-
Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?
I must declare one interest, I have materially benefitted from the Brexit vote. Nonetheless, I think whatever side of the /Brexit fence people may fall, the shenanighans of the last week or so can only be described as farcical.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3711226.html
I am going to argue that Brexit is undeliverable under this administration and that is is best if the UK revoke Article 50 and forget Brexit negotiations until it :
- Has a clue what it's goals are
- Has the capacity to deliver those goals
- Whatever it does is in the interests of the country , not those of a political party
- Explains to Parliament the impact of its propsals in full
- Explains to the British people, properly, in general terms, the benefits or detriment arising from it's policies.
I also suggest for the sake of common sense that a new Brexit proposal be put to a referendum.
The current process looks screwed. The referendum called only for the UK to stay or leave the EU. It is perfectly possiblde to be outside the EU and stay in the single market (Norway) and /or the customs union (Turkey),
Yet by calling article 50, commiting the UK to a process it has barely understood , let alone costed or impacted, and by ruling out the single market and customs union, the UK has been left exposed because the Irish government will not tolerate different customs rules across the border. Any fool could see that the propsed compromise, euphemistically called "regulatory divergence" effectively removing Irish border controls , would lead to Scotland Wales and even London demanding the same treatment and an Ulster Unionist veto. As I see it the government is too weak and inflexible to revisit it's red lines, partly to a botched election. What I also find extraordinary is that O Jeremy Corbyn prefers to leave the EU , like most on the far-left he sees e the EU as a boss's / globalist business organisation, a cross-party approach would have worked, possibly, but no this tightwadded administrated doesn't want the help.
Am I the only one thinking this?
What does the forum say?
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
I'm glad you've made this thread mate (Also glad someone has thus far benefited from brexit :P), i was considering doing something similar but honestly did not have the heart or strength to summarize the complete and utter hash that has been happening. I agree with your assessment here fully. Its almost ironic that its not the EU playing hardnball or anything that's causing us problems thus far, but inner turmoil directly created by Conservative incompetence- both on the part of May (who bears the brunt of the blame), and the so-called 'hard brexiteers' who seem to believe that 19th century free trade and 'nightwatchmen state' is still possible and desirable in a 21st century context of multipolar international politics and increasing regulation to match the gig economies flaws. What's worse i think is the energy spent on brexit (for nothing thus far) has meant that quite literally the real issues in the UK are going to not just unaddressed, but are increasingly getting worse (The social mobility commissions damning walkout on May the feather in the cap of a chain of disasters and ignored problems). Which as i think people like Nye are rightly saying now is putting British democracy in a rather precarious place, we are perhaps ironically lucky that thus far the 'populist' leader to have come forth in this rather bleak social and economic context is something like Corbyn. Its like the Conservatives have forgotten that for a liberal democracy to work with a market economy, it has to be shown to be 'working' for everyone and for its electorate to have a 'stake' in the system (In the UK this being culturally attached to property and home ownership- which of course is in crisis...)
But to get back to brexit :P (You can see why i didn't create a thread, its legitimately depressing currently!). I honestly have not understood from the Conservative perspective why the hell after the failed election they didn't just do the 1920's solution- that being during the economic downturn that was then Great Depression the UK called a 'national government' of all parties in a coalition to deal with the crisis. This way May could have built a god damn consensus instead of being held hostage to economic incompetents like Boris, Moggs and co...and also to the DUP. Also the 'blame' for brexit (and lets face it brexit will likely 'kill' the party doing it- indeed we have political commentators perhaps prematurely, but with some truth calling this the 'death throes' of the Conservative party as it stands now- hence its zombie attitude on nearly all domestic fronts- they NEED a period of opposition)- can then be shared to all political parties, tarring all equally and actually bringing the country together instead of the huge gulfs in the electorate that exist currently (For instance the so called 'hard brexit combined with massive deregulation' advocated by the far-right of the Conservatives isn't even what most 'leavers' voted for- let alone 'remainers'- there is no 'mandate'- particularly with the election destroying the Conservative majority- so the fact such a small pressure group wields such undue influence is worrying to say the least).
But for some reason instead the Conservatives are adamant that 'they' will do brexit- as if there is any kind of political capital to be gained... do they fear Corbyn's secretly a communist waiting to devour their party? Perhaps- but in a national coalition... he A) won't be capitalizing on every mistake they make as now and B) They can in turn influence him- instead what the Conservatives seem to be blindly pushing towards (from their own perspective at least) is an electoral cliff-edge that has a Corbyn government in full control with no 'limiting' factors- surely that should be a worse option for them?
But yeah, rant over :P- its just merely perhaps quite a raw point for the UK to be so so incompetent generally- both on the domestic and brexit fronts. This latest issue with the Irish border (Where if anyone needs to know the context- a few weeks ago N.Ireland tried putting up signs saying 'Welcome to Northern Ireland' on the border with the republic...within days the signs have been shot, some set on fire and if the financial times are to be believed....taken away and blown up- now imagine any kind of checkpoints- its a cultural as well as economic and immigration issue) was dumb from the start- even the Tories original solution before their DUP masters forced them to U-turn at the 11th hour (Again how the hell when you rely on the 10 DUP MP's to prop up your government, could you 'forget' that they had painted a massive red line on the issue...i despair at May's frontbench) would have led to as now, the potential for the UK to break-up with other 'remainer' areas jumping on the 'They get special treatment, why not us'- it was so poorly handled.
An interesting solution is a sort of 'enforced' federalization of the UK, which naturally Scotland and co would jump on- with key elements of foreign policy and affairs outsourced to the devolved parliaments, alongside greater lee-way in immigration and business concerns... which sure while being interesting- is a huge tasks in itself- one that i think if the UK who is ignoring domestic issues in favour of brexit...and not making any headway there, is incapable then of taking on such a creative restructuring- which leads back to your point mate that they need to go away and draw up a god-damn plan of what they want, how they want it and build an electoral and political consensus- that ideally brings all main parties on board, and unlike currently does not ignore the devolved administrations.... well at least the ones who aren't propping you up...
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Seems simpler to have a second referendum to clarify that the electorate really wants to undertake this rather labourious process, which is a tradition concerning EU policy, at least within the EU.
Now that they had a very good view how this sausage is being made.
May may believe herself bound by the original referendum, unless she wants to provoke a constitutional crisis, certainly with Boris waiting in the sidelines, ready to spring a coup if she falters.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
I don't see how the UK can back away from a referendum result. The Brexiteers plainly lied, but all politicians do (the Stray group told their own bundles of lies too) and the people chose their path.
You can break the constitution of the state "for its own good" "to save the state" and so on. Great Britain is not the most democratic state in the world (with the City having more say in many matters than Parliament), but it has some input from the people and their voice needs to be respected.
To reverse this decision now would be a very retrograde step. Britain has to take its licks. The electorate will learn, or not, and its ignorance will be a factor in the survival of Britain great or otherwise.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Condottiere 40K
Seems simpler to have a second referendum to clarify that the electorate really wants to undertake this rather labourious process, which is a tradition concerning EU policy, at least within the EU.
Now that they had a very good view how this sausage is being made.
May may believe herself bound by the original referendum, unless she wants to provoke a constitutional crisis, certainly with Boris waiting in the sidelines, ready to spring a coup if she falters.
That is indeed one solution being bandied around. I think another infuriating point is that May if she wasn't so inept would realize that actually she has a stronger hand than she thinks when dealing with the Tories- based on the simple fact that there is no viable candidate yet to replace her. Boris is even more unpopular in the polls than she is, as is Davis and co. Moggs despite a vocal minority is too toxic and not a unifying candidate. Rudd is barely holding onto her seat by a few votes at last count, Davidson is ironically there best hope...and she's an MSP. Gove who they seem to be grooming for replacement has made some hiccups again and hasn't quite been rehabilitated yet fully for the electorate. She could theoretically do as she pleases as beyond allowing Corbyn in due to an early election, she is guarenteed until a Tory candidate appears who is suitably unifying for the party, electorally popular, acceptable to all factions and who has competent and unifying policies- particularly for the young as Tory voter demographics have taken a dive for the worse. It will happen of course eventually, its just if its in time for the next GE- thus until then May will be able to within reason tell backbenchers to stuff it as much as she likes- and again due the parties ignoring of domestic issues, she can use what little political capital this does get her to reach out to other parties quite freely and further isolate the troublesome hardliners.
This of course all relies on the premise that she realizes her political career is over and that she is just a caretaker- it is entirely possible that she believes she has a political future after this and thus is still trying to play the game... i can't imagine how delusional she'd have to be though for that :P.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cyclops
I don't see how the UK can back away from a referendum result. The Brexiteers plainly lied, but all politicians do (the Stray group told their own bundles of lies too) and the people chose their path.
You can break the constitution of the state "for its own good" "to save the state" and so on. Great Britain is not the most democratic state in the world (with the City having more say in many matters than Parliament), but it has some input from the people and their voice needs to be respected.
To reverse this decision now would be a very retrograde step. Britain has to take its licks. The electorate will learn, or not, and its ignorance will be a factor in the survival of Britain great or otherwise.
Only a referendum can overturn a referendum :P. But in seriousness, and in fairness to Mongrel i don't think he is advocating ditching brexit, merely doing what should have been done from the start and holding off on going further/ re-do it when we have a plan in place- and also the possibility of having a second referendum down the line.
Of course you could technically have a referendum that is politically feasible if we do the lib-dems idea of a referendum on the final exit deal as the form of brexit was not on the first referendum. I don't personally think anyone would be fooled of course that it would be anything other than a 'do you want brexit now?' referendum- most British people did not understand or care how the EU works, didn't get its problems or its benefits and were more in tune with US political news that we have no control over, than the EU...who we did actually belong to- so to expect them to seriously understand if a leaving deal is 'good' or 'bad' would probably be asking a bit much...and this is from me who advocates direct democracy in nearly all walks of life- so the lib-dem idea basically relates to 'referendum- the return'.
Technically too Parliament now get a vote on the final deal-so that's almost good. Except the Conservatives, like with their fixing the committees despite not having a majority and their proposal for the so-called 'Henry VIII' powers (No wonder their worried if Labour get in- all these extra-parliamentary tools and precedents they've created to avoid debates and votes in the House :P), have managed to fix it so their would not be enough time to properly scrutinize the deal before a vote and are vague at best when it comes to what Parliament down voting the deal would actually mean (We go back to re-negotiate, or we crash out with 'no deal').
Then of course the problem with the referendum is the Conservatives have rather just killed its legitimacy yesterday for the 'majority' argument- they were prepared to allow Northern Ireland specifically (Though now of course their backtracking- though the DUP still do not believe them) to have a different regulatory system that matches the EU's (I.e. Single market and customs union in all but name), and that would 'technically' be legitimized by Northern Ireland voting to 'remain' overall (The premise for why they were pursuing this option). This rather silly move for May has given Scotland and others more ammunition- as naturally if the referendum can be technically 'split' (as they have always argued) among the nations/ parts of the UK- why can't their 'will be respected'. Hence why there is some interesting discussion about how the UK will now probably have to federalize to provide any kind of 'unity' again.
I still hold with my idea of their actually calling this the economic emergency it really is and bringing in all major parties in another national coalition with the express purpose to hash out the future path of the UK- its even got legitimacy behind it as the electorate specifically removed the Conservatives majority last election, and all major parties have 'Remain and leavers' within their ranks- from here build a consensus that can actually be grounded in electoral legitimacy- instead of the current ideological posturing taking place among factions in the different parties.
I would also advocate the UK kissing the Commonwealths collective arses and starting to make up for decades of neglect, but on equal terms with all members (Unlike the idea advocated by some on the right of the political spectrum of 'Empire 2.0' where we can somehow return to the Commonwealth, impose our own reforms and expect Australia, Canada, New Zealand and India to go along with the process gratefully).... as quite frankly the looming prospect of a US trade deal (Who are all about protectionism under the current administration, and bilateral arrangements where naturally they hold all the cards, and who are on record stating brexit is a great opportunity to destroy British industries and market share- None of which i begrudge the US...just merely i'd rather not go straight from whatever way you spin it- a weak position in the post-brexit aftermath, into grappling in the arms of a Titan where we'd be held over a barrel straight away) where Britain is alone and desperate terrifies me for our economic future.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
The political reality seems your entire political establishment is committed. The fact they they are reluctantly committed makes it quite impossible to make a u-turn without committing electoral suicide.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
I largely agree with Cyclops.
In elections, there is great deal of lying going about. Some might say exaggeration or distortion or falsehoods that people do not know to be lies, etcetera. To say only one side lied or some such simply reveals your own personal bias on what is considered true. If truth were that simple to discern, we would not need elections or voters.
As to another referendum as some have suggested -- when does that diminish the purpose of elections if you demand a recount until you get the result you want? That process would never end until a unanimous vote is obtained.
The best for the UK is to exit, get a negotiated deal if you can, but exit. Sort out the national laws. Sort out the finances. Let the dust settle. Then either go about outside of the EU bureaucratic monster or ask for entry (reentry?) on the now going rate of terms for admission. In other words, finish the task started and stop grousing. I am pretty certain that most parents tell this to their own children. Maybe it should be told to the UK as well.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NorseThing
The best for the UK is to exit, get a negotiated deal if you can, but exit. Sort out the national laws. Sort out the finances. Let the dust settle. Then either go about outside of the EU bureaucratic monster or ask for entry (reentry?) on the now going rate of terms for admission. In other words, finish the task started and stop grousing. I am pretty certain that most parents tell this to their own children. Maybe it should be told to the UK as well.
The best thing for the UK, apart from getting over the self-righteous finger from the continent, is to cleverly adapt and maneuver around an EU membership, which is what they will do. They always did and had to. If there is anything Brits can do, it's beeing too European for being European.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Muizer
The political reality seems your entire political establishment is committed. The fact they they are reluctantly committed makes it quite impossible to make a u-turn without committing electoral suicide.
This is indeed the case, its a strange situation that basically is of their own making. Instead of consensus- which i would argue the result of the referendum and subsequent election should have led to- one giving no 'safe' majority either way, and the other making sure the Conservatives lost their majority- we have a weird squabble that is in essence party-political instead of national, for what brexit 'means'. The referendum result being used as some weird 'Support brexit, or your a traitor' by many different takes...all calling each other wrong. So the one pushed for instance by the Conservative libertarian right- for lower regulation, lower worker protections etc- its not a platform they would ever get elected on- Britain just does not have that tradition after a historically disastrous flirtation with the 'nightwatchmen state' in the 19th century- but its thought they could force their ideology on the country off the back of brexit (The tax-haven 'no deal' idiocy- which wouldn't work anyway from an economic perspective as the UK lacks the demographics and structures to be able to pull it off properly)- On the other hand the 'bespoke' deal is a pipe-dream that arguably has seen its death today in the Irish border issue, the concept of 'Empire 2.0' that some MP's bandied around is fantasy. The public are (rightfully, though for the wrong reasons i'd argue) concerned about a free trade deal with the US- so the idea of tumbling from the embrace of the EU, into the arms of the Yanks isn't a go ahead. There is just no actual practical solution being put forward that can work yet- beyond arguably staying in the single market and customs union as Norway does- but that means admitting to Britain's diminished global role- something that's fair enough, but a significant section of Parliament and probably the British public rightly or wrongly could not accept that.
The amusing thing (If i wasn't here that is :P), is that the vast majority of these 'red lines' and issues are of the UK's and specifically Conservative parties own making- A case in point just five minutes ago- David Davis came out and said that the Northern Ireland border issue wasn't an issue, the DUP misunderstood- actually the whole of the UK would adopt those regulations, not just N.Ireland alone... that basically means a complete U-turn on all Tory rhetoric up until now of not being basically in the single market or customs union. As 'regulatory parity' is just that. On top of that the DUP have made a statement that what May almost agreed to, they would never accept as it would mean a border between Northern Ireland and the UK- unacceptable to the unionists. The Tory hard-right (Moggs and co) have gotten angry because Davis's comment basically means that we'll still be following the EU in regulatory respects and basically would still be in the single market- something they don't accept...and when asked for clarification on whose right, Downing Street is silent. The governments just made a complete hash of things there.
