***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 49 *****
==============================================================
uk.news.yahoo.com/brexit-britain-set-offer-eu-184648664.html
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 13 Jul 18 at 10:35
|
My prediction when this whole sorry saga kicked off was that we'd spend a fortune on lawyers and diplomatic jollies for two years, only to end up with pretty much what we have today, but under a different name. I don't think I'm going to be too far out.
|
But under the proposed system, the British government would retain the right to impose an emergency brake or enact restrictions on migration when it felt a need to in the national interest.
I think govt. is trying to make both remainers and leavers happy but in reality they are making both groups more upset.
|
|
I think they are attempting to negotiate a compromise arrangement that most people on both sides can accept. Is that not what politics is all about?
|
I think it's worse than that;
The politicians are trying to negotiate a compromise agreement in a situation where one side wants totally "in" and the other side wants totally "out", and the majority on both sides do not know enough about the detailed issues to understand whether or not a compromise is acceptable, so stick with their all in / all out vote.
I cannot imagine either side accepting a compromise.
And frankly why would or should they? A compromise was not on the referendum paper, so nobody voted for it.
The "outs" voted out, not a bit out, or mostly out, but *out*. The "ins" voted for in, not mostly in or any other combination other than *in*.
So not only are their strong feelings about what was voted for, there is the fundamental point that a voted has been had, a choice has been made, and a compromise on that choice is seen as not giving people what they voted for.
Hopeless.
And the longer this goes on the more each side becomes blindly entrenched in their position.
And the b***** politicians screwed this up from the beginning and I see no sign of it changing.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 30 Apr 18 at 19:22
|
One could argue that we were given a vote without anyone in the government or civil service thought through what out would mean and what could be delivered. There should have been a more definite definition of what was on offer.
Take NI and the border issue. You can't not have a border and not be in a customs union. You can have one or the other. And that's just one example.
Cameron never imagined there'd be a no majority so they probably didn't think it necessary to do any work.
|
That's history.
The fact is, there was a referendum where the entire country felt strongly and "out" narrowly won.
So out it is. And dicking about, however necessary, simply will not work. Perhaps it will force an election, but I can't really see what that will sort out either.
Unless we have one party declare itself the "In" party and one the "out". And I don't see that happening either.
Cameron has done more harm to this country than one can accuse either Blair or Thatcher of achieving.
|
There are three puzzling things about this fiasco:
Why didn't Cameron notice that there was a strong feeling for out, and prepare a Plan B just in case?
Why having seized the initiative by calling an election did May throw it away with such a pathetic and shambolic campaign?
Why is the EU so determined to force Britain to stay in? Is it just the money, or fear of break-up, like the Warsaw Pact?
|
>> Why is the EU so determined to force Britain to stay in? Is it just
>> the money, or fear of break-up, like the Warsaw Pact?
They are not forcing Britain to stay in, they just want to make sure we can't have all the same benefits on the outside. The "they are trying to stitch us up" mentality is just the same as the "the EU is trying to take us over - its a German plot" mentality that got us out.
|
>>
>> They are not forcing Britain to stay in,
You could have fooled me. Why then does it seem that every time negotiations appear to be going along nicely, they think of something else that bumps the price up, or some new quasi-EU body that we'd have to pay extra to stay in?
But the thing I really notice is the looks of venomous hatred on the faces of Barnier & Co. Their faces betray outrage that anyone should dare to presume to resign from their club.
|
>> You could have fooled me. Why then does it seem that every time negotiations appear
>> to be going along nicely, they think of something else that bumps the price up,
>> or some new quasi-EU body that we'd have to pay extra to stay in?
Negotiation going along nicely? when was that I missed it. As for contributing to the costs of something we want to be part of? I sorry yes thats right you want it for free.
>> But the thing I really notice is the looks of venomous hatred on the faces
>> of Barnier & Co. Their faces betray outrage that anyone should dare to presume to
>> resign from their club.
Rubbish. Utter rubbish.
|
>>
>> Rubbish. Utter rubbish.
