Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

[Cyclops]

MP's are the only ones to truely hold a mandate from 'the people' and it comes from them being elected in their constituencies. MP's are entirely free to make up their own minds. That AND they are the sole providers of a democratic mandate to the government. Apart from that, the government only has an appointment from the Queen. Just to point out that in legal terms and in terms of precedent set for the future, you have to look at what is currently happening as if the referendum never happened.

Yeah nah. We have pretty much exactly the same Westminster system here in Australia, and referenda are by convention a binding element of that system.

A constitutional question is referred to the people when Parliament chooses to do so and then Parliament follows the decision. They don't get to go "hey Britain, whaddayathink?" and then refuse the answer "haha you utter twits, we're not doing that!".

You can make a case to say that's not written down anywhere but very little of the British constitution is. The proof of this pudding is every single one held in the UK has been honoured by Parliament.

[95thrifleman]

Thing is, the labour party can basicly take over parliment without even needing a general election now. It's amusingly undemocratic to take over the country while accusing the other side of doing it and being too scared to have a GE.

The simple fact is no legislation is going to get passed now, anything labour try to pass using the new powers will be mired in tory amendments and vice versa.

[Daruwind]

Labour can but why would do it or anybody else? Let goverment and Bojo in the mess, longer the better. Because it looks like he lost all his cards and unless he resigns, he will have to go to EU and ask for extension...and if there are no election up to November or what...conservatives will looks like yet another mouth talking party without any actual results with alot mess around... and with bill passing, his hands will be tied.

Well I would say Bojo last option is to take over Brexit party voters and leave voters from Labours....but here is the catch, why should anybody vote for him especially if opposition will let him in current mess. And conservatives will lose all centric and others probably? Just look at how he is openly lying...He said he will get new agreement with EU, so far nothing even proposed. How this is yet again damaging to UK reputation in whole EU...great representation, nebody gonna take his words for anything. His plans to force no deal are basically canceled by parliamentm unless he resign he will probably have to go to EU and ask for extension which will definitely not be what he will ask for (EU probably offer long one)

EDIT: Election now without bill, Bojo can frame them like "give me vote, i will do no-deal" so far it looks like he might be willing to do it. But after the bill or after 31st October...

EDIT2: okay, each part of opposition might have different strategy and prefferences about timing of election. Lib-dem sooner, Labour later.....

[TheLeft]

And yet I think we all know that in our heart of hearts, it doesn't matter how bad Boris is. Soon enough there will be a General Election and the knee-jerk reaction of the British Working Classes is, and has always been, submission and utter deference to the Old Etonian Spivs, and for that reason, the Tories will win the election.


I really wish it wasn't so, but in a world where 52% of the population were gullible enough to be fooled by some bollocks written on the side of a bus, I have zero faith in the critical thinking skills of the British electorate.


Accept it. It will make it easier in the long run...


"Meet the new Boss, same as the Old Boss..."

[Dante Von Hespburg]

EDIT2: okay, each part of opposition might have different strategy and prefferences about timing of election. Lib-dem sooner, Labour later.....

Indeed i think it resonates partly to do with this:

https://twitter.com/britainelects?lang=en-gb

Westminster voting intention:CON: 35% (+2)LAB: 25% (+3)LDEM: 16% (-5)BREX: 11% (-1)GRN: 7% (-) UKIP: 1% (+1)via @YouGov
, 2 - 3 Sep

The longer a snap-GE is held off for, the more the vote seems to be coalescing to Labour from the Lib-dems, particularly with labour now placing itself championing the 'anti-no deal' cause (which i think significant for any GE gives wiggle room in the regional narratives of if Labour is pro-remain or pro-leave- at least i suspect that is the idea, how this will play out will be interesting- but note that Labour's polling is rising).

The Lib-dems and brexit party are getting squeezed, and i suspect may continue to get squeezed. The question will be by how much- on 11% for instance the Brexit party will get 0 seats at Westminster (due to FPTP its unlikely to get any even if it polls into the 20s)

What's interesting is that UKIP has re-emerged- perhaps just a polling fluke here, but if its there next poll, it means the brexit vote now may potentially be split into 3-ways. Which isn't great for the Conservatives potentially, particularly if Labour keep diminishing Lib-dem vote share (Lib-dems of course will remain, as beyond their loyal core, they also have Tory remainers).

[Gaidin]

Question is, how soon EU will say that countless extension are pointless.."here, take 5 year extension with ability to left immidietely (or after short period of time) in case Uk parliament finally agrees on something nad/or ratify the agreement with EU". Honestly i expect that even if Ukask for short extension, EU will simply offer longer one because "we don´t wanna solve this again in 2-3-6 months...."

Because such longer extension is only thing that will somehow deescalate things immidiately at least for medium period of time.