Its what i don't understand, brexit is electoral suicide either way- whatever party was doing it was never going to get back in, as 'remainers' would flock to other banners, and leavers were sold by Boris and co such a 'golden wishworld' of brexit- even in the short term- that even a really 'good' deal for Britain- will still not meet expectations, thus leavers will feel rightly betrayed. There's no electoral bonus to doing brexit, especially with the way its currently being done, there is your right though no electoral bonus for not doing brexit either- otherwise the Lib Dems would have seen a resurgence...though again the last GE's terms were dictated by Labour who made it mostly about domestic affairs, so it could be said it wasn't a true 'brexit' election. Its why again though regardless to flog my dead horse, i do not understand why no national coalition was sought, and why such an aggressive stance was taken by the Conservatives to brexit and the other parties early on... i get they thought at the time it was the way to kill off UKIP and win votes...and yet that backfired at the last General Election- so lord knows why they haven't tried to reach out, instead of as they currently are doing trying to keep as much 'in house' and away from Parliament as possible- as it means when the dust settles, the only people who can be blamed are them (and again, even a 'good brexit' will fall short of what was promised to us), thus their electorally stunted- combine this with their losing the 'safe economic pair of hands' crown, and the growing discontent that they are not actually doing anything domestically to solve the UK's myriad of economic issues (Which especially for the North, contributed indeed to brexit) and you have a government who seems to just want to collapse... but ideologically cannot bear the thought of losing yet- hence they'll stay ransomed the DUP, they'll avoid as long as possible a General Election (Though even the FT predicts next year now) and will attempt to in essence keep the three factions that make up the Tories...together, even thought it would actually be easier if they split as they should have done in the 90's between at the least traditional conservatives and pro-business conservatives (let alone pro EU anti EU).
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
I always wonder why Theresa May did not just pick the hard way for Brexit, since it is quite clear Brexiters want it anyway.:surprise:
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mongrel
I also suggest for the sake of common sense that a new Brexit proposal be put to a referendum.
To elect if it is Brexit time again or not? Even the Queen has given aproval by now..
To be fair, a second referendum on this, if confirmed the Brexit side again, people would just call for a third one. And if it gave a remain, there would be another one, then another one, and so on ad infinitum.
There's a reason you don't repeat elections too early except after something on the level of dissolving the parliement.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
They never have been €-members, if i may remind you of that. Nevertheless, there is not really an easy way out and it's not like it doesn't have consequencs for "the continent" as well. It may be stupid, but it's undeniably brave in my opinion.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
I am going to argue that Brexit is undeliverable under this administration and that is is best if the UK revoke Article 50 and forget Brexit negotiations until it :
- Has a clue what it's goals are
There is one goal and that is to leave the European Union, any negotiated settlement for trade relations is secondary,
Quote:
- Has the capacity to deliver those goals
The capacity is only for the latter of these goals. The incompetence of the present government will lead to their punishment in the polls should the economy be damaged as a consequence of having no trade deals in place when the UK leaves the EU (either with the EU or any outside).
Quote:
- Whatever it does is in the interests of the country , not those of a political party
It is not in the interests of any of the main political parties to leave the EU, and seemingly on the basis of what each has been up to since the vote, it isn't their intention to do so either .
Quote:
- Explains to Parliament the impact of its proposals in full
The secretiveness off this whole negotiating process with Brussels is absurd and deeply suspicious. You have a PM yesterday who was quite prepared to agree the division of Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK without even having discussed it with the Northern Irish party by which she forms a government let alone the rest of the population.
Quote:
- Explains to the British people, properly, in general terms, the benefits or detriment arising from it's policies.
That is called an election, which after yesterday, is likely to happen a lot sooner than 2019
Quote:
I also suggest for the sake of common sense that a new Brexit proposal be put to a referendum.
No, we had a vote and we decided to leave, the fact that we have an incompetent and untrustworthy government to carry out the will of the people, doesn't invalidate the result in any way.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
As much as political establishment would love the idea, any attempts to thwart nation's democratic decision to leave EU by either hosting another referendum or outright ignoring actual referendum's results is a form of political harakiri and would erase whatever remains of its political legitimacy. Having said that, sanity and logic haven't really been the words that could be applied to UK's political establishment's decision making process, so nothing is certain.
All in all the problem isn't in Briton's deciding to abandon the sinking ship, problem is in the incompetence and ineptitude of the political establishment itself.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
There is one goal and that is to leave the European Union, any negotiated settlement for trade relations is secondary,
Agreed, however, I suspect for party political considerations May that decided to add three conditions, leaving the ECJ, the single market and customs which makes things hellishly complicated and potentially very expensive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
The capacity is only for the latter of these goals. The incompetence of the present government will lead to their punishment in the polls should the economy be damaged as a consequence of having no trade deals in place when the UK leaves the EU (either with the EU or any outside).
Agreed
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
It is not in the interests of any of the main political parties to leave the EU, and seemingly on the basis of what each has been up to since the vote, it isn't their intention to do so either .
From what I gather behind the scenes the intention is defininitely there, it is just the execution is inept because of the bad choices made since Cameron fled the scene.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
The secretiveness off this whole negotiating process with Brussels is absurd and deeply suspicious. You have a PM yesterday who was quite prepared to agree the division of Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK without even having discussed it with the Northern Irish party by which she forms a government let alone the rest of the population..
Exactly, what kind of idiot would not anticipate that.Also disgusted that the impact assessments given to the House have been heavily redacted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
That is called an election, which after yesterday, is likely to happen a lot sooner than 2019
That was a billion £ well spent??
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
No, we had a vote and we decided to leave, the fact that we have an incompetent and untrustworthy government to carry out the will of the people, doesn't invalidate the result in any way.
The result is what it is. If only Cameron did the bare minimum of preparation before dumping the job on May's desk.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
The problem isn't Brexit. The problem is Theresa May and her government. She can't deliver on any issue not just Brexit. She's worthless. Incompetent, delusional, out of touch with reality.
And the same could be said about most Tories anyway. The UK is run by parasytes.
As for Brexit, you can't revoke the application of art. 50. If you want in, you'll have to reapply to join and the UK won't get a better deal than what it had.
They had an opt out on the Euro and immigration and Thatcher's rebate. Noone in the EU wants to give those back if the UK wants to join again. Also you don't have badasses like Thatcher anymore. Cuckservatives aren't worth an inch of her.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
I'm in agreement here with most guys that Brexit didn't have to be a disaster, but it will be under this government. Just a few minutes ago, on BBC the brexit committee interviewing David Davis was broadcast... he admits now that there are no such thing as the economic assessment impact reports on...not for 50 sectors of the UK economy, not even for one. They haven't done any preparation or research.
What's more, he's lied then to Parliament and to the Committee. Last year and of course earlier this year- he himself claimed they had done an extensive impact analysis on the economy, other Conservatives working with the brexit department stated that their had been a look at anything from '100 sectors- down to 50'- but they couldn't say the results as they would 'weaken our hand' in the negotiations. Well now it turns out nothing was done. Davis claims they didn't have the 'resources'- which would be bad in itself... except the further fact that he's lying through his teeth to parliament and the public.
Now the question is, where the Tories lying to make the government seem more competent than it actually is? Thus going so far as to lie to the House and Committee (Even going so far as to create 'fake' redacted reports)- this is what Davis is saying currently- and its blown up in their faces. OR are their actually reports (Because he's referred to them A LOT as have other Conservative ministers) but they are so damning for the UK economy under the Conservatives current 'red lines' strategy and domestic mess that they think its better to basically say 'we made it all up and lied- please don't look any further!'.
I suspect its the former, but the latter is now an option considering how weird and incompetent it would make the Tories if they were trying for the former. I despair. I agree with Caratacus that an election before 2019 is now very likely. Especially considering the inner- back biting the Tories are also going through this morning, with ministers distancing themselves from May and her failed N.Irish deal which upset their coalition allies the DUP- apparently their all claiming they didn't know the DUP hadn't been informed, nor did they know what the terms were (Depending on who you ask)- Some Tory hardliners are calling for walking away now as they can't trust the government to fulfil their vision of keeping the UK intact and all of it outside any EU influence, while others are saying those are idiots and we have to get some kind of working relationship with the EU- considering that WTO terms are going to be difficult to reach in itself (Involve a hard border with Ireland, and we'll need to deal with the EU anyway- plus issues over getting our own schedule..which involves a lot of negotiations in itself, including with the EU particularly as the current plan to make things easier for the UK and not have us held to ransom by the EU or Argentina etc for instance is for the UK and EU to jointly present a schedule and work together with the WTO to make it as smooth and quick as possible). So yeah a lot of Conservative infighting again and party-political look out.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Sounds like malpractice.
Most professions have insurance against that occurrence.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Btw even ''the greatest disaster of Brexit'' so far, the Pound depreciation, is a lie.
https://i.imgur.com/bqHlcFy.png
Steady upwards for the entirety of 2017. Despite Theresa May.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dante Von Hespburg
I'm in agreement here with most guys that Brexit didn't have to be a disaster, but it will be under this government. Just a few minutes ago, on BBC the brexit committee interviewing David Davis was broadcast... he admits now that there are no such thing as the economic assessment impact reports on...not for 50 sectors of the UK economy, not even for one. They haven't done any preparation or research.
What's more, he's lied then to Parliament and to the Committee. Last year and of course earlier this year- he himself claimed they had done an extensive impact analysis on the economy, other Conservatives working with the brexit department stated that their had been a look at anything from '100 sectors- down to 50'- but they couldn't say the results as they would 'weaken our hand' in the negotiations. Well now it turns out nothing was done. Davis claims they didn't have the 'resources'- which would be bad in itself... except the further fact that he's lying through his teeth to parliament and the public.
Now the question is, where the Tories lying to make the government seem more competent than it actually is?
Quote:
Impact assessments of Brexit on the UK 'don't exist'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42249854
"David Davis has probably not done the Brexit cause a huge bundle of good this morning. First, his frank admission that no impact assessments have been completed will inevitably be seized on by critics to argue Team May simply haven't done the basic spadework.
Second his suggestion that he doesn't have the resources for this, and anyway some of the work his officials have done wasn't much good, is hardly a ringing endorsement of his Brexit department.
Third, Mr Davis probably didn't help his own reputation by telling the committee he had been handed two chapters of the 850 pages of analysis but hadn't read them. At times Mr Davis even chided the committee over the time they were taking."
You don't need this frank admission to know that this government is unable or secretly unwilling, to manage the process of Brexit. Not one country has been approached with a view to setting up trade deals, not one!! That's if you don't count the mysterious visit to Israel by Priti Patel for a supposed vacation, in which she undertake discussions with Israeli officials (including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu) And for which the PM and the Foreign Office were completely unaware, yeah sure!!
Honestly how can you have a government behave and such a secretive and covert way whether it was in that or during the Brexit negotiations, during which things are being agreed which even threaten the very future of the Nations unity. Do we really know how much money May agreed to pay the EU for a trade deal, because the figure of 50 billion that was being banded around, seems to have been leaked to the press! Government must be open and accountable, whether you voted Remain or Leave most people believe that. I think the only reason Theresa May is still there at No10, is to act as an "Aunt Sally" and carry the public's frustration and anger when the whole process goes belly up! Yes, we have a Conservative government who are accepting that Jeremy Corbyn will be the next Prime Minister, the only question is when, because I can't see her being propped up much longer given her level of mis-management.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
You don't need this frank admission to know that this government is unable or secretly unwilling, to manage the process of Brexit. Not one country has been approached with a view to setting up trade deals, not one!! That's if you don't count the mysterious visit to Israel by Priti Patel for a supposed vacation, in which she undertake discussions with Israeli officials (including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu) And for which the PM and the Foreign Office were completely unaware, yeah sure!!
I think this is spot on honestly. Indeed we have actually had protestations from Australia, New Zealand, Argentina and others that under the Tories current plans of splitting trade schedules (both EU and WTO versions)- would actually mean that we are an unattractive proposition for them to trade with as they'd be limited in what they'll be able to sell us in terms of agriculture particularly as the Conservatives in an attempt to not get involved in trade agreements are hoping to palm off the EU's existing arrangements a particular percentage of the trade (So 92% of current wheat goes to the EU, 8% comes to us)- hence why i believe your quite right in no countries have been approached yet (Beyond the PM going to India last year and offending them).
Its madness to me for instance why the Commonwealth at the very least hasn't been sought out ( I get nothing concrete can be set- but you are allowed to lay down the framework, informal talking and understandings for trade agreements)- there's been multiple chances, and heck if you look at it, currently its a broken and shallow organization, containing some of the fastest growing (and in terms of Africa- predicted fastest growing) economies and some of our key anglo partners. It is ripe for a new kind of trade framework, that creatively could cut down on the issues and fears of the UK having to alone deal with China and the US straight away while we are in a very weak position by if done fairly for all, allowing us access to several key economies and opportunities from a myriad of states in a relatively short length of time (Reforming the Commonwealth could take a couple of years and practically would allow the UK to use its limited negotiating resources in an more effective manner than one by one approaching states that could take several years each to iron things out.- Again i do emphasize to differentiate my position from certain other groups who seem to believe we'd be able to bend the Commonwealth into our will in Empire 2.0 or some rubbish- this would require a reset in relations with India, and a recognition of equality of all members on an even footing- we cannot expect that they'll all jump at the chance, nor would i say make the Commonwealth a exclusive club/EU alternate group- instead make it an open trade and cultural block that doesn't restrict members- but does have actual trade clout for its members, unlike currently.
Quote:
Honestly how can you have a government behave and such a secretive and covert way whether it was in that or during the Brexit negotiations, during which things are being agreed which even threaten the very future of the Nations unity. Do we really know how much money May agreed to pay the EU for a trade deal, because the figure of 50 billion that was being banded around, seems to have been leaked to the press! Government must be open and accountable, whether you voted Remain or Leave most people believe that. I think the only reason Theresa May is still there at No10, is to act as an "Aunt Sally" and carry the public's frustration and anger when the whole process goes belly up! Yes, we have a Conservative government who are accepting that Jeremy Corbyn will be the next Prime Minister, the only question is when, because I can't see her being propped up much longer given her level of mis-management
I am 100% with you here. Its also more than just the EU brexit issue, the government for instance with Universal Credit- had to be forced by labour to release the impact reports it was having on those its been rolled out too. Their actively avoiding votes- heck the last budget showed their also avoiding tackling any domestic issues. the Henry VIII laws can do more than just 'sort out' the regulations of the EU- but also can be used to change domestic law as it stands without parliamentary scrutiny. The 'weighting of the Committees' allows the Tories a majority on all of them, despite their lack of a parliamentary majority- a hand expressly dealt to them by the electorate because a Tory majority with its policies were not wanted. Their whole process currently smacks of being as cloaked and undemocratic as possible. Its honestly mind-boggling how they think its acceptable. What's worse though is that these are now precedents they have set for further governments to use- I wonder if they'll kick themselves when Corbyn's Labour do the same thing? But indeed it does feel May is the punchbag in the hopes that the electorate will blame her and not the Conservative party as a whole- i'd question though whether this will work considering their front bench is now also mostly tarred with the same brush of incompetence. I think also they underestimate the domestic economic issues they have allowed to go unaddressed and indeed in some cases made worse through what little policy they have implemented- this will perhaps see Labour (though not necessarily Corbyn who i believe would only do one term as PM before retiring) in for the next few terms as the Tories have to rebuild an image of being practical economists and not as current blind ideologists who keep as much from the public as possible.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fkizz
To elect if it is Brexit time again or not? Even the Queen has given aproval by now..
To be fair, a second referendum on this, if confirmed the Brexit side again, people would just call for a third one. And if it gave a remain, there would be another one, then another one, and so on ad infinitum.
There's a reason you don't repeat elections too early except after something on the level of dissolving the parliement.
But this is the leftist and neoliberal view of democracy. If the result is not what you want, accuse the people who voted for it, and then have them vote and vote again, until you get your favored result. This is what our PM did with his party, when they internally voted for something he didn't like. As for the referendum, such things are insignificant for stalinist fossils. When the result of our referendum came out as no, he just ignored it and turned it into a yes. Britain's political culture is too high for such a blatant disregard of the public's view, so EUSSR fans in the country are just calling for another referendum.
So, the deal is to either conduct elections over and over again, until "we" get what we want, or to not hold any election at all (the EUSSR is quite allergic to referenda).
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ioannis76
But this is the leftist and neoliberal view of democracy. If the result is not what you want, accuse the people who voted for it, and then have them vote and vote again, until you get your favored result. This is what our PM did with his party, when they internally voted for something he didn't like. As for the referendum, such things are insignificant for stalinist fossils. When the result of our referendum came out as no, he just ignored it and turned it into a yes. Britain's political culture is too high for such a blatant disregard of the public's view, so EUSSR fans in the country are just calling for another referendum.
So, the deal is to either conduct elections over and over again, until "we" get what we want, or to not hold any election at all (the EUSSR is quite allergic to referenda).
'Leftist' and neoliberal are not one and the same mate, particularly in the UK's political context discussed here. There is an upsurge of the 'left' off the back of Tory incompetence over the last 7 years and inability of their 'right' to get to grips with modern economic issues- seen both in the last general election, but also recent polling (Labour are now in 'majority' territory according to survation- the only poll to get the GE and brexit right) regarding domestic affairs and brexit but they are not saying 'hold another referendum'- Indeed Corbyn's inner circle and he are against the EU as they see it as a tool for big business. The 'remainer' Labour MP's have all folded to Corbyn after his victory, and have accepted brexit, though with debates over if single market access should be sought etc.