>>
I don't think so.
I notice a depressing modern trend whereby everyone who disagrees with someone else, or is opposed to a particular course of action, seems to work themselves up into a state of simulated righteous anger, and can only respond by shouted words, demonstrations, intimidation, and occasionally, violence. If you do not notice the facial expressions now commonly adopted by opposing sides then I think you are missing something.
Along with this goes an evident delight at highlighting failures or shortcomings. No one, (apart from their fans of course) actually wants Brexit to succeed, or Trump's economic policies to work, or the NHS to be coping despite funding and other difficulties, or Corbyn to turn into an effective opposition leader. Everyone, of whatever side, delights in criticising, carping, and it often seems, actually wanting disaster in order to show that they were right and the other lot wrong.
No one now says tolerantly "I hope you are right, but I fear not". Now they wave their tiny hands exitedly shouting "Yippee, it's all going wrong, and it's your fault!"
|
>>If you do not notice the facial expressions now commonly adopted by opposing sides then I >>think you are missing something.
I am missing nothing, they do not exist on any of the faces of the negotiators involved.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 1 May 18 at 13:44
|
>> Why didn't Cameron notice that there was a strong feeling for out, and prepare a Plan B just in case?
Arrogance and politicians being detached from public in general. Rather than serving the public, they want to dictate public. The referendeum result was 52-48 but within parliament and Lords, a poll revealed results were 25-75 in favour of Leave. So politicians are way detatched from public sentiment. Cameron's advisers also fed his ego by claiming Leave would not win.
>> Why having seized the initiative by calling an election did May throw it away with such a pathetic and shambolic campaign?
Same as above. Arrogance and she misread public sentiment - again. TM thought election would decimate Labour but she lost her majority. BTW, so far I find DUP being a sensible party.
>> Why is the EU so determined to force Britain to stay in? Is it just the money, or fear of break-up, like the Warsaw Pact?
UK economy is larger than EU's smallest 15-16 countries' economies combined (you can check this up against GDP values). So UK leaving EU is equivalent to half of EU leaving. UK is net contributor to EU and has a very large population base and economically powerful. UK leaving would definitely cause a crack in the existing EU model. So it is for fear of money + fear of further countries leaving + fear of derailing their gravy train + fear of normal people not playing by rules of social elite class. More so, if UK flourishes outside EU, it would be death knell for EU. So, it is not in EU's interest to UK thrive after leaving the club.
I am more surprised why Farage is silent.
|
So UK leaving EU is equivalent to half of EU leaving.
>> UK is net contributor to EU and has a very large population base and economically
>> powerful. UK leaving would definitely cause a crack in the existing EU model. So it
>> is for fear of money + fear of further countries leaving + fear of derailing
>> their gravy train + fear of normal people not playing by rules of social elite
>> class. More so, if UK flourishes outside EU, it would be death knell for EU.
>> So, it is not in EU's interest to UK thrive after leaving the club.
It will not be the death knell for the EU when the UK leaves. Again it is merely the fact that we can not be expected to have all the benefits of the EU without being in it. and contributing to it. The "gravy train and social elite" comment is just pure anti eu rhetoric.
|
>
>> I am more surprised why Farage is silent.
Its not at all surprising really.
The divorce bill is going towards his pension accrued while he was part of the gravy train. He has been very quiet about the settlement figure since that was mentioned. His "popular policy" has happened and he has nothing to replace it with. And finally having caused the problem, he wants no part in the next step because he knows he is incapable of providing any future direction or plan
So he has gone away to hide.
|
>> And finally
>> having caused the problem, he wants no part in the next step because he knows
>> he is incapable of providing any future direction or plan
In fairness to Farage, it's not just him. It looked to me like none of the prominent Leave politicians were actually expecting this to happen, and had no idea what to do next. A bit like kids playing with matches and accidentally starting a fire. Look at each other in bewilderment and mild panic before walking away with hands in pockets, whistling innocently.
|
>>You can't not have a border and not be in a customs union
Or not have freedom of movement from the EU.