Here's the thing. And the problem is the same if you come from a Western country. The Executive, however the design of the government is done, does the negotiating, but what I'll call the Legislature(in this thread's case the Parliament) still has to approve what's brought back. Countless times they vote it down. Whatever MP's vote for whatever reason. I don't care. It's voted down. EU gets tired of that and gives them a "Screw you deadline" at some point and says take it or leave it but you're out because you invoked X so get out.

It's fundamentally the same as how the Senate has to approve the treaties the President comes up with in the US.

[Daruwind]

Here's the thing. And the problem is the same if you come from a Western country. The Executive, however the design of the government is done, does the negotiating, but what I'll call the Legislature(in this thread's case the Parliament) still has to approve what's brought back. Countless times they vote it down. Whatever MP's vote for whatever reason. I don't care. It's voted down. EU gets tired of that and gives them a "Screw you deadline" at some point and says take it or leave it but you're out because you invoked X so get out.

It's fundamentally the same as how the Senate has to approve the treaties the President comes up with in the US.

That´s why you add current option to prematurely end extension in case UK decided for no-deal or ratify any deal agreement with EU...If you keep this option for UK, isntead of 6 month extension simply offer 5 years and you don´t have to bother about reoccuring short time extensions

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Wider context for an election poll i posted earlier-

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49551893

The article is not providing its own poll, but has averaged those taken (and stated its criteria when those like You Gov did not offer a 'neither' option).

Essentially 44% of people (Leave and Remain) are against leaving the EU without a deal.
38% of people (Leave and Remain) are for leaving the EU without a deal.
11% of people want neither (Though not all polls had this as an option)
10% of people don't know.

So this is the struggle Boris faces in any snap election (which there now will be, some time soon). With Labour gunning for the 'anti-no deal' vote, and seeking to shift to the domestic. Boris's idea of a 'People vs Parliament' campaign is rather shot to pieces as there is not the clear well-spring to tap into, especially not with the Brexit party still in the picture and UKIP seemingly (and maybe briefly) re-appearing in the polls.

Boris has further complicated this though as he's not aiming to run on a 'no-deal' platform, as it will scare off too many centrist-leavers (hence why he's only looking to remove the back-stop now). This though means Farage and the Brexit party are in Farages own words (paraphrased) his worst enemies. So he's rather stuck.

Luckily for him, so are Labour potentially, even as the Lib-dem vote shifts somewhat to Labour (or moves to the fence) as the Lib-dems and brexit party are squeezed, though not enough.

However, the fact the country has a clear majority in favour of getting a deal from the EU makes things harder for Boris, than it does for Corbyn, simply because Corbyn's support and targeting has absolutely nothing to do for those who want 'no deal'. Boris on the other hand will have to try and create a balance, while those demanding a no-deal have the Brexit party to get behind. It's a tricky political position for whenever the firing gun for a GE is shot- particularly as the Tory rebels are hammering home now that Boris has yet to bother to attempt to get a deal- while this may be true or not, it doesn't matter. The narrative does not help Boris, who has now rather big former Tory names running around talking to the core Tory voting base.

Ironically he's almost managed to manufacture the same context that saw May, with a 20 point lead over Corbyn self-destruct as Corbyn climbed the polls during the campaign. Boris's party is now openly rent, with former and influential members running around with some fairly damaging stuff, he'll have to concentrate on fighting blue on blue fires for traditional demographic, while also fighting for the 'Leave' demographic, who are split further by Boris's need to balance his position between advocating no-deal to diminish the brexit party, while saying he'll get a deal that changes the back-stop to meet normal leave voters expectations (who may be prepared to take a no-deal, but who do not expect it to be specifically advocated), which puts him in opposition to the Brexit parties 'no deal' advocates, while he'll have Labour still technically hiding their brexit position behind simply an 'anti-no deal message' and who aim to bring things around to the domestic.

It's interesting with pitfalls for both the big two parties, and indeed maybe the smaller parties once a GE is called may be able to facilitate a 'come back'- though i rather doubt it, with the caveat of course that they'll be 'just' big enough to potentially cause a headache to the influence of the bigger too- even if say the Brexit party as is likely receive 0 seats, or the lib-dems remain around their current number. You could see no party get a real majority- but coalition building currently favours Labour due to their more flexible brexit narrative, than Boris who essentially cannot work with any other party bar the DUP while taking a 'hard line' on no deal and a second referendum.

EDIT: I should probably had said re-reading my post, that while we're talking about fairly tight margins- for instance even in the 'no deal' vs 'deal' its only 6% let alone breakdowns of how remain and leave voters feel, in regard to polling projections on the electoral map as i highlighted earlier there isn't a section who either side can afford to 'ignore'- particularly when current polling will essentially just see the result May got in 2017. The trick will be for the winner to be able to present themselves as the 'broadest church' possible, while also most ably fighting off the 'specialist' parties of Lib-dem, Brexit and UKIP (If UKIP isn't merely a current blip).