There is an argument to be made though that the Conservatives need to hold a GE soon or some form of referendum (though a GE is probably the easiest and most legitimate method...particularly as one is coming soon next year anyway- the last few days have been the death knell for any remaining beliefs surrounding the Conservatives ability to govern, let alone actually 'do' brexit) on the 'type' of the UK that will emerge from brexit though- thus far they have been incredibly undemocratic as i think everyone agrees in this thread thus far by secretly trying to set up the future of the UK in regards to employment rights, type of economy, environmental protections, devolved powers, Using Henry VII powers to allow ministers to change anything they fancy without a vote etc without having any parliamentary say so by avoiding parliamentary votes (Literally not turning up), hiding reports, weighting committees (even though with a minority government, its constitutionally wrong to do so) lying about documents and goings on behind the scenes (making Labour have to keep forcing votes in Parliament using a very old loophole to get the government to release domestic and brexit related documents for scrutiny)- indeed the Conservative 'hard right'- are trying to push for a deregulated UK that they know would be electorally unacceptable (Indeed the Conservatives lost their majority at the election, so i do question the legitimacy of their being able to make long-term decisions beyond brexit regarding the structure of the UK).
Its the big irony that its not the 'left' being undemocratic- But the Conservative Party- who again are a strange mix of traditional conservatives, Thatcherites and 'New Labour part 2 (Or Cameronites as some have called them). All of them incompetent in their own way- The Thatcherites have no workable economic plan, Cameronites are advocating a different type of brexit which is cross-party...and yet keep putting the 'party' before this, and traditional Conservatives seem to have zombified on the domestic front, offering no solutions- let alone credible ones, and are fiddling while the party burns. This whole farce is made even more ironic considering it seems any criticism May has ever lobbed over at Labour, she ends up falling into 'Coalition of Chaos', 'Divided party', 'Strong and Stable', 'Safe pair of hands', 'Will of the people'- all the fan favorites- its like she predicts which :wub: up the Tories are heading towards next.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Interesting to observe UK politics. I was thinking that, because the whole concept of Brexit was suggested and materialised by Farage's nationalists, the hard-line left wouldn't want to have anything to do with it (out of reflex, this is how I've known politics to work in my country). But now that I actually read the OP :whistling, it seems that it doesn't work that way for other countries.
The conservative inadequacy is a standard, it appears, but (perhaps I missed it) where does the actual Labour Party (centre-left, I assume) stand in all this? The Centre-left is a traditionally huge force in modern politics, as many people identify with it for some reason, is the UK an exception?
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ioannis76
Interesting to observe UK politics. I was thinking that, because the whole concept of Brexit was suggested and materialised by Farage's nationalists, the hard-line left wouldn't want to have anything to do with it (out of reflex, this is how I've known politics to work in my country). But now that I actually read the OP :whistling , it seems that it doesn't work that way for other countries.
The conservative inadequacy is a standard, it appears, but (perhaps I missed it) where does the actual Labour Party (centre-left, I assume) stand in all this? The Centre-left is a traditionally huge force in modern politics, as many people identify with it for some reason, is the UK an exception?
You've asked probably some of the most poinient question in UK politics there mate :P.
I think firstly its important to note that while UKIP indeed were integral to forcing the referendum, things get murky after that. The Conservative brexiteers, deny Farage had any real influence- this is because there was two 'Leave' campaigns in essence running side by side and technically in opposition to each other. UKIP's with Farage and an 'Official Leave Campaign' that was led by prominent Conservatives and no small number of Labour MP's.- inside that official Leave campaign there were further party splits on what 'Leave' would mean and how the advertised it. The Conservatives would argue that since the UKIP voter effectively disappeared after the last General Election, and that they are 'in government' (By being propped up by the DUP)- it was their version of 'Leave' that the country wants...and this is where ALL the issues start basically, as among the Tory leavers and general Tory party their are raging debates over that that actually is. This is further compounded by historically 'Brexit' being the prerogative sphere of around half the Conservative party (Who made huge issues around the EU for Thatcher and Major), before Farage and UKIP ever took up the banner in any serious way. So brexit is a very nuanced and subjective thing. Who you give credit to for brexit tends to be linked to party affiliation and subjective interpretation- i for instance tend to adhere to the idea that the Conservatives- to sort out their own internal fractures and also to stop UKIP nipping at their voting share. I though do accept that for someone who has been say long-term anti-EU more weight would be given to UKIP nipping at the vote share forcing the thing.
Now to Labour and what they are currently- as the Conservatives are a broad Church of at least four general political positions (and numerous small faction-specific interests), Labour is too- New Labour under Blair, 'modernized' the party and effectively made them 'centrist'. He did this by running roughshod over the older socialist, social democratic and working class based factions- using his stunning electoral victory to forced them to not quite adhere to his new mantra, but to effectively go underground.
During this time, there's actually a very interesting Economist article that details exactly what Corbyn and Macdonell were doinng- these two a social democrat/socialist (depending on who you ask)- were considered so 'irrelevant'- that they and their small faction weren't even given pagers by Blair and were basically allowed to continue as they always had, being a 'traditional left'- but without any real teeth to make big changes. - So yep under Blair it was definitely centrist- i wouldn't even use the terms 'Center-left' as basically there was a direct continuation of policy with Thatchers economic outlook, though they added multiculturalism to 'humanize'. Thatcher and this legacy it turns out was economically suicidal for the UK in the long term, despite the short-term boost.
Brown was in essence Blair 2.0. Beaten by Cameron who was Blair 3.0. Economic crisis- misused austerity begins to make a right mess. Labour meanwhile under milliband shift back a bit towards the traditional left- not too much, but suddenly market regulation is back on the table- its all very 'Liberal-Democrat'- the Tories call this Communist, much guffing and laughter- 'Red Ed' as they dub him is annihilated. Blairites are now discredited electorally- Iraq war, economic issues, anger at lip-service to real problems resulting from Thatcher and Blair economics- put them in a bit of a spin. An arguably joke/mistake puts Corbyn up as a leadership candidate- who is 'traditional' left-wing. This actually means he's a Social Democrat- He wants to within current structures of a market economy (that is regulated to be fair and has nationalized elements to ensure a fair playing field) and of parliamentary democracy make the UK a fairer place for the working classes, but also for everyone- idealism indeed, but he has some very interesting economic policies, and in the context of the struggle with the gig economy and automation, and in solving housing, cost of living crisis and social care- he's got the answers, unlike the Conservatives. He is not a communist (No revolution), nor a socialist particularly (again his reforms are not full nationalization- far from it- it literally is just the UK taking the best of the German and Nordic models). Corbyn wins...then a civil-war that lasts a good part of a year erupts in the Labour party as the Blairites and centrists try to kick this radical left-winger out... they fail at a leadership vote, and then the General Election comes around where Corbyn actually increases Labours vote share quite significantly for the first time in decades, actually taking seats that Conservatives have held for in some cases hundreds of years and robbing May of her authority- stunned silence descends on his critics in Labour- seems the country is crying out for radical change of the traditional left variety. The Conservatives who had been mocking Corbyn, suddenly start to take him seriously (Note no more laughter at his being 'unelectable', no more cat-calling etc)- Far from 'Red Ed'- here is an actual social democrat of the traditional persuasion- whose solutions fit the modern age. Que May scrambling to make the Conservatives seem 'for the working man'- something that recently was highlighted to fail in the falling through of social mobility in the UK (Something she pledged to solve)- as the entire Committee resigned at how incompetent and how little the Conservatives had done over the issue, indeed they'd been actively making it worse (This is one of many domestic issues that May has failed at and made worse- hence partly the swing the Corbyn). So Corbyn has gone from being a figure of ridicule to dictating the political agenda- its interesting to note how the Conservatives have moved to meet him- they tried going further right, which didn't work, and now their coming back to the center-right... which seems to not be working either. (A key issue being their key demographic support are the over-65's... typical enough, but their vote share among the under 40s has consistently fallen... its why their MP's have stated that they become 'extinct' as a major party within the next decade unless they also do something radical...which isn't happening).
So you could argue the UK Labour party is 'center-left' because in encompasses, like its Conservative opposite so many different perspectives... but in actuality its basically a Social democratic 'Traditional left' party which has ditched 'Identity politics' for 'Economic politics'- which concentrates on workers rights and improving living conditions, is against multinational corporations and tax evasion and argues for a radical relook is need for the UK economy (Which it is- the key thing that the right have forgotten is that to have a functioning democracy based on (traditional) liberal values of individualism, freedom etc you need to make sure that every one of the electorate has or can have the potential to have a 'stake' in upholding the system-in the UK that means a house or property through the way democracy has been culturally cultivated- at the very basis this means that democracy and the market 'works for all'- currently of course none of that is happening, and the right have failed to address it- thus creating as commentator like Joseph Nye have said a 'vacuum' for anti-democratic/flawed democratic or populist leaders to potentially rise and manipulate the country towards the far-right or far-left in the manner of the 1920s). So aye i don't think the UK is necessarily an exception- its more the UK Labour party for instance has always been quite different to Europe (The UK Labour party historically being a church for various left-wing movements- in the 1920's the unrest that happened over Europe with far-left and far-right parties rising up was captured and bent to the will of liberal democracy through the Labour party being stoically tied to parliamentary democracy and helping to quash radical elements who sought to overthrow it- for instance neutering the British communist parties potential vote share, while actively alongside the other traditional parties destroying Mosley's 'Black Shirts' ). So basically there is a big difference between Center-left Labour (Blair) and 'traditional left' (Or more properly termed- Social Democratic left) of Corbyn. The current one being based in economic policies that help across different identity groups and arguably across classes too- so while Blair would concentrate on affirmative action for specific minorities, Corbyn talks about fair employment practices for all.
EDIT: More brexit related- its come out in a further blow to the Conservatives- that their very own Chancellor- Philip Hammond- has stated that the cabinet and government have not yet discussed or agreed to what actually the UK is hoping to get from brexit or head towards. Its confirmed what's been said earlier, directly by the second most important position to the PM that the UK literally has no idea what it is negotiating for in essence. Mongrel is quite right then that we need to pause and rethink or come up with an idea quite fast.
Further to this Hammond has stated that the UK is going to pay the so-called 'Brexit bill' even if we do not get a free trade deal- so even if we drop out without a deal, we'll still pay the EU somewhere between £50-100 billion (depending on who you ask). May has immediately said this isn't true or going to happen...so just who is right? It seems to the Conservatives are fast giving up the pretense of unity here.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Great information, thank you for going into the trouble of writing all that down. It seems to me that Farage is a very skilled stonemason, who came to the Conservative "Rock" with a chisel and a hammer, and struck one blow at the very right spot, right in the fault line, if you will. For what reason he did this, who might have put him up to this (if anyone), is difficult to see. My suspicion that someone might have given him a "mission" is because once he achieved the Brexit, he just stepped down.
It looks to me like Corbyn is going to keep rising in popularity (as opposition leaders usually do) but if he doesn't deliver, if and when he comes into power, his party is going to be the next rock that breaks. One major Party breaking is one thing the system can usually handle, but both (because it's usually a two party choice)... I don't know.
So, the Labour was responsible for our view of the UK as a politically moderate and cool-headed country. Interesting. :).
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ioannis76
Interesting to observe UK politics. I was thinking that, because the whole concept of Brexit was suggested and materialised by Farage's nationalists, the hard-line left wouldn't want to have anything to do with it (out of reflex, this is how I've known politics to work in my country). But now that I actually read the OP :whistling, it seems that it doesn't work that way for other countries.
The conservative inadequacy is a standard, it appears, but (perhaps I missed it) where does the actual Labour Party (centre-left, I assume) stand in all this? The Centre-left is a traditionally huge force in modern politics, as many people identify with it for some reason, is the UK an exception?
Britain doesn't follow Mudpit rules, as Dante has so elegantly explained.
Anyway, credit to all who have posted so far. It is good to actually exchange views on politics rather than prejudices.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ioannis76
Great information, thank you for going into the trouble of writing all that down. It seems to me that Farage is a very skilled stonemason, who came to the Conservative "Rock" with a chisel and a hammer, and struck one blow at the very right spot, right in the fault line, if you will. For what reason he did this, who might have put him up to this (if anyone), is difficult to see. My suspicion that someone might have given him a "mission" is because once he achieved the Brexit, he just stepped down.
It looks to me like Corbyn is going to keep rising in popularity (as opposition leaders usually do) but if he doesn't deliver, if and when he comes into power, his party is going to be the next rock that breaks. One major Party breaking is one thing the system can usually handle, but both (because it's usually a two party choice)... I don't know.
So, the Labour was responsible for our view of the UK as a politically moderate and cool-headed country. Interesting. :).
Your welcome mate, glad to be of help here- its something i'm potentially doing for a dissertation so i've been stuck in such obscure stuff recently is all :P. I think the analogy of Farage is spot on, he also it could be argued helped Labour go 'back to its roots' under Corbyn as some UKIP support was drawn from ex-labour working class voters who felt left-behind by the centrist New Labour. So i would rate him as a very smooth operator for his end goal.
I think that is the big question for Corbyn and Labour- in opposition, particularly to probably the most incompetent government since Attlee (Some people say Lord North- but i actually think North did a pretty ok...or average job in a bad situation) who have actively made the UK economy and the lives of the majority of people in the UK far harder for ideological reasons has meant that he's been well...we've all seen it, Glastonbury- the whole cult of personality almost that's sprung up around him has been quite easy. It also helps that Corbyn while he's a bit 'stuffy' formal Parliament settings, is an absolutely sterling showman and campaigner- so when on the actual election trail he had a huge advantage over the Tories who tend to struggle to be engaging whoever it might be. Though whether this will translate well into actually delivering to the UK radical reform will be another thing. An election in 2018 as seems likely with a Labour victory might see them flounder in the face of a brexit that is impossible to 'get right' and an economy that has been in all honesty trashed by the Conservatives. I kinda see two scenarios- that either Labour will 'tone down' and thus start shedding support on not delivering, getting mired like the Tories in brexit and crash and burn. Or- the Conservatives will have made such a hash of things, brexit, the economy and domestic cities- that basically Labour can (must as Cameron did) use this to blame the now opposition and make political capital on that- adopting a 'saviours' honeymoon period that would see any issues over brexit- blamed on the Conservatives who set the framework- so we have to stay in the single market- Tories fault, we crash out with no deal and theirs been no trade talks with other states- Tories fault (Which is literally what the Conservatives did to Brown's Labour when they took power, and how they actually managed to stay in for a a good three terms by riding the mythos they created that 'labour directly ruined the economy').
I think indeed though as you say, it'll be interesting if both Labour and the Conservatives collapse- the Tory 'Wildnerness' years in opposition are going to be interesting enough, with many predicting the party splitting, Its entirely possible that a catastrophic Conservative failure as seems to be building might result in a Labour government, but with a new opposition- either of a 'centrist' variety (If Labour is seen to be the party of brexit and Tory remainers share a lib-dem platform), or a different type of 'right'- perhaps with Hard right Tories moving in on UKIP's territory, and UKIP also being revived by those who feel that brexit is being mishandled by the Tories, but who don't want Labour in for domestic or trust reasons. If Labour fall- i can see them splitting too into New Labour and Old Labour as the infighting will come back, particularly over what 'type' of successor to Corbyn their would be.
But yes indeed and in fairness the Conservatives have done their part historically in keeping far-right or radical elements 'down' by consuming them electorally and incorporating them into the party just as Labour do- though again i think lately the broad-church of Conservatives has been fractured by brexit more so than Labour (perhaps because their party functions slightly differently to Labour- Labour tend to emphasize the membership far more and rely on them for funding, especially recently in taking positions and have the Unions who are still influential backers, while the Tories have a diverse number of big business groups funding them, do not tend to rely on the membership to provide funds, but these big backers come with competing interests- all of which is made worse by the 1922 committee being a powerful institution for backbenchers, able to challenge the front bench and even remove them). Regardless though the Two-Party system by making smaller parties effectively irrelevant helps give the picture (historically at least, not sure now :P) of the UK being a rather moderate, calm country- because all the shouty elements are boxed in by the two big parties like a dirty secret, or quickly made electorally irrelevant. The downside of course is the UK is very much less democratic than our European counterparts- a key issue of late- as Party whips and policy override concerns of constituents (highlighted by brexit in detail currently) and if say you were right-wing who was traditionalist, believing in the community, family, fair work for fair wages, christian values etc- well under Thatcher you'd have had a hell of a time as no party would have provided you with that. Currently if your a right-wing business owner of a small company- the Tories are also your worst enemy as their trying front-bench is espousing 'traditionalist' policies economically- they even attempted to make self-employed people pay more tax...which while they quickly u-turned on this due to the outcry- it rather highlights they are not the party for you.- Likewise left-wing voters can have the same issue- Care about centrist politics, pro-globalization and gender/identity issues? Good luck finding a party that would particularly espouse that currently. Heck if you are center left or center right- you have no one to really vote for :P.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mongrel
Britain doesn't follow Mudpit rules, as Dante has so elegantly explained.
