permalink

No, "New" Koba the Dread, you are entirely incorrect.  The PM took the unusual step of lengthening Parliament's session to a one-off two year term rather than the traditional one year term.  This had nothing at all to do with the Queen's speech but rather to give this Parliament more time to deal with Brexit. As for the Queen's speech, you have no idea of what you are talking about.  The Queen's speech is written for her by the Government in power and outlines the coming legislation for the year (in this case, two years).  She has absolutely no input into what the speech says. You should not be so haughty in your replies to people, esp when you don't know what you are talking about.

In reply to by Koba the Dread

WTFUD artichoke Sat, 06/17/2017 - 23:11 Permalink

If the barren old witch would've had children she'd have been more human. Even Thatcher showed emotion when her dipstick son was taken hostage in an attempted coup he'd participated in Equatorial Guinea. Why they didn't hack him to death tells me the British Tax-payer must've forked out a sizeable ransom. The useless POS received a knighthood for his trouble. It's a great system is the UK. s/c

In reply to by artichoke

truthordare artichoke Sun, 06/18/2017 - 00:58 Permalink

The Queen approves the opening of parliament after a new government is selected and the PM has alreadey minced over to the Palace to lick her boots and swear to serve her faithfully. She doesnt actually go to the house of "commons" but sends "black rod" instead to lead all her servants (MP's) over to the House of "Lords" to hear her speech. When we are operating a system where they openly refer to "commons" and "lords" you have to question the whole set-up. You really cant make this shit up.

In reply to by artichoke

kommissar Sat, 06/17/2017 - 22:11 Permalink

she NEVER had the balls for this job to begin with!  anyone with any leadership intuition could have worked that out.  somehow she got "appointed" so that she could do whatever she was told by her puppet masters.  this wimpy little pussy is not even a cunt!  she's a puppet that has been bent over to whatever purpose and is NOT fit for duty.  she's a total cockup and pretender.  why don't they just get on with it and put farage in charge??!