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

https://twitter.com/annaturley/status/1168980398166237185

The physical embodiment of arrogance, entitlement, disrespect of the conservative upperclass.

[Cope]

1. Mate, the Admins here aren't going to shag you no matter how much you LARP as a Mod.

This has nothing to do with moderation; I couldn't care less if your post is removed or the subject of an infraction. What interests me is preventing you from derailing the conversation to draw attention away from your ridiculous remarks.

2. The simple fact of the matter is that five years ago, virtually no one cared either way about the EU. No-one was in the slightest bit worried about our EU membership. There were no protests, no strikes, no marches. I never even read so much as a Facebook rant about it. It's become depressingly easy to incite half the country to vote to shoot themselves in the foot based only on a few vague promises and a couple of slogans. I suddenly heard people I'd known for years, who'd never even mentioned the EU, now using terms like "slavery" and "treachery". It's infuriating as hell.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Five years ago, UKIP were the largest British party in the European Parliament. The idea that Euroscepticism - which has featured heavily in both Labour and Conservative movements over many decades - simply emerged out of nowhere after the 2015 general election is just utter drivel. The fact that Westminster was able to marginalize Euroscepticism for twenty years doesn't mean that it didn't exist, it just means that it was deliberately kept off the agenda until Farage was able to force Cameron's hand. Whinging about how "half the country" has been manipulated into shooting "themselves in the foot" is nothing more than a regurgitation of the sanctimonious tripe peddled by Europhilic activists.

And all this because Ed Miliband looked a bit weird eating a bacon sandwich...

Ed Miliband is a generic Blairite who offered the electorate nothing other than a more diluted form of austerity. He deserved to lose.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

HOLY KINNOCKS AMENDMENT has passed BY ACCIDENT.

Literally a up during the voting process, and by no 'tellers' (counters) turning up, means that it has automatically passed under parliamentary law- the commentator and Hansard academic were stunned- It literally had no real support from either Government (of course) or Opposition.

Whether this might be rectified later is unknown, but currently its an amendment that has passed. It also may fundamentally change the shape of Brexit, as it brings May's deal back to the table (Yeah i had to run and read up on it- again literally i was paying no heed as it was expected to fail) for another vote, in a new context where you have the threat of no-deal, and a perception that remainers are almost succeeding in preventing brexit. This might see May's deal, in all its glory- including the backstop pass.

[Copperknickers II]

Labour are not going to vote for a general election which lets Boris Johnson name the date for it and neither are any of the opposition parties...

Not if they wish to be honourable and right-thinking. Of course, if they were to be cynical and calculating, they might realise that:

1. Leaving with No Deal would be a disaster of Tory making. If No Deal were allowed to happen, Labour could use it as a powerful weapon, both to get into government and also once they are in government. All the moreso, in the case of the closet Brexiteers such as Corbyn himself, who would be freed of the guilt of inflicting Brexit on Britain since it's what he wanted all along anyway.

2. No Deal is only the beginning of the negotiation process of the long-term future relationship with the EU. If Labour got control of those negotiations, that might be more productive than their current efforts to block No Deal and force an elusive Soft Brexit. A Soft Brexit is a hard proposition to vote through the current parliament, but potentially a very much easier one to negotiate once we've passed the watershed of 'delivering on the result of the referendum' and have a potentially considerably larger Remain tally in parliament.

3. The SNP stand to benefit massively from No Deal, it will allow them to wipe the floor with the Tories in Scotland and give them the best possible chance of holding and winning an independence referendum.

Yeah nah. We have pretty much exactly the same Westminster system here in Australia, and referenda are by convention a binding element of that system.

'By convention' being the key part of that sentence. Referenda are advisory and there's no legal obligation to enact their result. Not to mention that they are obviously superseded by subsequent referenda on the same issue.

[caratacus]

HOLY KINNOCKS AMENDMENT has passed BY ACCIDENT.

Literally a up during the voting process, and by no 'tellers' (counters) turning up, means that it has automatically passed under parliamentary law- the commentator and Hansard academic were stunned- It literally had no real support from either Government (of course) or Opposition.

Whether this might be rectified later is unknown, but currently its an amendment that has passed. It also may fundamentally change the shape of Brexit, as it brings May's deal back to the table (Yeah i had to run and read up on it- again literally i was paying no heed as it was expected to fail) for another vote, in a new context where you have the threat of no-deal, and a perception that remainers are almost succeeding in preventing brexit. This might see May's deal, in all its glory- including the backstop pass.