Anyway, credit to all who have posted so far. It is good to actually exchange views on politics rather than prejudices.
As always, Jealous of your ability to be concise, on point and witty mate :P. That's rather the perfect summary.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
I'm pleased I'm not the only one beleiving the whole management of Brexit is a farce, and I think that applies equally to Brexiteers, remainers and the indifferent. But I never anticipated this...Despite having previously indicated to Parliament that work had been undertaken to assess the impact of Brexit on Britain's economy in 57 areas. ( why wasn't this done before the referendum??!!) after a long no show, a vote was made in the House of Commons on the issue, demanding the Government to release them, with officials later releasing 850 pages of heavily redacted bollocks.
Mr Davis, who I'm told is the Brexit Secretary has now admitted to the Brexit Select Committee that there aren't any. This some 18 months after the Brexit vote. Not only is there no policy, there is none of the essential analysis (some of which is statutory) to inform a policy. This is beyond simple incompetence, it negligent.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a8094481.html
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
well, at the end of the day, they couldnt very well do planning and research in earnest, it just would show how brexit is bollocks. in public perception, well knowing you are screwing things up is still worse than having no idea at all.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mongrel
Everybody I talk to about the subject no matter what their position, has an equally poor opinion of this government. Those of us who voted Brexit are viewing the handling of the process with particular cynicism about what the ultimate outcome will be. The confidence of a great many of them, went out the window a long time ago and their votes in any future election cannot be assured.
For example, following on from Monday's embarrassing turnaround by the PM in the Brussels negotiations, and today's admission by David Davis that no impact assessments were carried out on the economy for leaving the EU. You now have a Chancellor who stated to the Treasury committee, that it would be unethical and thereby inconceivable for the UK to leave the EU without paying them a cash settlement, whether or not we had any form of trade deal!! So in the decades to come, whilst our public services, NHS, police and armed forces budgets are facing huge challenges in meeting expenditure, the UK would be paying Brussels an estimated (wherever this figure came from?) 49 billion pounds, even though there isn't an obligation to pay anything. Astounding!!:disgust:
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
It wouldn't be the first time a non-binding referendum has been ignored by a government. And a 51/49 mandate a couple of years back is almost guaranteed to be a 60% against brexit now so the consequences for a change of heart probably wouldn't be a newly elected UKIP government.
Given how things have gone since the election, the only reasons I'm seeing here to continue with it is that 1. It would be politically damaging and 2. because Brits chose this path so should wear it like the stoic Brits they are.
It seems to me that the Tories are too tainted by Brexit to pull out now. It's a pride call. They've tied their future to brexit and that's that. Labour's Corban wing were always Euro-skeptic deep down and rather cynically are waiting for the Tories to implode and wear the blame for the guaranteed mess that brexit will bring. They can then sweep in like heroes and instigate the People's Republic of West Russia and be done with it.
I never thought I'd ever align myself with the Lib Dems... Heaven forbid.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
I was arguing that invoking article 50 in the first place would be stupid even if it may have been necessary due to the national politics of Britain. From a legal perspective the referendum did not bind the politicians to leave the EU but ignoring it would obviously not sit well with a large proportion of the public. It is however quite astonishing how Theresa May and the Tories not only sticks to the referendum but also manages to make this fiasco their own despite Jeremy Corbyn, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage all being excellent scape goats that at least could share the vitrol from the public. Being the party in power the Tories are obviously the biggest culprit of the issue but the lack of support from Labour and most leading Brexiteers fleeing the field as soon as they had won the referendum should have allowed May and the Tories to take more control over the situation.
Personally I loath Jeremy Corbyn and even if I enjoyed Dantes in-depth description of events I disagree about Jeremy Corbyn being "nordic left". He is more similar to the moralist left wingers of the Social Democratic parties in the Nordic parties. These people carry influence in national politics but their contributions to any Nordic model are limited due to the same reasons that Jeremy Corbyn was a backbencher between 1983 and 2015. They lack the ability to compromise and only get into power in times when polarisation force more centrist politicians to collaborate with the fringes of the political spectrum.
Currently it looks to me like Theresa May wanted to grab power by both hands and in doing so she have quickly established herself as unacceptable to most of the population. The Tory Brexiteers distrust her due to her lack of transparency and blame Brexit failures on her rather than Brexit being idiotic while the centre and left rallies around the only serious alternative they have, which unfortunately happens to be Jeremy Corbyn. Are the Liberal Democrats really that bad?
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
by your standards (not having any significant power, see Corbyn) they are, so you loathing someone you disagree with is hardly an argument (not that it would be anyway).
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ioannis76
Interesting to observe UK politics. I was thinking that, because the whole concept of Brexit was suggested and materialised by Farage's nationalists, the hard-line left wouldn't want to have anything to do with it (out of reflex, this is how I've known politics to work in my country). But now that I actually read the OP :whistling, it seems that it doesn't work that way for other countries.
The conservative inadequacy is a standard, it appears, but (perhaps I missed it) where does the actual Labour Party (centre-left, I assume) stand in all this? The Centre-left is a traditionally huge force in modern politics, as many people identify with it for some reason, is the UK an exception?
Dante Von Hespburg's post explained things very well, but just to add in an important point:
Leave voters were concentrated mainly in white areas in rural and poor urban areas of England. It was really very similar to the Trump phenomenon: Brexit could not have won without combining support from less educated older people in rural areas (who tend to vote Conservative) with less educated middle aged people in small towns and cities in Northern England and the Midlands, who would usually vote Labour. The similarity between Brexit voters was not a question of left or right wing, it was based on the distinction between those who benefit from globalism vs those who don't (the 'somewheres' vs the 'anywheres', as they are sometimes called). So what Brexit did, was it split both Labour and the Tories down the middle. This was in large part due to the history in British politics of moderate 2 party politics, which means Labour was an uneasy coalition of hard left socialists and metropolitian centre-left champagne socialists/immigrants. Meanwhile the Tories were an equally uneasy coalition of educated metropolitan middle class centre-rightists including certain immigrant groups such as Hindus, with somewhat xenophobic rural true conservatives. So Brexit was basically a result of the joining together of the more extreme elements on both the left and the right against the educated metropolitan centrists, again both centre-left and centre-right.
Corbyn is an interesting one, because he himself is a metropolitan champagne socialist from inner London and is very immigrant-friendly, he hangs around with a lot of dodgy groups including the anti-Israel Free Palestine crowd, many of whom are rather hardline Islamists. However, because he's also a hard-left (democratic) socialist, he has the allegiance of a lot of people not just in traditional inner city Labour areas in the South of England and the Midlands, but also a lot of Brexit-voting Northern areas, because he was actually quite anti-EU until he became Labour leader and was convinced to grudgingly campaign for Remain. The group which Corbyn tapped into most (apart from capturing the hard left vote, which was expressing itself through Brexit mainly as a protest that they were denied a proper far left candidate, and prefer Corbyn to Farage and the Tory Brexiteers) was young people. A lot of Corbyn voters are from poor white areas in the North of England and other Brexit-voting areas, and are the children and grandchildren of people who voted for Brexit. When it came to the Brexit referendum, these young people either didn't vote at all, or they didn't really understand and just voted how their parents told them. But then when the Tory party collapsed into paralysis and infighting, there was shock in the Labour party, as they expected it was Labour which would collapse and Corbyn would end up being forced out. Then Theresa May called an election early this year, and the Labour party realised this was the make or break moment for Corbyn. Everyone expected the Tories to win a landslide majority, and so the anti-Corbyn elements of the Labour party came up with a plan: they would allow Corbyn's supporters (led by the socialist group Momentum) to lead the Labour campaign in whichever way they saw fit. Then when they lost, it would be easy for them to get rid of Corbyn by putting the blame on him. However, as you may know, Theresa May's gamble backfired, not surprisingly, as a lot of Brexit supporters deserted her (many either didn't vote as they assumed she couldn't fail to win, or they were Labour/UKIP voters who backed the Tories in 2015 just to guarantee the Brexit referendum promised by David Cameron). The result was, Momentum managed to reach out to young people who had never voted before in many cases, and convinced them to come out and support Corbyn. And so May lost her majority and Corbyn will be the Labour leader for the forseeable future.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Condottiere 40K
Seems simpler to have a second referendum to clarify that the electorate really wants to undertake this rather labourious process, which is a tradition concerning EU policy, at least within the EU.
I thought that was the whole plan. Delay it as much as possible, until a Labor government's in power, and then declare that since the electorate voted in a pro-union government, Brexit is no longer what Britons support. That is Europe's MO: hold one referendum after another until you get the result you want.
Britain is not leaving.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HannibalExMachina
by your standards (not having any significant power, see Corbyn) they are, so you loathing someone you disagree with is hardly an argument (not that it would be anyway).
That I loath someone is my position on the subject of what I think of that person. Why I loath him is a separate subject that is more suitable for another thread given that this thread is about Brexit.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Adar
Currently it looks to me like Theresa May wanted to grab power by both hands and in doing so she have quickly established herself as unacceptable to most of the population. The Tory Brexiteers distrust her due to her lack of transparency and blame Brexit failures on her rather than Brexit being idiotic while the centre and left rallies around the only serious alternative they have, which unfortunately happens to be Jeremy Corbyn. Are the Liberal Democrats really that bad?
Most people in the UK forget the Lib Dems even exist. The idea of them becoming the majority party is a joke. And yes, they are that bad, they are just pro-Remain Tories and besides they want to have a second Brexit referendum, that's not exactly going to help matters. The real voice of reason in the UK is the SNP, they are actually in power (if only in Scotland) and so they don't have the luxury of just saying whatever people want to hear like the Lib Dems do which means they have to make sensible suggestions. The SNP also have three times as many seats as the Lib Dems despite the fact that the SNP only contest seats in one small part of the country and the Lib Dems are nationwide, which shows you just how irrelevant the Lib Dems are. The Lib Dems try to go for the votes of younger educated people such as myself since we are the main Remain constituency: tell me, Adar, seriously, if someone stole £30,000 of your money and then asked you to vote for them, would you? That is what the Lib Dems did to me and thousands of others during their time in coalition with the Tories (and voting for a party willing to go into coalition with the Tories is reason enough for not voting for them).
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dr. Legend
I thought that was the whole plan. Delay it as much as possible, until a Labor government's in power, and then declare that since the electorate voted in a pro-union government, Brexit is no longer what Britons support. That is Europe's MO: hold one referendum after another until you get the result you want.
Britain is not leaving.
Ignoring results of referendum is something that would take away Labor's legitimacy and build grounds for a coup or revolution. People voted Leave because they want out of EU, not because government is pro-Union. Not to mention that Labor would scare some of those Remainers who are not fiscally illiterate enough to support Labor's policies, thus making even bigger part of population support the notion of leaving.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Heathen Hammer
Ignoring results of referendum is something that would take away Labor's legitimacy and build grounds for a coup or revolution. People voted Leave because they want out of EU, not because government is pro-Union. Not to mention that Labor would scare some of those Remainers who are not fiscally illiterate enough to support Labor's policies, thus making even bigger part of population support the notion of leaving.
Remain is not a Labour position . It isn't even a left -right issue. I suggest you follow the spirit of the thread by following the example of the excellent posts spelling out the complexities of this issue.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dr. Legend
That is Europe's MO: hold one referendum after another until you get the result you want.
And for the British government to do exactly that on the issue of Brexit would destroy whatever credibility they had. True. And because Labour is committed as well, Brexit is politically impossible to back out of. If I had to place a bet I'd say they're headed for an extremely watered down version of Brexit which they'll have to pay through the nose to get. A "worst of both worlds" deal, just to get a nominal Brexit.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Adar
Personally I loath Jeremy Corbyn and even if I enjoyed Dantes in-depth description of events I disagree about Jeremy Corbyn being "nordic left". He is more similar to the moralist left wingers of the Social Democratic parties in the Nordic parties. These people carry influence in national politics but their contributions to any Nordic model are limited due to the same reasons that Jeremy Corbyn was a backbencher between 1983 and 2015. They lack the ability to compromise and only get into power in times when polarisation force more centrist politicians to collaborate with the fringes of the political spectrum.
Currently it looks to me like Theresa May wanted to grab power by both hands and in doing so she have quickly established herself as unacceptable to most of the population. The Tory Brexiteers distrust her due to her lack of transparency and blame Brexit failures on her rather than Brexit being idiotic while the centre and left rallies around the only serious alternative they have, which unfortunately happens to be Jeremy Corbyn. Are the Liberal Democrats really that bad?
That's a fair enough position mate. I think for me the concentration on economics, a mixed economy and national owned companies regulating strategic areas of infrastructure (Power, Water, Broadband, Rail) alongside a tax overhaul, creation of a national investment bank and provision of a National Education Service from birth to grave (The only sensible way to deal with the UK's unique structural issues stemming from automation and the gig economy as in essence the UK currently is a predominantly low-skilled emphasized service economy which is vulnerable to these rather radical changes over the short and mid-term as the Bank of England report summarized)- these from my stance are what makes a lot of what he is offering Social Democratic policy (Over socialism... or communism as some seem to imply) and are things that are found across Europe, but particularly Germany and the Nordics- though in fairness i understand that actually there is a fair bit of significant differences between you guys- iirc Sweden is more neo-liberalist from the 1990s, while Norway is rather more state orientated (The Sovereign oil fund they have was an amazing idea.... compare that to the UK that squandered most of our oil boom on short-term tax breaks courtesy of Thatcher that had no lasting wealth creating impact)- so i have no arguments if you place Corbyn as left-wing within a Nordic Social Democratic party, its more from the UK perspective whose right-wing economics are faltering in the face of structural issues (Social mobility has collapsed with the government not giving a hoot, home ownership and all those things i mentioned before) Corbyn offers an alternative that has a basis of working well for us potentially.
Perhaps more to the point is Labour (and arguably the SNP in fairness) are the only two currently to actually offer any kind of in-depth solution. The Conservatives briefly tried to fall back on how 'free market capitalism' helps pull people out of poverty historically...which fair point indeed, if the current political context wasn't that their economic policies had just thrown more people than ever before in recent decades into the poverty line, and are actually with universal credit fiasco killing people (According to the University of Oxford- not my words i know they can be controversial!)- so the 'status quo' rings incredibly hollow.
The Liberal democrats- are an interesting point. I was a supporter myself for a long time and they did some good it turns out in the coalition in constraining the Conservatives, alas they were awful spinners- thus all their victories the Tories claimed, and a lot of the disasters the Conservatives very smoothly blamed on them. But that doesn't avoid the fact that when in government they did put party and power before what they had been voted in for. Blank support for austerity was economically inept- particularly as we now know it was indeed an ideological choice- Osbourne the 'then' Chancellor has gone on record saying that Labour under Brown dealt with the recession incredibly well, their plan was working (Some austerity, borrowing and investment) and he almost decided to stick with it- but then saw that austerity was in his words 'an alternative' (A cynic might say the Conservatives saw an easy way to gut public services which they know electorally couldn't pass)- and i think its here (and the tuition fee fiasco) that really let them down and tarred them. They since have Vince Cable, who while i like- is tarred with that coalition brush, being the business secretary at the time. The student vote they relied on (and betrayed given the position of their manifesto) is too late to get back considering Corbyn's nabbed them. So for the foreseeable future their left floundering- taking such a hard stance against brexit also didn't really help- as Remainers would always flock to one of the big two due to the political system- Copperknickers II's analysis of this issue is very well put in regards to the globalists vs nationalists.
So yeah- Lib dems rather shot themselves in the foot- which was a shame as they more than any other party would have been able to force reform on the UK's political system- Labour for all its economic ideas will steadfastly refuse to change FPTP and allow the UK to become 'more democratic'- because the current system benefits them- same with the Conservatives. Indeed the latter are actually talking about cutting down the number of MP's by 50 and merging constituencies, which will give even less representation to regions and differing political viewpoints- its not officially stated, but i tend to agree with some commentators that the limiting of MP's is a way to 'make' FPTP 'work' again by lessening the likelihood of minority governments as now and prevent potential political instability by watering down regions.
In other news- AN AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REACHED -Removes in practice the option of a hard-brexit by tying the UK in a no-deal scenario to single market regulations, divorce bill is paying for the EU budget and not merely Britain's financial obligations as they see it- I mean essentially the UK's caved on nearly all things- we have managed to make sure that the European Court of Justice will not be indefinitely a court of last resort (duh?)...but according to Gove a few minutes ago- It will have oversight for a period of time- almost a decade in reality.
https://www.ft.com/content/4ebcc00e-dbd4-11e7-a039-c64b1c09b482
So this mornings big news- an agreement reached...and boy is it interesting.