Anyone in the EU can move freely to the Republic of Ireland - without a hard border they can then move freely into N.Ireland and rUK.
BEANO.
|
>> BEANO.
Movement of people is one issue.
Movement of goods and/or services is another.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 1 May 18 at 10:02
|
>>Movement of people is one issue.
>>Movement of goods and/or services is another.
Not really - most goods are transported by people.
|
>> Not really - most goods are transported by people.
>>
Who deliver the goods and go back home
The goods move permanently the people move temporarily
|
>>
>> Not really - most goods are transported by people.
>>
Yes, look at the floods of Chinese coming in, carrying all the stuff we buy from China.
|
If good can get in unhindered so can European nationals.
Next.
|
Now, remember how one of the things about the BREXIT campaign was all about helping farmers and protecting them from the evil EU???
Well, urrr yes, now about that..........
"The food and farming industry wants assurances from the government that it will still be able to recruit enough staff from the EU after Brexit.....[and] maintaining "frictionless" trade with the EU"
I'm not she [NFU President; Minette Batters] has quite got a grip on this whole Brexit thing.
www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44274022
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 28 May 18 at 13:55
|
I think they are wanting their cake and eating it. Unfortunately they're not the only ones.
|
“After Brexit whether for good or ill, we will be self-governing. That’s the point. I never said it would be a beneficial thing to leave and everyone would be better off, just that we would be self-governing."
- Nigel Farage, Friday 1st June 2018"
Ohhhh, I see,
What an utter a***.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 12 Jun 18 at 11:29
|
>> “...That’s the point. I never said it would be a beneficial thing to leave...."
>>
>> - Nigel Farage, Friday 1st June 2018"
>>
"On Thursday we must have the courage to exit the failed EU project and ensure a safer, more prosperous future with us in control of our country’s destiny."
Nigel Farage, 21st Jun 2016
|
|
Farage a liar ? Who'd have thought it...
Last edited by: R.P. on Wed 13 Jun 18 at 09:29
|
Watching local news yesterday. They were doing a feature on Brexit and the possible impact on the local car import trade in particularly Kia who import through Immingham and Stallingborough docks. They followed a vehicle from source - Zilina, Slovakia via the German port of Cuxhaven to destination and spoke to members of the public both in the Grimsby and Cuxhaven area.
What impressed me was the controlled and rational way the Germans spoke about not wanting Brexit. On the other hand one of those interviewed in the UK thought that it would be good in that the public would be able to purchase 'British' cars instead.
Perhaps they were referring to the good old Mini (BMW) or Lotus?(Chinese) because car manufacturing ownership is now global. There are no 'British ' cars.
Be afraid.
|
>> They were doing a feature on Brexit and the possible impact
>> on the local car import trade in particularly Kia who import through Immingham and Stallingborough
>> docks. They followed a vehicle from source - Zilina, Slovakia via the German port of
>> ownership is now global. There are no 'British ' cars.
>> Be afraid.
>>
Add the famous British, sorry Indian, brand Landrover to the mix, who are now moving some Jaguar production to Slovakia as well.
Would they have moved production if it Brexit were not happening?
Last edited by: Driver on Wed 13 Jun 18 at 11:59
|
>> Perhaps they were referring to the good old Mini (BMW) or Lotus?(Chinese) because car manufacturing
>> ownership is now global. There are no 'British ' cars.
>> Be afraid.
Precisely.
If we fall out of the customs union and the single market, it will make no sense whatsoever to continue manufacturing cars for the EU market in the UK, or to use British based companies to supply components to plants in the EU. If every completed car, or component had a customs process to follow or a tariff assigned, it would be a massive backwards step, and hike in costs.
Take MINI's Plant Oxford as an example, which currently exports 80% of the cars it builds. Of the top 5 destination countries for Oxford built MINIs, 3 are in the EU.