Yes, proposed by an MP whose parents are as embedded with the EU as you can get. This whole thing is farcical and an utter disgrace. Are there no depths to which the cuurent Parliament will stoop to undermine our parliamentary democracy and undermine our position with the EU. Now it is fully exposed why this country's democratic system is broken and not fit for purpose, it isn't just the EU. This parliament is a shambles!

[Ludicus]

Boris, the authoritarian non elected populist has expelled 21 members of parliament. The Independent has just hit the nail on the head,
Like his political counterpart Boris Johnson, Matteo Salvini's gambit in Italy has failed miserably
---
The European Council will certainly agree with an extension to the 31 January 2020. ( Benn Burt Bill)
---

Boris has no credible replacement to backstop, and there is no alternative to a hard border. But there is an alternative - a new referendum. Food for thought:

'informed decision' now second referendum would 'overturn' Brexit vote

Jacob Rees-Mogg just said "we can't have another referendum now that people know more about Brexit, because we'd vote to stop it"

To sum up, the less you know, the better.

[JP226]

I haven't been following too closely, when does the "do over" vote take place?

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

HOLY KINNOCKS AMENDMENT has passed BY ACCIDENT.

Literally a up during the voting process, and by no 'tellers' (counters) turning up, means that it has automatically passed under parliamentary law- the commentator and Hansard academic were stunned- It literally had no real support from either Government (of course) or Opposition.

Whether this might be rectified later is unknown, but currently its an amendment that has passed. It also may fundamentally change the shape of Brexit, as it brings May's deal back to the table (Yeah i had to run and read up on it- again literally i was paying no heed as it was expected to fail) for another vote, in a new context where you have the threat of no-deal, and a perception that remainers are almost succeeding in preventing brexit. This might see May's deal, in all its glory- including the backstop pass.

Own goal.

[JP226]

I just tuned in some to this little parliament thing you guys have going on. Holy hell, what a show. Congress may be wildly unpopular and ineffective here, at least they have some class compared to this bunch.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Yes, proposed by an MP whose parents are as embedded with the EU as you can get. This whole thing is farcical and an utter disgrace. Are there no depths to which the cuurent Parliament will stoop to undermine our parliamentary democracy and undermine our position with the EU. Now it is fully exposed why this country's democratic system is broken and not fit for purpose, it isn't just the EU. This parliament is a shambles!

Well you know my thoughts on the Westminster system, i just hope people around the country now look and realize that their conception of democracy is based on the European PR + Constitution structure which most states in Europe have, and is totally at odds with how the Westminster system functions- where an unwritten constitution and FPTP structure designed to 'Make democracy safe for the world' (Baldwin), which is reliant on what are essentially gentleman's agreement and subject to easy change of precedent, gives you an executive in the form of a Government- who are prepared to run roughshod over democracy, and an opposition who in response also are prepared to do things that while under the Westminster system are 'democratic', are totally at odds with a 'representative democracy' as most British people imagine.

Thus we should (as i've continously whined i know) get behind Parliamentary reform that kicks out the Westminster system root and stem, creates a written constitution, legally enshrined checks and balances (currently the ones that did exist the executive have warn down since the original 1920s conception). I know however, this is still a pipe dream alas, as it would require a smaller party who support PR to get in- never happening. But we can hope. But i do agree, the system is a shambles and both sides have essentially destroyed (as they are actually allowed to alas) the last vestiges of the checks and balances that the Westminster system provided.

I just tuned in some to this little parliament thing you guys have going on. Holy hell, what a show. Congress may be wildly unpopular and ineffective here, at least they have some class compared to this bunch.

Next time a Westminster system advocate tries to argue how 'great' the so-called mother of all parliaments is (as some Brits like to do to Americans I've noticed), just remind them that it is indeed a mother... who hasn't updated her look in any realistic way since the reforms of the later 19th century and that the adversarial 'shouty' and school-boy cat-calling nature of the debate is embarrassing. They waste so much time, for so little actual effect. I mean we've just had PM Boris essentially cluck around and sulk, and several Labour and Tory MP's slag one anothers leaders off for no particular gain. I remember watching some Congress debates and being amazed that there was a distinct lack of cat-calling, it was downright refreshing.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

One good thing has Johnson's proroguing of the Parliament in my opinion, its obvious now, that the UK needs desperately a written constitution, which regulates explicit the relationships between crown, government, parliament, state and citizens.

Its an anachronism, that the UK relies so heavily on oral tradition and single laws.

@ dante: I said this already 3 pages before.

[Alastor]

I just tuned in some to this little parliament thing you guys have going on. Holy hell, what a show. Congress may be wildly unpopular and ineffective here, at least they have some class compared to this bunch.

Oh yes, the difference is shocking. US Congress seems... civilized in comparison. But on the other hand watching a Congress session isn't anywhere near as entertaining as the Westminster Circus.