May has effectively 'got rid' of the option for a so-called 'hard brexit'- there is now no way the UK can merely walk away and do its own thing, as we have signed up for in the case of a 'no deal' scenario abiding by all regulatory alignments to the single market indefinitely
Quote:
The deal text says if Britain and EU fail to settle the terms of their future relationship, the UK will maintain “full alignment” with key EU internal market and customs rules which underpin trade across the Irish border.
So...while not being in the single market, we shall take on all of its regulation.
For the N.Irish border issue, May has in essence kicked it down the road- the DUP have warned:
Quote:
Mrs Foster said the DUP had worked “right up until the early hours of this morning to secure changes to the document”. But she also made clear her reservations about the final text, saying it could “prejudge the outcome” of discussions among the cabinet, the Conservative party and the DUP about what a future trade relationship should look like.
But the 'no deal' scenario that has us now in essence mirroring the single market basically means their shouldn't be too much of an issue (As unlike last time with merely N.Ireland having a different system mirroring the EU- it is now the whole of the UK that will do it).
This is going to be erm...interesting to see just how she'll get this passed her own party, particularly the brexiteers. Gove has already been on this morning dodging questions about how this correlates with what the Conservative Leave group have been after. I suspect May has gone around and said 'This or Corbyn' to them to get them to toe the line.
The UK will also pay the EU a divorce bill somewhere between
Quote:
While the net estimates for this settlement vary between €40bn and €60bn, the UK pledge in effect means no EU member state will lose out as the EU’s long-term budget is discharged. Mrs May started negotiations saying Britain had no legal obligation to pay any exit bill.Although agreement contains no figures, during talks the UK estimated a net payment of €40bn-€45bn while the EU put it at around €55bn. When contingent liabilities, such as loans to Ukraine, are added the bill rises to an estimated €55.5bn-€65.5bn.
So far more than the £20 billion the UK advocated, and also not merely for our 'obligations'.
A final note Britain has:
Quote:
However, in a compromise that has alarmed some Brexiters, Britain did pledge to indefinitely pay “due regard” to relevant European court rulings on the citizen rights enshrined in the treaty.
So basically i tend to agree with the Britian's own assessment that:
Quote:
Even British officials admit the overall terms are closer to opening demands made by the EU, including the size of Britain’s exit bill, the breadth of protected citizen rights and commitments made regarding the Northern Ireland border.
The EU got its way. Now i don't think anyone here will be surprised by that honestly. What will be interesting now is the political fallout for May and the Conservatives in general- Will her own party accept this (Bearing in mind indeed, even yesterday Mogg's chastisement of his own leader to sticking to their red lines- while arguably this could be said to fulfill that- in practice its rendered a 'no deal-walk away' no longer an option and has drawn all over those lines)- moreover will those among the public who voted leave accept this. If we're honest this is very much thus far going to be the so-called 'soft brexit'. So will be interesting. Do the brexiteers fear Corbyn more than they want to stick to their principles? I think the fact so much has been kicked down the road is going to be an issue- as well as already differing interpretations of what this means being bandied around- while May argues that we won't be in the single market- leaked EU documents have stated that we will be during the transition- i think for May its a lot due to the fact that it will only be just before Christmas when the Cabinet all sits down and actually discusses for the first time what they want from brexit and what the future UK relationship will look like- talks that again have been kicked down the road much like the Irish border due to how divisive they are within the government.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
For those blasting the May government fro sitting still, you may now blast the May government for doing a deal with the EU to move a step closer to exiting the EU.
Quote:
The bargain came as May compromised on the biggest challenges facing Britain during its split. A disagreement over borders between Northern Ireland and Ireland
nearly derailed the deal this week. British factions have also tangled over the amount of money they will have to pay as they leave the European Union as well as who will guarantee the rights of E.U. citizens after the divorce.
On those issues and a host of others, Britain has been forced to capitulate to the European Union after saying earlier this year that it held the upper hand in the negotiations. Instead, British negotiators have found a largely united European Union that sees little need to give in to London's demands.
article continued via link https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...D=ansmsnnews11
My personal guess is that they should have made a clean break period. But then I am an American and I dislike the multilateral agreements in general.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NorseThing
For those blasting the May government fro sitting still, you may now blast the May government for doing a deal with the EU to move a step closer to exiting the EU.
Indeed. All that capitulating and being stabbed in the back by Arlene Foster must have been very tiring. I'm sure her hard Brexiteer colleagues will be delighted that she's effectively just guaranteed the EU that we will have a soft Brexit. There are two things that might happen now:
1. Theresa May has a meeting with her Cabinet, she tells them she's angling for a soft Brexit with de facto continued membership of the single market and customs union. Boris and co back down and bend the knee, and give Dame Theresa of Winterhold, mighty vanquisher of Brussels, free reign to make Britain another Norway, paying the EU for access to the market without having any say on EU law and policy. There may be some wiggle room for concessions to the hard Brexit wing, but May will still be out on her ear come 2019 and most likely Boris will end up prime minister, at least during the runup until the next election when he might be defeated by Jeremy Corbyn.
2. The same meeting goes ahead, and Boris and co tell her to get stuffed and inform her that Boris is officially challenging her to a leadership election because she has betrayed the will of the people. He tries everything possible to negotiate a magic fairytale unicorn-land Brexit where we renege on most of the guarantees in this week's agreement (which is not legally binding and which explicitly says everything in it is subject to a successful negotiation including the Irish border guarantees). Boris withdraws us from the process when the EU tell him he can't have his cake and eat it, and we have no deal Farage-style hard Brexit.
Number 2 would be as disastrous as Number 1 is unlikely. Laura Kuenssberg seems to be of the opinion that the Tories are rallying around May and have realised they can't get what they want and so her position is secure and a soft Brexit is now acceptable to the vast majority of Tories. I highly, highly doubt this is the case, because when Leave voters realised they have been conned and nothing is actually going to change as regards immigration and the money we send to Brussels, they will demolish the Tories, so there's a lot of pressure on hard Brexit MPs even beyond the crippling weight of their delusions about the potential for Brexit to be a success.
Personally I think that we're going to see someone or something come out of the woodwork by the time the next election rolls around that will be a total gamechanger. I can't say exactly what, but a lot of MPs are keeping a low profile until all the chaos of Brexit negotiations blows over, and once everything is finalised in one direction or the other people are going to come out on full attack mode about all the other issues that Brexit has been deflecting attention from.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
That's not how May will spin things. She will cling to the interpretation that the fact that it's agreed there's no deal until the whole thing is agreed actually means the UK got what it wanted all along, which was to include trade deals in the negotiations from the start, instead of settling the divorce first, and only then start talking about the new relationship like EU wanted. That might help keep the hard brexiteers quiet. But it's all postponing crunch time.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Muizer
That's not how May will spin things. She will cling to the interpretation that the fact that it's agreed there's no deal until the whole thing is agreed actually means the UK got what it wanted all along, which was to include trade deals in the negotiations from the start, instead of settling the divorce first, and only then start talking about the new relationship like EU wanted. That might help keep the hard brexiteers quiet. But it's all postponing crunch time.
I think the key issue was the money. The EU must have surely known that the other issues, especially the Irish border, could not reasonably be confirmed before negotiations had taken place.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NorseThing
My personal guess is that they should have made a clean break period. But then I am an American and I dislike the multilateral agreements in general.
The Northern Irish border has been used as a way of keeping the UK in EU "Full Alignment" is in effect that Northern Ireland will remain within the Single Market. And as NI will not be separated from the rest of the UK , thanks to the DUP, it means that the UK will remain within the Singe Market not have a trading relationship with it from outside. We will need to comply with all of its requirements, including open borders but without the benefit of changing these requirements because we won't be part of the EU. Not only that, but because we are bound up so closely to the EU Single Market, we won't be able to negotiate any trade deals with any country outside the EU. Which presumably is the reason is that none have been attempted so far and Mr Davis hasn't commissioned any detailed studies!!
The British people that voted for Brexit have been "sold a pup" by the Conservatives, something that may have been the intention from the inception of the referendum rather than making a detailed case as part of an election. The result of this so called "Soft Brexit" is that the City can break free of any new regulations on financial services which come about from the EU moving towards a federal model. However, much else about the detrimental impacts of membership will remain the same, be it that the British public will no longer have a voice in the EU.
A complete scam!
We adhere to European Laws, as well as any new ones created post Brexit for at least 8 years if not indefinitely. We adhere to the Customs union and it's existing regulatory framework. We adhere to the EU's security policy and proceed with its plans of military unification. And all this whilst we have no representation within Brussels and continue to pay them billions of pounds in a divorce settlement, whilst public service budgets in this Country continue to be cut.:disgust:
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
The British people that voted for Brexit have been "sold a pup" by the Conservatives, something that may have been the intention from the inception of the referendum rather than making a detailed case as part of an election.
Being critical of politicians is fine, but I don't like the innocent victim attitude. The electorate put the conservatives in power (sort of) and voted "yes" to an idea based on emotion rather than any reliable insight into the consequences.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Muizer
Being critical of politicians is fine, but I don't like the innocent victim attitude. The electorate put the conservatives in power (sort of) and voted "yes" to an idea based on emotion rather than any reliable insight into the consequences.
That's a good establishment way to spin it, "its all the fault of the dumb voters who put their cross in the wrong box, never mind there is always a way to give them a second chance" But perhaps, just perhaps these voters never really had a choice anyway and the referendum was a clever piece of manipulation, because the political establishment couldn't be as dumb as the voters, right!
Here is one plan Mr Davis and his colleagues are sure not to have forgotten
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Its not my fault my vote comes back to bite me, why am i not surprised. Nothing of what happens now is a surprise to remainers, so brexiters dont get to play dumb. Own your actions.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Remainers seem to be blind (some by choice, some by ignorance) to the fact that the problem is with UK's political establishment and its ineptitude, rather then with nation's wise and rational choice to abandon the sinking ship while they can.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Heathen Hammer
Remainers seem to be blind (some by choice, some by ignorance) to the fact that the problem is with UK's political establishment and its ineptitude, rather then with nation's wise and rational choice to abandon the sinking ship while they can.
You can hardly celebrate the Brexit as the most rational and smartest of choices. They will end up depending on continental Europe just the same without having an official say regarding the matters at hand.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
swabian
You can hardly celebrate the Brexit as the most rational and smartest of choices. They will end up depending on continental Europe just the same without having an official say regarding the matters at hand.
Europe itself isn't likely to go anywhere, and so is then opportunity to establish trade agreements. But EU is quite unstable. With the utmost disregard for the interests of European population and native Europeans by pro-EU politicians and EU leadership, EU becoming thing of the past is in majority's best interest.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Heathen Hammer
Europe itself isn't likely to go anywhere, and so is then opportunity to establish trade agreements.
What does that mean? You think there will be an alternative structure for trade, i guess. There will be. It will be called diplomacy and it will root in the times when countries woundrously survived without the EU.
Quote:
But EU is quite unstable. With the utmost disregard for the interests of European population and native Europeans by pro-EU politicians and EU leadership, EU becoming thing of the past is in majority's best interest.
You say they have the utmost disregard for our interests? How can you be so cruel and insensitive, your sayings actually might cost the job of some learned 'Europolist'.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
That's a good establishment way to spin it, "its all the fault of the dumb voters who put their cross in the wrong box
You know you can put your own box on the ballot if you're not happy with the ones that are there. If you don't own your democracy, you kind of deserve to be bamboozled.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
swabian
What does that mean? You think there will be an alternative structure for trade, i guess. There will be. It will be called diplomacy and it will root in the times when countries woundrously survived without the EU.
.
Sadly, UK diplomacy rests with one Boris Johnson. I need say no more.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
god save the queen, and the rest of you poor sods.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
swabian
You can hardly celebrate the Brexit as the most rational and smartest of choices. They will end up depending on continental Europe just the same without having an official say regarding the matters at hand.
It's almost as if you've fallen for the rethoric that EU = European Continent and its Citizens and History.
Take some time seeing European Continent as separate from EU (can be surprisingly difficult due to all the propaganda flooding the mind) but if doing this for long enough, the Brexit will seem a completly different thing.
It was a middle finger towards EU Elites, not towards european citizens.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
swabian
You can hardly celebrate the Brexit as the most rational and smartest of choices. They will end up depending on continental Europe just the same without having an official say regarding the matters at hand.
Interesting statement, given that the EU itself is completely dependent on other countries (not least Russia) for energy. One long fuel embargo from Russia would be enough to wreak havoc on all european industries.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
May just lost a crucial vote on the Brexit Bill in parliament. She's in a whole heap of trouble now. Doesn't necessarily mean Brexit won't go ahead but makes it a whole lot easier for parliament to sabotage things. I think hard Brexit is pretty much off the table now, the final bill will need to be scrutinised and agreed on by the whole government including rebels and the anti-hard brexit camp can hold the hard brexiteers to ransom.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Copperknickers II
May just lost a crucial vote on the Brexit Bill in parliament. She's in a whole heap of trouble now. Doesn't necessarily mean Brexit won't go ahead but makes it a whole lot easier for parliament to sabotage things. I think hard Brexit is pretty much off the table now, the final bill will need to be scrutinised and agreed on by the whole government including rebels and the anti-hard brexit camp can hold the hard brexiteers to ransom.
I assume you are referring to this vote as reported in CNN (I know there are other sources)http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/13/europe...ote/index.html
I have and will continue to say that a clean break and then picking up the pieces would have been easier. I am a bit confused how demanding the parliament have a final say would be a problem though. This is a treaty. I know in the USA the US Senate has something to say about treaties and I would hope the same would be true for the legislative bodies in all countries.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
british legislative bodies can do whatever, they could even still cancel the whole nonsense. but the people who still hold the majorities (yet) have neither the balls nor the inclination.
once the tories go down, as they will, they will have collectively pulled a farage (only not as voluntarily) and leave the whole mess to those who come after.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Copperknickers II
May just lost a crucial vote on the Brexit Bill in parliament. She's in a whole heap of trouble now. Doesn't necessarily mean Brexit won't go ahead but makes it a whole lot easier for parliament to sabotage things. I think hard Brexit is pretty much off the table now, the final bill will need to be scrutinised and agreed on by the whole government including rebels and the anti-hard brexit camp can hold the hard brexiteers to ransom.
Does nothing of the sort, we leave the EU deal or no deal. In fact tonight probably made the prospect of the latter a great deal more likely.
However, the defeat of the Government in Parliament, was of benefit to the people not either Hard Brexiteers or Pro-Remainers. It is right that Parliament have a voice in any agreement, that is one of the principle reasons we are leaving the EU, because it doesn't allow for this type of public scrutiny and accountability. If MP's decide to thwart the process and abuse their right of influence, then they shall face the consequence during the next election.
What I was totally against is the behavior of this Conservative administration in handling the whole process of Brexit and the secrecy that negotiations have been carried out with Brussels, it is unfitting of good government. Quite plainly a deal was struck last week the precise details of which the British people still remain in the dark about but which the EU want to make legally binding, and that is plainly unacceptable.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
I think the real issue with last nights vote (which as others have said is important as it provides some semblance of democratic process regarding brexit- though there is actually a long way to go before the Governments brexit is 'democratic'- they are still trying to roll out the Henry VIII powers without proper safeguards- the concession for a scrutiny committee has no teeth as it would be advisory only and can be ignored, still obstructing on impact assessments etc- but its an important step.) is though that it exposes the idiocy of making brexit party-political... we have this morning the Conservative party in very real trouble of a meltdown as brexiteers round on their fellows flinging around 'traitor' and 'will of the people' and calling for their deselection... which is dumb as the government doesn't have a majority so every MP counts. The Government have implied at a later day their going to try and overturn this, though now they are not sure of winning next weeks vote which is putting the exit date into law (Again rather dumb from a national perspective as anything can happen in negotiations- but the party-political rears its head as if Corbyn gets in next year, it would leave Labour to take the blame for the Tories mess with no chance of moving around it, so the Conservative cock ups so far will in their view be evened out by an arbitrary timeline that sabotages any incoming government).
But yeah, i don't know when the penny is going to drop that one parties vision of brexit and post-brexit (This goes for all sides of the House) has no mandate given both the brexit vote was across-party and the general election gave no one an electoral mandate- their needs to be consensus, compromise and a national vision (Not using brexit as a way of implementing a hard-on for full Singapore deregulation or full socialism that they know will never be approved by the electorate if it was a manifesto promise).