I've really tried to keep a balanced view on the whole Brexit thing, but all I see are potential pitfalls based on likely (if not probable) outcomes. Where are the advantages? Many of those touted by leave were debunked within days of the vote, and the remaining "leavers" seem to be doing everything they can to distance themselves from the whole thing. The apparent lack of strategy, or even a joined up approach from senior politicians would actually be funny if it weren't so serious.
|
>> I've really tried to keep a balanced view on the whole Brexit thing, but all
>> I see are potential pitfalls based on likely (if not probable) outcomes. Where are the
>> advantages? Many of those touted by leave were debunked within days of the vote, and
>> the remaining "leavers" seem to be doing everything they can to distance themselves from the
>> whole thing. The apparent lack of strategy, or even a joined up approach from senior
>> politicians would actually be funny if it weren't so serious.
Sensible people might have approached the question in two parts:
(1) Is there a tangible gain from leaving?
(2) If yes is cost (time and money) aggravation and opportunity cost of withdrawal worthwhile?
We're now seeing that even if answer to (1) was yes then answer to (2) should have stopped Brexit in its tracks.
|
>> (1) Is there a tangible gain from leaving?
>> (2) If yes is cost (time and money) aggravation and opportunity cost of withdrawal worthwhile?
>>
> We're now seeing that even if answer to (1) was yes then answer to (2)
> should have stopped Brexit in its tracks.
I agree with your point, but since other than a hatred of the EU and all things foreign it is difficult to know what the 'Leavers' actually want, I don't know how anybody could make that assessment and arrive at a way forward. They seem unable to order their desires, though how much that is due to the collapse of the original campaign arguments and it's supporters is difficult to say.
Not that I think the "Remainers" have any better grip on the matter, it's just that their position is less damaging to the country.
Cameron, Johnson and the others have done more harm to this country through their mismanagement of this than Blair could ever have done.
As an aside, I was at a 'thing' the other day with Johnson; he was, obviously, in Chile. He spoke well and made excellent comments. But I found it very difficult to take him on face value or seriously given his behaviour around the time of the Brexit referendum. I couldn't stop wondering whether he was stupid or duplicitous and what was behind everything he said.
Previously I had found him quite credible.
I'm a bit surprised that more of the electorate haven't felt the same way.
|
>>Previously I had found him quite credible.
Lefty-leaning radio chap, but still a decent demolition job of Bojo:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4P796ztgoVw
|
>> Lefty-leaning radio chap, but still a decent demolition job of Bojo:
And then some.
Most of it pretty well founded though.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 13 Jun 18 at 20:04
|
I've noticed people and the press "calling out" how badly the Govt is implementing BREXIT.
I suppose they are laying the land for if stuff does go mammaries up, then they can say the Govt did it all wrong and didn't implement it as it was envisaged.
The Govt really are in a lose/lose position.
|
>>they can say the Govt did it all wrong and didn't implement it as it was envisaged.
Oh totally.
"Success has many fathers, but failure is an orphan"
|
|
Always was going to be the 'poisoned chalice'.
|
>> Oxford built MINIs
Oxford assembled MINIs... And a lot of 'parts' will have come from the EU. So a lot of tariffs potentially and customs processes.
|
>> >> Oxford built MINIs
>>
>> Oxford assembled MINIs... And a lot of 'parts' will have come from the EU. So
>> a lot of tariffs potentially and customs processes.
>>
Absolutely!
Until BMW realises it is a lot cheaper and logistically more sensible to move production to the mainland and avoid all of the hassle that tariffs bring.
|
Once again my younger brother nails it succinctly:
"It's almost as if he's a self-serving, amphibian- faced piece of f.....g s..t"
|
Brexit Secretary David Davis has resigned from the UK government.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44761056
|
Never the sharpest tool in the box. I expect Gove will get his job. He is presenting himself as the bridge between remainers and Brexiteers. Could become next PM. Very clever if not always very likeable character.