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dante Von Hespburg
I think the real issue with last nights vote (which as others have said is important as it provides some semblance of democratic process regarding brexit- though there is actually a long way to go before the Governments brexit is 'democratic'- they are still trying to roll out the Henry VIII powers without proper safeguards- the concession for a scrutiny committee has no teeth as it would be advisory only and can be ignored, still obstructing on impact assessments etc- but its an important step.) is though that it exposes the idiocy of making brexit party-political... we have this morning the Conservative party in very real trouble of a meltdown as brexiteers round on their fellows flinging around 'traitor' and 'will of the people' and calling for their deselection... which is dumb as the government doesn't have a majority so every MP counts. The Government have implied at a later day their going to try and overturn this, though now they are not sure of winning next weeks vote which is putting the exit date into law (Again rather dumb from a national perspective as anything can happen in negotiations- but the party-political rears its head as if Corbyn gets in next year, it would leave Labour to take the blame for the Tories mess with no chance of moving around it, so the Conservative cock ups so far will in their view be evened out by an arbitrary timeline that sabotages any incoming government).
It seems that from now on "Appeaser May" is going to find it difficult getting any deal through Parliament no matter how soft, given the intention of many sitting on the opposition benches to thwart the whole process. The stigmatization of a number of Conservative MPs yesterday, the cooperation of which she depends on, seems extremely counter productive. The life span of the current government and especially her tenure at no 10 has been shortened considerably by it.
Headlines by the Mail like this are very unhelpful for a paper that wants to keep Jeremy Corbyn from being PM.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/320/cp...99975_mail.jpg
Quote:
But yeah, i don't know when the penny is going to drop that one parties vision of brexit and post-brexit (This goes for all sides of the House) has no mandate given both the brexit vote was across-party and the general election gave no one an electoral mandate- their needs to be consensus, compromise and a national vision (Not using brexit as a way of implementing a hard-on for full Singapore deregulation or full socialism that they know will never be approved by the electorate if it was a manifesto promise).
The negotiations with the EU currently taking place are being done so to obtain a mutually agreed departure from the EU and establish a new relationship. BUT they are not necessary to leave the EU. In the referendum there were two questions do you wish to remain or leave the European Union, not what negotiated settlement would you want.
For this reason, it is important that the government in charge of negotiating any such settlement, be as open and honest as possible with the British public, which so far they have not.
Quote:
Speaker criticises David Davis over release of Brexit papers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42350892
Mr Davis released an 850-page dossier of information outlining the economic impact of Brexit on 58 different sectors of the economy to MPs - but not the public - after a binding vote in the Commons last month.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
It seems that from now on "Appeaser May" is going to find it difficult getting any deal through Parliament no matter how soft, given the intention of many sitting on the opposition benches to thwart the whole process. The stigmatization of a number of Conservative MPs yesterday, the cooperation of which she depends on, seems extremely counter productive. The life span of the current government and especially her tenure at no 10 has been shortened considerably by it.
Headlines by the Mail like this are very unhelpful for a paper that wants to keep Jeremy Corbyn from being PM.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/320/cp...99975_mail.jpg
I find the Daily Mail and other media rhetoric about this and previous cases rather... silly honestly. As you point out its counterproductive to any actual aim of keeping those they support in power. I think though its basically that print media, particularly the Mail, Sun, Mirror et al are seeing their influence decline on the left and right quite significantly- the last GE rather showed how important Social Media has become to politics. Again like or hate, Labour's use of social media platforms to circumvent what i think we all agree was a rather hostile press- even from the Mirror and Guardian to him, exposed just how much their influence has declined on the electorate- so it seems their getting brasher and louder to try and stem the loss of importance perhaps.
Or they could just be dumb papers :P.
But as to the Government, i genuinely do not believe how much they mishandled it. All it would have technically taken was compromise earlier on- accept this had to happen and their would not have been this rebellion and loss. Its like May and co forgot about their own parliamentary weakness in not having their own majority (Perhaps like earlier forgetting the DUP?)- they really did mess up.
Quote:
The negotiations with the EU currently taking place are being done so to obtain a mutually agreed departure from the EU and establish a new relationship. BUT they are not necessary to leave the EU. In the referendum there were two questions do you wish to remain or leave the European Union, not what negotiated settlement would you want.
For this reason, it is important that the government in charge of negotiating any such settlement, be as open and honest as possible with the British public, which so far they have not.
Indeed, though i probably am not explaining myself properly- I'm not merely talking about the negotiations, but the structures of the UK that emerges- the issue with the Henry VIII powers is that currently their not just limited to brexit, and apply to changing all sorts of primary (Which usually require Parliamentary approval and a vote) and not merely secondary laws, through using secondary legislation to do so- without any sort of scrutiny from anyone- and that's immediately a long-term structural change. So doing things like radically altering working rights, environmental protections taxes et al at the same time as brexit is happening and that all coming into force regardless of the type of negotiated deal we get (be it hard or soft) is a huge concern- particularly when their are large lobbies of influential MP's who are aiming to do exactly this. Brexit is being used potentially as a piggyback to changing how the UK essentially 'works' without any kind of public or parliamentary say- merely various small factions trying to push forward their 'dream UK utopia'. Its why the Singapore crash-out is not merely a negotiating position/potential consequence- but actually is one being pushed by Moggs and co under brexit, but as a seperate domestic front on the back of brexit-devised legislation.
This is why i'm worried, as of course no doubt if Labour were in alone, they would be talking about a Nordic model with larger socialist elements or some such, and using brexit 'powers' to deliver that without needing to worry about electoral consequences or parliamentary scrutiny. In broader terms i tend to agree with Nye and Wolfgangs current assessments that we're led on all sides for the first time in quite a while by ideologues as opposed to political pragmatists- which is both good and bad, but the trouble is that these ideologically led policy groups will want to radically alter the country from an economic and cultural perspective and are willing to use whatever means they have at their disposal- The 'Legatus' group (Far-right free market, deregualtion libertarianist) has been a key lobby for Conservative policy of late. So brexit in a way here is only half the picture, and half the danger- but is entirely the 'means' (in the government as you rightly say being so secretive) for bringing about these wished for changes by lobbies.
To give a more concise (I hope) example- May...sort of got in at the last GE on a platform of increased regulation, tackling wealth inequality and helping the 'JAMS'- now reality of course as the social mobility commitee disaster shows- none of this is happening. But a Moggs fronted faction of the Tories who are influenced by lobbies like Legatus are using brexit, the negotiations but more importantly the legislative powers the government is trying to take to keep the public and parliament in the dark about as tools to create their own vision which is the complete opposite of this- they do not have any kind of legitimate mandate to do so, but brexit provides the tools to circumvent that potentially- this is why i think its important that Parliament and public are indeed informed, but also are given greater say to counteract such powerful interests(made so by backing, but also how weak May is politically in regard to brexit) by removing the fact that in essence May is a punch-bag- which protects in many ways these groups from any electoral consequences and also emboldens them in exerting influence, by drawing all such decisions on working rights and economic structures (which are not negotiation related, but for some reason the government think should be able to be changed by ministers through secondary legislation- with no limits on their remit, and little to no actual scrutiny) etc into a public frame.
If that makes sense, i might not be honestly :P Its been a long day and Panto season is downright exhausting.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dante Von Hespburg
I find the Daily Mail and other media rhetoric about this and previous cases rather... silly honestly. As you point out its counterproductive to any actual aim of keeping those they support in power. I think though its basically that print media, particularly the Mail, Sun, Mirror et al are seeing their influence decline on the left and right quite significantly- the last GE rather showed how important Social Media has become to politics. Again like or hate, Labour's use of social media platforms to circumvent what i think we all agree was a rather hostile press- even from the Mirror and Guardian to him, exposed just how much their influence has declined on the electorate- so it seems their getting brasher and louder to try and stem the loss of importance perhaps. Or they could just be dumb papers :P.
The newspapers have a problem with declining circulation and are desperate to remain relevant to their readers. But lets not forget that all are pushing a political agenda of their owners and I have no doubt that was the reason the Mail undertook such a provocative headline which is bound to stir up animosity. Quite why a Conservative leaning party would want to demonise 11 Conservative MPs rather than the opposition parties who were responsible for mounting a covert campaign to delay and thwart Brexit, I leave up to you to decide. For me, it is a clear case of attempting to cover the duplicity in the present government with Brussels in agreeing a direction in negotiating Brexit which the majority that voted for it, would not agree with.
Social media is indeed becoming a lot more popular in disseminating news than it was an Labour have been more successful in this than the Conservatives. But viewing a Youtube channel on politics yesterday, which attempts to place some light on many of the underlying motivations behind the political process. I can't but help thinking that these channels simply enforce our own cynical opinions rather than influence those with only a casual interest in politics. In that, a headline slotted in the Sun newspaper between the winner of Bog Brother and Prince Harry's relationships, is probably still more likely to shape opinions.
Quote:
But as to the Government, i genuinely do not believe how much they mishandled it. All it would have technically taken was compromise earlier on- accept this had to happen and their would not have been this rebellion and loss. Its like May and co forgot about their own parliamentary weakness in not having their own majority (Perhaps like earlier forgetting the DUP?)- they really did mess up.
The Government have truly messed up in these negotiations big time! But I can't help thinking that "Appeaser" May breathed a sigh of relief when the vote was declared in favour of giving Parliament a greater influence in the negotiating process. She knows the agreement she is wanting, is not what the British people want and this easily passes on the blame to those in Parliament who have already demonstrated their intention to make a Brexit softer than a downy pillow laid across Jean-Claude Juncker's chest. In old squawky's words today in Brussels - "For the next stage we will be focusing on the transition agreement. My top priority is Britain's deep and special relationship with the EU"!? Seemingly no mention of trade deal then. How can you value a transition agreement without a done deal on the end state, especially relating to trade. I wonder that, and so do over 60 million Brits!:hmm:
Quote:
Indeed, though i probably am not explaining myself properly- I'm not merely talking about the negotiations, but the structures of the UK that emerges- the issue with the Henry VIII powers is that currently their not just limited to brexit, and apply to changing all sorts of primary (Which usually require Parliamentary approval and a vote) and not merely secondary laws, through using secondary legislation to do so- without any sort of scrutiny from anyone- and that's immediately a long-term structural change. So doing things like radically altering working rights, environmental protections taxes et al at the same time as brexit is happening and that all coming into force regardless of the type of negotiated deal we get (be it hard or soft) is a huge concern- particularly when their are large lobbies of influential MP's who are aiming to do exactly this. Brexit is being used potentially as a piggyback to changing how the UK essentially 'works' without any kind of public or parliamentary say- merely various small factions trying to push forward their 'dream UK utopia'. Its why the Singapore crash-out is not merely a negotiating position/potential consequence- but actually is one being pushed by Moggs and co under brexit, but as a seperate domestic front on the back of brexit-devised legislation.
This is why i'm worried, as of course no doubt if Labour were in alone, they would be talking about a Nordic model with larger socialist elements or some such, and using brexit 'powers' to deliver that without needing to worry about electoral consequences or parliamentary scrutiny. In broader terms i tend to agree with Nye and Wolfgangs current assessments that we're led on all sides for the first time in quite a while by ideologues as opposed to political pragmatists- which is both good and bad, but the trouble is that these ideologically led policy groups will want to radically alter the country from an economic and cultural perspective and are willing to use whatever means they have at their disposal- The 'Legatus' group (Far-right free market, deregualtion libertarianist) has been a key lobby for Conservative policy of late. So brexit in a way here is only half the picture, and half the danger- but is entirely the 'means' (in the government as you rightly say being so secretive) for bringing about these wished for changes by lobbies.
To give a more concise (I hope) example- May...sort of got in at the last GE on a platform of increased regulation, tackling wealth inequality and helping the 'JAMS'- now reality of course as the social mobility commitee disaster shows- none of this is happening. But a Moggs fronted faction of the Tories who are influenced by lobbies like Legatus are using brexit, the negotiations but more importantly the legislative powers the government is trying to take to keep the public and parliament in the dark about as tools to create their own vision which is the complete opposite of this- they do not have any kind of legitimate mandate to do so, but brexit provides the tools to circumvent that potentially- this is why i think its important that Parliament and public are indeed informed, but also are given greater say to counteract such powerful interests(made so by backing, but also how weak May is politically in regard to brexit) by removing the fact that in essence May is a punch-bag- which protects in many ways these groups from any electoral consequences and also emboldens them in exerting influence, by drawing all such decisions on working rights and economic structures (which are not negotiation related, but for some reason the government think should be able to be changed by ministers through secondary legislation- with no limits on their remit, and little to no actual scrutiny) etc into a public frame.
If that makes sense, i might not be honestly :P Its been a long day and Panto season is downright exhausting.
I think there is an aspect of Brexit that so far unsurprisingly, I haven't heard in the media, and that is the need to reform the political process and Parliament in particular. A great many people who voted Brexit, did so because of a annoyance at the political class who they believed weren't representative and unless more positive change comes in this direction the distance between Parliament and the people will continue to grow. Any government who attempts to push through greater control and take away powers away from Parliament will be myopic in the extreme, if they think that this will be supported, even swept along with something as emotive as leaving the European Union. That is even with the efforts of papers like the Mail. Although with many Brexiteers, it seems to have worked so far in making the enemy those who would make Brexit accountable to Parliament. Likewise, any attempt to use Parliament to subvert the will of the people by undermining the outcome of the referendum, will also entrench many people low opinion of politicians in general.
Exhausting!? are you in a panto Dante, Widow Twankey perhaps? :laughter: With a liking of Pantomime and politics, you certainly should be seeking a career in Westminster.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
The newspapers have a problem with declining circulation and are desperate to remain relevant to their readers. But lets not forget that all are pushing a political agenda of their owners and I have no doubt that was the reason the Mail undertook such a provocative headline which is bound to stir up animosity. Quite why a Conservative leaning party would want to demonise 11 Conservative MPs rather than the opposition parties who were responsible for mounting a covert campaign to delay and thwart Brexit, I leave up to you to decide. For me, it is a clear case of attempting to cover the duplicity in the present government with Brussels in agreeing a direction in negotiating Brexit which the majority that voted for it, would not agree with.
Social media is indeed becoming a lot more popular in disseminating news than it was an Labour have been more successful in this than the Conservatives. But viewing a Youtube channel on politics yesterday, which attempts to place some light on many of the underlying motivations behind the political process. I can't but help thinking that these channels simply enforce our own cynical opinions rather than influence those with only a casual interest in politics. In that, a headline slotted in the Sun newspaper between the winner of Bog Brother and Prince Harry's relationships, is probably still more likely to shape opinions.
That's a fair point here and indeed a possibility. Honestly the fractious nature of the Conservative party has made it uncharacteristically murky of which papers are supporting which 'faction'. I know it was leaked that Murdoch and Gove were once more a 'thing'- hence partly why Gove is being media rehabilitated to be wholesome to the public (And putting him in environment i dare say helps, as while its a 'non entity' position- it also is one that politically in terms of public image, unless you are a moron, your always going to get a good reception). But yeah, its unclear what exactly is going on, a big part of it stemming from the fact their is no 'successor' candidate yet on the horizon, so perhaps a lot of the press on both sides are unsure exactly what to attack and not- lack of dogs for the fight in essence :P
With social media, i can't say honestly. We both agree that its growing in importance, and i get your point about 'echo-chamber' syndrome (Though of course isn't that also how our papers work? We only buy those we agree with?). Though also i would say that Labours facebook ads and online presence and also the fact that they had their activists run rampant over their Conservative counterpart's pages had quite a big impact among those under 45 voters, have a fair degree of influence in all those under that age bracket 'swinging their way'. I found it quite interesting indeed, to look at Labours pages (The echo-chamber :P), but i notice there was no 'dissent'...but then looking across at say Theresa May's Facebook page, or the Conservative Party twitter/Facebook and the comments there would be full of dissent, people debating, lots of posts outright 'flaming the government'- a fair few posting links to a Labour page of some kind. I suspect that has quite a big impact on those perusing the Tory pages, and indeed on undecided/politically nonchalant who might only be perusing to get some idea of what the election is about.
The Conservative attempt to set up their own online 'youth wing' (Funded by the party directly and led by a few MP's) to counter this and build up their online presence, has thus far not really delivered results. Within a few days they were marred in scandal being called out for joking about 'gassing chavs', and then also something about bullying- so it rather fell apart. I think the issue is that the Conservatives do not understand that an online media presence (be it webpages, activists, 'trolls' etc) is not something you can 'force' from the top down- you have to build it from the grass roots. Something they always struggle at.
But yeah, i think the next GE will be interesting in the social regard to see not only if Labours lead in this realm was temporary (I suspect it isn't) but also the extent of its ability to sustain support as traditional media once allowed someone to do- i think the differences between signing up to a newspaper subscription of sustained exposure and randomly coming across pro/anti political articles is considerable perhaps indeed.
Quote:
The Government have truly messed up in these negotiations big time! But I can't help thinking that "Appeaser" May breathed a sigh of relief when the vote was declared in favour of giving Parliament a greater influence in the negotiating process. She knows the agreement she is wanting, is not what the British people want and this easily passes on the blame to those in Parliament who have already demonstrated their intention to make a Brexit softer than a downy pillar laid across Jean-Claude Juncker's chest.
Perhaps, though i couldn't say due to Davis when delivering the governments official line on it went into...meltdown? His responses did not make much sense at all- going from pretending as if the vote had not happened, to now saying 'difficult with the timescale' to 'we accept this defeat' to 'we'll fight it'. May hasn't been much better. So i'm unsure if their welcoming it or not- you do have a good point though in it providing a cushion for blame, in which case i'd expect them to put up token remorse and 'carry on chaps'- though again can't really gauge this as it appears they haven't decided yet!
Again interesting today- Davis is still on about a 'Canada plus plus plus' deal making sure finance is the crux of it... despite that not really being within the realm of possibility without accepting single market terms. So much for managing expectations i think.
Quote:
I think there is an aspect of Brexit that so far unsurprisingly, I haven't heard in the media, and that is the need to reform the political process and Parliament in particular. A great many people who voted Brexit, did so because of a annoyance at the political class who they believed weren't representative and unless more positive change comes in this direction the distance between Parliament and the people will continue to grow. Any government who attempts to push through greater control and take away powers away from Parliament will be myopic in the extreme, if they think that this will be supported, even swept along with something as emotive as leaving the European Union. That is even with the efforts of papers like the Mail. Although with many Brexiteers, it seems to have worked so far in making the enemy those who would make Brexit accountable to Parliament. Likewise, any attempt to use Parliament to subvert the will of the people by undermining the outcome of the referendum, will also entrench many people low opinion of politicians in general.
I can't agree enough with you about the need for political reform in the UK. Its my one major disappointment regarding Labour, who make noises about reform, but no firm commitments as they would not benefit from it. The big two will never seriously engage with the idea and the smaller parties have very little hope of ever making big enough waves. I hope you are right though in that the public would not tolerate an implementation of the factional plans regarding using brexit for structural change- but again as you said about the Papers and brexiteers, there are also a very vocal section of the populace from both sides who seem to think that ministers being given Henry VIII powers (without a deadline of when they end i might add) is a great thing, that indeed Parliament is a bulwark for Remain/Leave and should be excluded. Its the fact that in essence things you think the citizenry should be rightly wary of, their actually apathetic or indeed supportive of, and that's when i start worrying that yep- a small faction, influenced by powerful lobbies will be quite easily able to use the brexit smokescreen to reshape the UK with little resistance and no scrutiny- i can even see the arguments 'to make brexit a success and increase productivity and provide housing for all we will remove the necessity for properties to be 'fit for human habitation' and other red-tape regarding needless extra security and safety specifications'- Of course if i wasn't being facetious i'm pretty sure even i could spin that in a way that would have people going 'yeah, that's right'.
Quote:
Exhausting!? are you in a panto Dante, Widow Twankey perhaps? :laughter: With a liking of Pantomime and politics, you certainly should be seeking a career in Westminster
Haha i am indeed! Currently take whatever work i can get, so over Christmas i have the illustrious role of 'Chorus 1' My acting career is reaching new heights, though i'm pretty sure i only got the part due to affirmative action, i'm the token hetro :laughter:. But seriously all i can say is that i'm glad i'm a student predominantly and didn't try making acting a 'real' career- as those guys are suffering badly right now due to the current mentality of 'stay in my role until i die' that has afflicted the west-end.
But heck yes i think that i could make me a consummate politician, i can adeptly do a song and dance about nothing of relevance AND talk a load of twaddle:P, and currently i do it all for meager pay by comparison! Not sure why May hasn't come begging yet.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ioannis76
Interesting statement, given that the EU itself is completely dependent on other countries (not least Russia) for energy. One long fuel embargo from Russia would be enough to wreak havoc on all european industries.
And thats why EU "elite" is pushing for a rapid adoptation of renewable energies, and they have done wonders so far.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
dont worry about russia, ivan needs to sell to someone.
here, if i recall we pissed off poland to build this:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dogukan
And thats why EU "elite" is pushing for a rapid adoptation of renewable energies, and they have done wonders so far.
I'm not sure if one can support heavy industries with renewable energy sources at this point. Even so, I think that Germany would only rely on wind energy as far as renewables go.
Quote:
dont worry about russia, ivan needs to sell to someone.
Ivan needs to sell to someone, but if the EU pushes Ivan too far, an embargo would be an interesting alternative to war. Any measures are likely to hurt both ways anyway, but I do think that shutting down German industry is going to do wonders for Germany politically. Already, the AfD was rising with no economic crisis in Germany. Imagine millions of unemployed Germans, watching "immigrants" enjoying benefits... maybe they'd start voting with their brain, not their "feelz".
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ioannis76
I'm not sure if one can support heavy industries with renewable energy sources at this point. Even so, I think that Germany would only rely on wind energy as far as renewables go.
Energy is stored just the same.
You can have a look at it here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewa...European_Union
Doesn't matter if energy comes from coal, or gas, or oil or wind turbine, or solar panels.
The problem with the renewable energies thus far was their low efficiency and high costs. A balance that is changing extremely rapidly.
Unsuprisingly, Russia is quiet against these changes because by the time their biggest consumer markets switch to renewable energies, a huge portion of their exports, which are primary goods will decline. Its bad for an already declining and outdated, un-innovative economy. (they did relatively ok this quarter by a 2% growth but I mean they are a middle-income country)
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ioannis76
I'm not sure if one can support heavy industries with renewable energy sources at this point. Even so, I think that Germany would only rely on wind energy as far as renewables go.
Ivan needs to sell to someone, but if the EU pushes Ivan too far, an embargo would be an interesting alternative to war. Any measures are likely to hurt both ways anyway, but I do think that shutting down German industry is going to do wonders for Germany politically. Already, the AfD was rising with no economic crisis in Germany. Imagine millions of unemployed Germans, watching "immigrants" enjoying benefits... maybe they'd start voting with their brain, not their "feelz".
:laughter:you are so bloody scared of dirty foreigners, you never voted with anything but your "feelz".
the AfD will make anything into a scare, and even a real crisis got them barely double digits. once the ruckus has died down, the idiots voting for them will realize they cant get anything done. not that they could, they will never be in the government, but that didnt register with their followers when they voted, so why should it then. theyll go back where they crawled from.
the russians are already suffering from sanctions, they cant piss off their buisness partners in the west too. germany can get resources elsewhere, russia is short on friends. so is britain btw.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Gina Miller, who is always right about such things Brexit (the Supreme Court says so Mrs May!) now beleives that any withdrawal agreement, and any future trade agreement replacing the existing treaties will require a new referendum under the European Act 2011. Sounds fair enough , its clear that the Tories entered this undertaking without a clue what was required of them. A referendum would force both leave and remain to argue their case on observable facts rather than , as HannibalExMachina describes, with feelz.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...-a8107931.html
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
You can't just host referendums until political establishment receives the result it desires. Anyone who would support such notion clearly doesn't care about actual democracy.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Heathen Hammer
You can't just host referendums until political establishment receives the result it desires. Anyone who would support such notion clearly doesn't care about actual democracy.
You don't get it. The law may suggest that a referendum is required regardless of the result the political establishment desires. It's called holding politicians to account, the very basis of democracy.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mongrel
You don't get it. The law may suggest that a referendum is required regardless of the result the political establishment desires. It's called holding politicians to account, the very basis of democracy.
It's absolutely nothing about democracy, its about Gina Miler the establishment sock puppet, doing her best to thwart Brexit. Where was this defender of the Constitution, when so much of our law making was surrendered to Brussels. Did we get a say, Noooo!! Did we get a say when the trade organization that the British people voted on to join(the EEC) morphed into pan European government body the EU, Noooo!!
Referendums are not formally part of our constitutional government anyway, so I doubt very much that any Supreme Court can require it. The next shenanigans to be played out, will rather be the opposition parties, together with their new found friends on the Tory back benches, attempting to kick Brexit further down the road by voting against a set date for leaving. Given our PM already seems to have capitulated on this important aspect. It looks like Appeser May is either sympathetic to their objectives or doesn't want a government defeat in the House and a leadership challenge. I mean she is doing such a good job for (Brussels!!) I mean Brexit, it would be a complete disaster right?
Quote:
Theresa May compromises on Brexit date to avoid second Commons defeat
http://www.itv.com/news/2017-12-16/b...h-tory-rebels/
Now Mrs May has agreed to offer more flexibility over the date of the UK's exit from the EU in an effort to win doubters among her MPs. She wants the planned date of Brexit - 29 March 2019 - to be written into the government's legislation. However, she had now agreed to measures allowing the date to be changed if negotiations with Brussels look set to stretch beyond that date.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
It's absolutely nothing about democracy, its about Gina Miler the establishment sock puppet, doing her best to thwart Brexit. Where was this defender of the Constitution, when so much of our law making was surrendered to Brussels. Did we get a say, Noooo!! Did we get a say when the trade organization that the British people voted on to join(the EEC) morphed into pan European government body the EU, Noooo!!
No she damned well isn't, it was the Supreme Court decided that Parliament had the right to have a final say on Brexit andnot the Prime Minister. She actually did the country a service by challenging the establishment as you call it. What was she doing in 1972, when Ted Heath took us into the EEC? She was a child. If only she had a TARDIS or modified Delorean,the poor sod.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
Referendums are not formally part of our constitutional government anyway, so I doubt very much that any Supreme Court can require it. The next shenanigans to be played out, will rather be the opposition parties, together with their new found friends on the Tory back benches, attempting to kick Brexit further down the road by voting against a set date for leaving. Given our PM already seems to have capitulated on this important aspect. It looks like Appeser May is either sympathetic to their objectives or doesn't want a government defeat in the House and a leadership challenge. I mean she is doing such a good job for (Brussels!!) I mean Brexit, it would be a complete disaster right?
The Supreme Court's only requirement is that the law is followed. Its what judges do. As I pointed out to HH, whether they agree depends entirely on the letter of the European Act, not sentiment. Following the law, which looks like it ought to be tested, does not alter the merits of Brexit or Remain, indeed it would give the result, either way, added legitmacy.
Is your worry that Remain's argument would be stronger if people voted on the experiences so far and actual data, rather than the bollocks offered by both sides last time round?
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
There was already referendum and decision has already been made. If Remain was to win, they would probably have had to use actual facts instead of emotional panic-inducing statements about potential apocalypse in the event of Brexit. I get that you realize that Remain would still lose (since second referendum would probably backfire PR-wise for obvious reasons), but you hope that this time establishment is more prepared to either doctor the results directly or simply organize media hoaxes to push the public opinion towards the desired outcome.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Heathen Hammer
There was already referendum and decision has already been made. If Remain was to win, they would probably have had to use actual facts instead of emotional panic-inducing statements about potential apocalypse in the event of Brexit. I get that you realize that Remain would still lose (since second referendum would probably backfire PR-wise for obvious reasons), but you hope that this time establishment is more prepared to either doctor the results directly or simply organize media hoaxes to push the public opinion towards the desired outcome.
It is not about the feelz.
It was a non-binding advisory poll. May's mistake was to pretend that it wasn't, in order to placate the loonier end of the Brexiteers, rather than co-operate ewith a Labour Party whose Remainers were decisively repressed by one O Jeremy Corbyn.May's job was to act in the national interest, she is failing to do that. If the law is found to require another referendum , she is bound by it. If it does not, well if the Brexit case is that good it can tested again , this time properly.
The only person doing the 'doctoring' as you call it is Davis, who promised impact assessments, which did not exist. There are things which are not hoaxes, inflation increasing, EU nationals still remaining here and if a 'soft Brexit ' is chosen still migrating here, so much for migration control, no EU health treatment and restrictions on travel. Paying more for DVDs bought online as duty will now have to be paid on them as indeed for anything else imported costing less than 15 quid. And where the hell are we going to get 8,000 customs officials needed to check goods if Brexit goes hard? A soft Brexit would avoid the worst of these effects, but people aren't idiots, they will notice this. As for the pluses for Brexit as far as the country goes, no-one has actually articulated this in a coherent way.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mongrel
No she damned well isn't, it was the Supreme Court decided that Parliament had the right to have a final say on Brexit andnot the Prime Minister. She actually did the country a service by challenging the establishment as you call it. What was she doing in 1972, when Ted Heath took us into the EEC? She was a child. If only she had a TARDIS or modified Delorean,the poor sod.
You know that to be fact then? Because I think her motivation isn't some deep seated concern for Parliamentary democracy. I'm sure there has been plenty of time in her formative years in the legal profession for her to demonstrate that concern until recently don't you think?
But never mind, we digress to personalities, and that isn't the issue here. True, Parliament should have a voice at a say in the Brexit process, to ensure legality under the Constitution. Since a referendum and a government mandate alone aren't sufficient to push through all the legislation that is required both before and after leaving the EU. To argue such would, and has, been the ridiculous position of the PM. But the use of Parliament to deliberately prevent or water down leaving the EU such as to render the Country as some kind of subject state, maybe constitutionally in order, but will set Parliament against large numbers of the electorate, which would be extremely bad for Parliamentary democracy in the UK.
Quote:
The Supreme Court's only requirement is that the law is followed. Its what judges do. As I pointed out to HH, whether they agree depends entirely on the letter of the European Act, not sentiment. Following the law, which looks like it ought to be tested, does not alter the merits of Brexit or Remain, indeed it would give the result, either way, added legitimacy.
Is your worry that Remain's argument would be stronger if people voted on the experiences so far and actual data, rather than the bollocks offered by both sides last time round?
So you would sort out the uncertainties in the British position in the negotiating position with the EU, created by a referendum which the Supreme Court consider purely advisory, with another referendum? Seems odd that a Supreme Court would be advocating something they themselves consider flawed in deciding public policy. Why not have made Brexit the part of a new election in 2019 when agreements have been reached and we are set to leave. Then the British people can . A. Accept the conditions of the agreement. B. Not accept the agreement and leave without, or C. Not leave at all. Of course this would be a deal more open than the nefarious antics currently being pursue by the political establishment who quite obviously wish to keep as much from public involvement as possible and leave the whole process to be decided within a Parliament that didn't wish to leave.
Quote:
A reverse Maastricht would be legal and politically feasible
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...erendum-brexit
With strong leadership(?), pro-remain MPs could use their majority to protect UK access to the single market as part of an EU withdrawal.
"What if the Brexit camp wins the referendum on 23 June, as some polls are currently scaring sterling by suggesting? Could pro-remain MPs do as one anonymous minister told the BBC and use their parliamentary majority in a “reverse Maastricht” to protect UK access to the EU single market as part of the withdrawal?
"So the “reverse Maastricht” tactic is both legal and politically feasible. All it would take – the Norway model or any that looks better on the day – is
leadership and willpower."
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
In response to the title of this thread: yes.
What you have set out in the OP is the sensible way a country should be governed. The UK currently deviates from that significantly. Unfortunately in a representative democracy, unless the people elect good leaders, and unless good leaders put themselves forward for election, then you end up with the current situation: bad leaders doing a bad job. The solution would appear to be the ballot box but we just had an election. Arguably the quality of the candidates was part of the problem. What the reasons are for such poor quality candidates leading all the main parties, I don't know. But it needs to change, and fast. Unfortunately I see little immediate chance of that happening, but perhaps if the Tories collapse and Labour takes over that could be the catalyst for further unpredictable changes that might eventually result in better leadership (not necessarily Corbyn but perhaps someone else).
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
You know that to be fact then? Because I think her motivation isn't some deep seated concern for Parliamentary democracy. I'm sure there has been plenty of time in her formative years in the legal profession for her to demonstrate that concern until recently don't you think?.
.My understanding is that she only got involved in politics, not party political either in 2009, her main concern is poverty.Oddly enough May's obsession with keeping total control of Brexit has seen poverty explode in Britain. Besides, Miller was right, the Court says so Whether her instincts are right again about another referendum, and she admits she had to be persuaded, is again up to the best judges Her Majesty has at her disposal. I rate them against David 'I know buggerall' Davis every time. What bothers me though is that shouldn't take the efforts of private individuals to consider these important points. Are there no constitutional experts left now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
Parliament should have a voice at a say in the Brexit process, to ensure legality under the Constitution. Since a referendum and a government mandate alone aren't sufficient to push through all the legislation that is required both before and after leaving the EU. To argue such would, and has, been the ridiculous position of the PM. But the use of Parliament to deliberately prevent or water down leaving the EU such as to render the Country as some kind of subject state, maybe constitutionally in order, but will set Parliament against large numbers of the electorate, which would be extremely bad for Parliamentary democracy in the UK..