What a completely shambolic waste of time money and effort this whole thing has been. Cameron has an awful lot to answer for.
|
Wonder whether Conservative party will break up! The leavers can form a new party and joined by leavers from Labour too. So, in next election, two major parties will be come Brexit party and anti-Brexit party :-)
|
>> Wonder whether Conservative party will break up! The leavers can form a new party and
>> joined by leavers from Labour too. So, in next election, two major parties will be
>> come Brexit party and anti-Brexit party :-)
I am beginning to wonder if the Brexit farrago might lead to a temporary or lasting realignment of British politics.
Two years after the referendum and it took the Cabinet until now, 15 months after the Article 50 starting gun was, fired to come up with a vision for what Brexit means. At least two resignations plus another prominent cabinet member who thinks the proposal is a badly polished turd. The Moggites on the back benches don't like it and a number of Tory backbenchers report their inboxes full of accusations of betrayal. May has an appointment with the 1922 Committee who are likely to be loyal but increasingly impatient.
The summer recess starts in a fortnight and apart from a week or so in September before the conferences that's it for the Commons until 09 October although Minsters and the Civil Service will be at their desks throughout.
Immediately after the referendum I thought aloud about a 'government of national unity' under Nick Clegg to deliver us from the mess. He is no longer in the house. Could the current Liberal leader step into breach. A competent man but one with no further ambition he might be a good pick.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 9 Jul 18 at 13:53
|
|
For next PM, Paddy Power is offering 4/1 odds on Gove, 6/1 on Javid and 9/1 on Boris.
|
" Could the current Liberal leader step into [the] breach. "
Goodness gracious, Brompt, have you taken leave of your senses!?
;-)
|
Could
>> the current Liberal leader step into breach. A competent man but one with no further
>> ambition he might be a good pick.
>>
Grasping at straws there, more chance of me being PM!
|
|
Self seeking odious Johnson has now also resigned.
|
|
Labour must be dreading any prospect of an election. The divisions on their side are equally deep, but in the comfortable position of being the opposition party they can keep them quiet.
|
>> Labour must be dreading any prospect of an election. The divisions on their side are
>> equally deep, but in the comfortable position of being the opposition party they can keep
>> them quiet.
This is a problem in the Tory party rooted in an almighty mess arising from two previous attempts (referendum and 2017 GE) to get the electorate to solve a problem in the Tory party.
Surely they won't gamble a third time.
Corbyn, if nothing else, is a campaigner. Either he got the youth vote out last time, gave the Tories a kicking and wants to try again or he failed to shift yoof off it's collective arxe and there's everything for him to play for.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 9 Jul 18 at 15:27
|
>>
>>
>> Corbyn, if nothing else, is a campaigner. Either he got the youth vote out last
>> time, gave the Tories a kicking and wants to try again or he failed to
>> shift yoof off it's collective arxe and there's everything for him to play for.
>>
But where does he stand on Brexit? He hates the EU and has wanted out for years but can't admit it because he would lose his powerbase. Most of those who voted him in are passionately pro EU, if Labour were to form a government now he would have to either go against his principles - which he might do for power given he has no more of those than the next man despite what he likes people to believe - or ram a sledgehammer through his party inside and outside of Parliament by taking us out.
|
>> But where does he stand on Brexit?
The party position is a soft Brexit, remaining in Customs Union and possibly Single Market. He can campaign for that. Whatever he says he's more believable than Boris.
I do however think we're nearing point of this being an existential crisis. We're little more than 6 months from crashing out of the EU with catatrophic consequences for the economy hence my thought og a Govt of National Unity headed by a man with competence and gravitas but no further ambition.
|
>> The party position is a soft Brexit, remaining in Customs Union and possibly Single Market.
>> He can campaign for that. Whatever he says he's more believable than Boris.
>>
The labour party only has a position in opposition, presented with the job of doing it it is no m ore competent than the tories and possibly even less so.
I cannot personally find JC in any way credible and more than Boris.
|
>> I cannot personally find JC in any way credible and more than Boris.
My point was around honesty. Corbyn, whatever you think of his policies and links with Sinn Fein and Palestinian groups, is an honest man.
Boris has lied to his bosses, both his wives and his electors in Henley, London and Uxbridge /Ruislip.
|
>> My point was around honesty. Corbyn, whatever you think of his policies and links with
>> Sinn Fein and Palestinian groups, is an honest man.
Not honest enough to say how he voted in the referendum or to state his belief in whether we should stay in or get out.
And hypocritical enough to sack shadow cabinet members who vote against him when he has a long record of doing that to previous leaders himself. It's easy to be "Honest" when you are a harmless agitator on the back benches, quite another when you see the prospect of power and you don't want to upset your supporters.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 11 Jul 18 at 02:18
|
>> Not honest enough to say how he voted in the referendum or to state his
>> belief in whether we should stay in or get out.
If he'd said he was always pro EU he'd have been dishonest. Trying to get a wedge between personal views and party policy is classic political interview technique. Refusing to be drawn is not dishonesty.
>> And hypocritical enough to sack shadow cabinet members who vote against him when he has
>> a long record of doing that to previous leaders himself. It's easy to be "Honest"
>> when you are a harmless agitator on the back benches, quite another when you see
>> the prospect of power and you don't want to upset your supporters.
Back bench agitator is one role. Membership of Shadow Cabinet is another. Penalties for defiance are different.
Boris lied (ie told untruths or denied matters of fact) to bosses Max Hastings and Michael Howard, to first wife Allegra Mostyn-Owen and his second, Marina Wheeler. Denied he'd paid for Petronella
Wyatt's abortion and that a blond mopped child of his former aide is his.
And that's before we start on his political storytelling.
As Eddie Mair put it in a TV interview (which if you view it amply bears out NoFM's point about BoJo's assumed superiority of intellect) 'you're a nasty piece of work aren't you'.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 10 Jul 18 at 19:56
|
I struggle to see any difference between them insofar as integrity and honesty is concerned. Splitting hairs doesn't really seem to be the point.
Though morality, intelligence and political orientation may differ.
|
>> I struggle to see any difference between them insofar as integrity and honesty is concerned.
>> Splitting hairs doesn't really seem to be the point.
Here's another example of Boris's fibbing (or poor factual recollection):
www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-boris-johnson-lied-about-eu-safety-regulation-in-his-resignation-letter
|
You don't need to prove Boris's lack of integrity to me, not even a little bit.
But it's this idea that Corbyn is anything other than a self-serving hypocrite and prone to lying, hypocrisy and reversals as much as any of the others that'd take some reinvention of history.
|
>> But it's this idea that Corbyn is anything other than a self-serving hypocrite and prone
>> to lying, hypocrisy and reversals as much as any of the others that'd take some
>> reinvention of history.
This
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 11 Jul 18 at 02:19
|
So johnson has quite the cabinet.
Good, As an Englishman I felt highly embarrassed to have that prick as my Foreign ambassador.
|
>> I felt highly embarrassed to have that prick as my Foreign ambassador.
You and me both. An a***.
|
|
Oi! Leave Bo Jo alone. I quite like him, and so do others. It was May who shafted him in the first place for appointing him as Foreign Ambassador.
|
|
When was the last time you spent an evening with him? The man is an a***.
|
The same could be said about any politician though.
If he was that bad, why did you spend the whole evening with him? ;)
|
>>If he was that bad, why did you spend the whole evening with him? ;)
You never know, you just never know.
And even if nothing, I find it fascinating to compare how people come across in what passes for real life as opposed to the television, radio or other media. Spending time with someone massively increases one's ability to understand them.
And understanding people is about as important as it gets. Because then you can interpret and gain some insight into current and coming events.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 10 Jul 18 at 21:16
|
>> This is a problem in the Tory party rooted in an almighty mess arising from
>> two previous attempts (referendum and 2017 GE) to get the electorate to solve a problem
>> in the Tory party.
>>
The tory party brexit division has a death wish. However the Labour party, and labour voters, are no less split over brexit than the tories and if given the chance will screw it up just as badly as the tories have.