Indeed, my observation is that party political considerations are overriding practical or even legal ones, so what you say next makes sense to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
So you would sort out the uncertainties in the British position in the negotiating position with the EU, created by a referendum which the Supreme Court consider purely advisory, with another referendum? Seems odd that a Supreme Court would be advocating something they themselves consider flawed in deciding public policy. Why not have made Brexit the part of a new election in 2019 when agreements have been reached and we are set to leave. Then the British people can . A. Accept the conditions of the agreement. B. Not accept the agreement and leave without, or C. Not leave at all. Of course this would be a deal more open than the nefarious antics currently being pursue by the political establishment who quite obviously wish to keep as much from public involvement as possible and leave the whole process to be decided within a Parliament that didn't wish to leave.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
It looks like May's right hand man, Damien Green has resigned , because his right hand may have been used for an unexpected purpose, allegedly.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...rn-allegations
Still it might give her the chance to get rid of some dross and draw up a more competent team.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
my first thought was: was he caught wanking in public? so damn close:laughter:
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mongrel
It looks like May's right hand man, Damien Green has resigned , because his right hand may have been used for an unexpected purpose, allegedly.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...rn-allegations
Still it might give her the chance to get rid of some dross and draw up a more competent team.
Hmm! I wonder if Green has a shoe fetish? :hmm: This situation has come about directly because we have a PM who allowed her association with Green, to influence his appointment and the fact that she needed a close ally in the cabinet. Given what we know now happened in 2008 during an investigation into a Westminster leaks, and which was known by the majority of leading figures within the Party, that choice was extremely unwise. Heck, its not just any Ministerial position but Deputy leader for Gods sake! If for some reason May could not undertake her job as PM Green would have been taken charge of everything. He was set firmly in May's bunch of closet "Remainers", but I see that David Davis was one of the ones who was keen to leap to his defense and initially promised to resign from the cabinet if anything came out of the accusations. So far none of those who spoke about the matter have voiced a response, and Brexit remains in Davis's responsibility.
Quite what to make of this episode and the Government's whole approach in the Brexit negotiations is extremely unclear, save for being thoroughly untrustworthy in actions and words. How can this Country achieve anything, let alone something as important as Brexit, with this group of individuals. Sorry I've lost what little faith I had.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
caratacus
Hmm! I wonder if Green has a shoe fetish? :hmm: This situation has come about directly because we have a PM who allowed her association with Green, to influence his appointment and the fact that she needed a close ally in the cabinet. Given what we know now happened in 2008 during an investigation into a Westminster leaks, and which was known by the majority of leading figures within the Party, that choice was extremely unwise. Heck, its not just any Ministerial position but Deputy leader for Gods sake! If for some reason May could not undertake her job as PM Green would have been taken charge of everything. He was set firmly in May's bunch of closet "Remainers", but I see that David Davis was one of the ones who was keen to leap to his defense and initially promised to resign from the cabinet if anything came out of the accusations. So far none of those who spoke about the matter have voiced a response, and Brexit remains in Davis's responsibility.
Quite what to make of this episode and the Government's whole approach in the Brexit negotiations is extremely unclear, save for being thoroughly untrustworthy in actions and words. How can this Country achieve anything, let alone something as important as Brexit, with this group of individuals. Sorry I've lost what little faith I had.
Total agreement there,. I could imagine any replacement would be a remainer in order not to cause panic amongst that faction, but that would suggest selection by clique rather than talent or ability.It is no way to run a country.
Davis's department is struggling to recruit or retain staff. It can't fill a quarter of it's posts and 44% of staff want to leave within a year.. It's difficult to say whether this lazy sod is taking this important excercise seriously.
I see that the decision to invoke article 50 may be subject to legal action, the grounds being that Parliament should invoke it, not the PM. If it has legs, that is entirely down to Mrs Mayhem. O Jeremy Corbyn would not opposed Article 50 in the House, given his form.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
It looks like the legal action is going ahead. The crux of it is this:
The Good Law Project is saying that there is a case for giving the UK parliament the right to unilaterally cancel the Brexit process, following arguments that the UK could withdraw article 50 without the consent of other member states.
It would strengthen Westminster’s ability to abandon Brexit if the deal was so poor it was against the national interest; it would also strengthen the UK government’s hands in the negotiations to know it could withdraw its article 50 letter without needing agreement from all 27 members.
My view? This is constitutional stuff that has again been overlooked. Why was Article 50 invoked without addressing this?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...rexit-go-ahead
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mongrel
It looks like the legal action is going ahead. The crux of it is this:
The Good Law Project is saying that there is a case for giving the UK parliament the right to unilaterally cancel the Brexit process, following arguments that the UK could withdraw article 50 without the consent of other member states.
It would strengthen Westminster’s ability to abandon Brexit if the deal was so poor it was against the national interest; it would also strengthen the UK government’s hands in the negotiations to know it could withdraw its article 50 letter without needing agreement from all 27 members.
My view? This is constitutional stuff that has again been overlooked. Why was Article 50 invoked without addressing this?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...rexit-go-ahead
I am great believer in constitutional government, but I realize that no governing party can even whisper that stuff and remain in power. An opposition party has greater room to maneuver. The Good Law Project does not even have the minor inconvenience of being in parliament as a party. Members of parliament can act without acting as a party. This can be useful and I wish them luck, but in the end their actions can be held against the party when the next election rolls by if the citizens wish to do so.
That said, the UK has made their collective bed and it will be an exit with or without any exit agreements. To do otherwise would be a grave mistake for the future of the UK parliament in any form with any composition of political parties. Of course I was in favor of a clean break, so I know my bias is showing here.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NorseThing
I am great believer in constitutional government, but I realize that no governing party can even whisper that stuff and remain in power. An opposition party has greater room to maneuver. The Good Law Project does not even have the minor inconvenience of being in parliament as a party. Members of parliament can act without acting as a party. This can be useful and I wish them luck, but in the end their actions can be held against the party when the next election rolls by if the citizens wish to do so.
That said, the UK has made their collective bed and it will be an exit with or without any exit agreements. To do otherwise would be a grave mistake for the future of the UK parliament in any form with any composition of political parties. Of course I was in favor of a clean break, so I know my bias is showing here.
Indeed. All this technical stuff should have been done before the referendum. Cameron certainly had the time to arrange this. That way the public would have been informed that Parliament, not party would be responsible for seeing the process through. The could also have avoided this meaningless Brexit means Brexit nonsense and allow the government to concentrate on a solution that would work.
Merry Xmas all.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Hmm, so if it is okay to "scrap" results of any democratic process, can we do that with all the other elections as well? We should scrap election results in France, just to make sure that public still wants Macron as their president? I'd sure love to see that happen in Canada as well with a man-child that we have for prime minister at the moment.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Heathen Hammer
Hmm, so if it is okay to "scrap" results of any democratic process, can we do that with all the other elections as well? We should scrap election results in France, just to make sure that public still wants Macron as their president? I'd sure love to see that happen in Canada as well with a globalistoid man-child that we have for prime minister at the moment.
If we look at the legal basis- then yes. As in the UK's political system (as broken, undemocratic and ridiculous as it is and has been for the past few decades). Because in the UK context we have a parliamentary democracy, and for whatever reason the referendum (which are rare in the UK and don't actually 'fit' properly within the usual political framework) was not 'made' legally binding constitutionally as the Scottish Referendum was- instead there was a political commitment by the Conservatives and Labour (though not the Lib-dems or SNP iirc) to go along with the result...and then a mad panic by both brexiteers and remainers when the vote passed and everyone jumped ship, shut down and realized ':wub: now my political career is linked to this'- May, completely unprepared activated article 50 and que the complete joke that the government has been regarding brexit.
But the important thing to note- you can't generalize democratic processes- particularly as the UK has a very undemocratic structure compared to most modern democracies anyway (It used to be justified by providing greater 'stability'- not so sure that holds water now)- but a state used to referendums like Belgium iirc for instance- sure ignoring it would be a constitutional issue, but here the 'constitutional' aspect is clear- it was advisory- hence why the lib-dems run on a platform for overturning the result and have received mixed results (Gaining votes the last GE, but being squeezed by the two big parties who stalemated with one another). Its the political commitment to brexit that keeps the process going- which of course is subject to change- If the lib dems magically somehow win the 2018 election (and lets face it, the Conservatives have :wub:ed up politically and economically and made said election certain) thent brexit would be chucked out as their manifesto is essentially 'forget brexit'- and that's part of the UK's 'democratic process' as it stands- its democracy as that's the manifesto that got them in. Thus a 'democratic referendum' here is not binding legally and is subject to the same political winds every other aspect of state policy is- again in the UK context.
So it doesn't really make sense comparing said UK referendum to elections- as they are completely different things, and an election can overturn a referendum if the manifesto stated so- Welcome to the messed up world of Britain mate- hence the constitutional crisis brexit has caused thus far, particularly as the Tories 'lost' their political mandate when the election destroyed their majority (That is what happens though when you :wub: up on the economy and domestic issues- which they have continued to do, ironically 'concentrating on brexit'...with very little to show for it- except lying, not doing any of the leg work (impact assessment scandal), and caving into the EU at every turn), while literally doing nothing domestically- literally nothing) which has resulted in the Tories devolving into their separate factions, fighting over what brexit will be and how it should be carried out and basically derailed any 'clear' pathway of brexit for them politically to latch onto. - Then we get to the beautiful mired issue of brexit being used as a means to change the country in either a full socialist manner, or full free trade manner 'by the back door' as noth parties know that in an election this would never stand, but see the oppertunity by tying it into brexit to make such things possible.
So brexit ironically carries a very 'undemocratic' element to it on its shoulders too (Henry VIII laws and the government power grab to undemocratically mitigate the minority it was given are just the tip here).
The ultimate irony at the end of this though is the Conservative brexit will be one that is literally given to them by the EU. Due to the Conservatives ineptitude in negotiating and being undemocratically secretive ...mostly to hide said ineptitude from the electorate (Looking at you Impact reports and weight committees) it will be the EU who sets the terms for the future relationship, the type of brexit, how much we pay, how much regulation we continue to adopt (Currently all of it for a period of time, with 'regulatory alignment' being indefinite) and the extent the UK is truly 'independent'. I can't remember who said it, but there was a political commentator who stated that in '2016 Britain voted to take back control, in 2017 the EU took control'- its incredibly fitting i feel to the current situation.
And indeed Merry Christmas ladies and gents, have a good one all.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Well, again, the problem isn't the fact that Leave won, but rather ineptitude and incompetence of the the overall country's political elite. In other words, the fact that majority of UK's citizens want out of EU isn't an issue, it is the fact that British political elites are chronically incapable of representing their electorate due to issues such as corruption and inherent undemocratic aspects of representative democracy itself.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Heathen Hammer
Well, again, the problem isn't the fact that Leave won, but rather ineptitude and incompetence of the the overall country's political elite. In other words, the fact that majority of UK's citizens want out of EU isn't an issue, it is the fact that British political elites are chronically incapable of representing their electorate due to issues such as corruption and inherent undemocratic aspects of representative democracy itself.
If you had followed the near contempt of the process closely,I think you would realise that the tired old phrase 'political elite' doesn't apply here. The people running the show are rank amateurs.The reason Brexit is struggling is down to pure laziness and some obscene haste to get this delivered before Thersa May gets defenestrated.
I'm pretty sure that if the government behaved the way it should have done, that is make the impact assessments, which are supposed to be statutory, work out scenarios like costs , for example the need to hire thousands of Customs staff, new software, considered the impact on Parliamentary time, because Brexit will require at least 1000 statutory instruments, meaning no Department has a hope in hell in writing or amendment secondary legislation, and reveiws of all treaty obligations with the EU and any nation affected by Britain's withdrawal, then it would not have invoked Article 50 until this essential work was completed
Britain's institutions aren't directly responsible for the mess, The Conservative Party is , by treating this as a party political excercise rather than a policy one.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
I think Mongrel has hit it spot on, its as i think most of us said earlier- Brexit from the get go was essentially made 'party political' as the Conservatives for some reason at first (perhaps due to Boris and co) that brexit could have political capital and be used to brand other parties as 'undemocratic' or 'traitors' and thus for once secure the Tories a decent majority (Something which they have struggled with since Thatcher). This was dumb. Brexit could have been 'a success' (to use May's phrase) if it had been done and planned properly- there is a fascinating and very detailed paper that was floating around a few years ago which won some awards and literally planned out for the government how the UK could successfully leave the EU AND thrive- the author was an ardent 'leaver' admittedly, but it made a lot of sense...the timescale for leaving the EU given by the paper was 15 years (13 of those being before anyone thought of activating article 50)- sorting out legislation, impacts, groundwork, informally discussing trade etc, i believe it was posted in another EU thread here- will see if i can dig up- regardless it was a way that wouldn't leave the UK as a a'vassal' or in an economic crisis- what it did point out though was that brexit could not be 'rushed'.
Que the Tories a couple of years later who go full moron. Even more so that somehow they still won't make brexit cross-party as if it isn't a poisoned chalice for any one party doing it. But then again you look at their front bench... and then at who they have 'up and coming' and you realize their are no serious politicians in their ranks (A big reason why May is still there- she is ironically their best candidate- polling better- and that's still pretty dire- even more amusingly it really does look like she's going to be the one who will lead them into the next GE at this rate)
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
I wish that we had been offered the prepared exit option, but we werent.
The only opportunity we were presented with was the hubristic mistake of an idiotic knownothing who thought he could get us to shut up about it once and for all. And and we took it I think despite its poor chances because we knew from all the precident of lesser countries that if we didnt they would never risk allowing us another.
It is as distressing for me as it is for you that we are now in the hands of those that wish it to fail, and the more it goes 9n the more I see why people would turn to extremes when the supposed moderate factions in politics prove just as untrustworthy as the fringe.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Greyblades
I wish that we had been offered the prepared exit option, but we werent.
The only opportunity we were presented with was the hubristic mistake of an idiotic knownothing who thought he could get us to shut up about it once and for all. And and we took it I think despite its poor chances because we knew from all the precident of lesser countries that if we didnt they would never risk allowing us another.
It is as distressing for me as it is for you that we are now in the hands of those that wish it to fail, and the more it goes 9n the more I see why people would turn to extremes when the supposed moderate factions in politics prove just as untrustworthy as the fringe.
If only your wish was granted Greyblades.
I note that , at last a proper, if not a fully comprehensive analysis is now availble. It was secret, the only reason why we know it exists is because it was leaked. MPs will now have sight of it. It seems to be a game changer, because bereft of any argument other than Brexit is red , white and blue, May is forced into explaining what on Earth her version of /Brexit looks like and Mogmentals will need to explain why a 'hard' Brexit won't destroy our economy .
If only this document was commisioned before the referendum. As summarised by Buzzfeed:
Quote:
Under a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU, UK growth would be 5% lower over the next 15 years compared to current forecasts, according to the analysis.
The "no deal" scenario, which would see the UK revert to World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, would reduce growth by 8% over that period. The softest Brexit option of continued single-market access through membership of the European Economic Area would, in the longer term, still lower growth by 2%.
These calculations do not take into account any short-term hits to the economy from Brexit, such as the cost of adjusting the economy to new customs arrangements
It is pretty damning. The document doesn't cover a bespoke Brexit, say inclusion in Customs Union, but no free EU migration of services and people, I would guess that the hit would fall between the 5% and 2%.
As a result of the revelation of this document, May's Brexit strategy has imploded. Oh Jeremy Corbyn is being pushed to jump off the fence and accept the least worst option, full membership of the Customs Union. Remainer Tories and Blairites see this as a good chance of scuppering Brexit altogether, perhaps through a second Referendum. Nigel Farage and Aaron Banks had already washed their hands of this abortion of a project and have openly called for a second referendum.
As for the Tories? No coherent response, just open civil war.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a8193611.html
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...ce-brexit-vote
http://www.businessinsider.com/greek...-the-uk-2017-9
Seriously, I am bit concerned about the future of UK after reading these. I mean Greece had a really rough time but why UK get through an economic turbulence if it can be avoided?
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Brexit is a rejection of globalisation and neoliberalism. It is also a triumph of racism, xenophobia, ignorance and bare faced lies.
Brexit is a reflection of the failure of the British political class. It is the failure of an economic model that channelled all the wealth and jobs to London while leaving the provinces to rot.
It is also a reflection of the increasing divergence between the rich and poor, and the complete disdain of the government for large parts of the country.
It is in short a symptom of the complete break down of society and in particular a deep division between the ruling class and the ruled.
-
Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
neoptolemos
Austerity was sold as preventing the UK economy becoming like that of Greece. I quite literally want my money back.
One other issue is that Brexit is paralysing the government.
Put aside the civil war and you may note from this document that Civil Servants and Parliament are having to reveiw 19,000 EU legislative acts currently in force. I don't think the combined legislative resource of the planet can do this job properly in 2 years. The government is cutting corners by converting EU law into UK law where it is practical. The Government and Parliament will then decide whether to repeal, amend or keep them, through the Great Repeal Bill, but is planning to amend or abolish elements through secondary legislation without Parliamentary scrutiny, the Henry VII clauses. With 19,000 laws to cover before and once Brexit is done, one can readily see that the government will have no Parliamentary time to pass wind, let alone new legislation, apart from the minimum required for the Budget.The country will therefore drift for 4 and a half years unable to respond to the country's needs.