In practice neither major party would run a single issue campaign because neither is really honest enough to admit that there is merit both in the remain arguments and the leave arguments as well as lies and nationalistic nonsense. That, unfortunately, is the nature of a democracy, it really does take all sorts and this is something that there will never be agreement on.
Similarly, whatever "deal" we end up with will never suit everybody or even a substantial majority
|
>>Similarly, whatever "deal" we end up with will never suit everybody or even a substantial majority
A deal will take a compromise obviously. That's why it's called a "deal".
Have you seen anybody, on either side, politician, media or voter, willing to make any compromise whatsoever?
|
>>
>> Have you seen anybody, on either side, politician, media or voter, willing to make any
>> compromise whatsoever?
>>
You are absolutely right. The EU "negotiator" has never shown any willingness to make any compromise whatsoever.
He's just like de Gaule, except this time No means you can't leave, whereas last time No meant you can't join.
|
>> He's just like de Gaule, except this time No means you can't leave, whereas last
>> time No meant you can't join.
of course we can leave, we just cant take the family silver and the tv with us
|
>> Labour must be dreading any prospect of an election. The divisions on their side are
>> equally deep, but in the comfortable position of being the opposition party they can keep
>> them quiet.
>>
Very much so, they've got away with it to a certain extent. And by the time the next GE comes round brexit will be agreed one way or the other. I think they'll get away with it.
|
Fundamental issue is that EU won't allow to stay in SM/CU without abiding by 4 freedoms. Freedom of movement was a big reason behind Brexit. So, UK can't stay in SM/CU without FOM. Any party directly accepting FOM to continue will be treated as "not carrying wish of public".
Labour will not do any better than Conservative because they also have both pro and anti EU MPs.
Lab pro-EU || Lab anti-EU
=================
Con pro-EU || Con anti-EU
Right now the division between two parties is via horizontal line but needs to be via vertical line. That's why I think there would be very different polarisation in UK politics in near future.
By trying to placate both leave and remain sides, TM has messed up the negotiation. Whoever leads the UK side, needs to decide either opting for full exit or full remain but no fudged exit.
Let's see how the drama unfolds.
|
We need an election, with a pro EU and other stuff manifesto party, and a Pro Brexit and other stuff manifesto party. See who wins.
That way the leader, the cabinet, and the MPs know they have a mandate to go or not and any not on board get their asses kicked
I love the fact that the brexiteers are going to end up with a party they most didn't want.
|
>> We need an election, with a pro EU and other stuff manifesto party, and a
>> Pro Brexit and other stuff manifesto party. See who wins.
>>
Wasn't that the point of the referendum? Put the choice to the electorate and see who wins?
Or if you don't like the result of the election we can just have another one.
|
When a general election is held, and a party comes into power, if they make a complete and utter hash of things, they can be voted out again in just a few years when the public can see that.
The difference with the Brexit hash, is that it's a permanent one.
|
>> We need an election, with a pro EU and other stuff manifesto party, and a
>> Pro Brexit and other stuff manifesto party. See who wins.
I don't think it would give us a clear result. We'd probably end with what we have now.
|
"I don't think it would give us a clear result"
We had a clear result but, unfortunately these days, we don't have losers and democracy is bound to produce some losers.
|
Can someone please explain this talk about a vote of no confidence motion?
I presume this means a no confidence motion in the Commons, which if she lost would trigger a general election. Or does it mean a purely internal conservative party vote of no confidence, which would merely mean they have to find a new leader?
|
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-nigel-farage-ukip-leader-article-50-chequers-theresa-may-a8439436.html
Nigel Farage threatens to return as Ukip leader unless Brexit is put 'back on track'
Last edited by: movilogo on Mon 9 Jul 18 at 19:43
|
>> Can someone please explain this talk about a vote of no confidence motion?
A vote that 'This House Has No Confidence in Her Majesty's Government', as felled Callaghan in 1979, is still some way off.
A vote that the Conservatives have no confidence in their leader, as did for Iain Duncan-Smith, is a real and immediate possibility.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 9 Jul 18 at 20:06
|
>>
>> A vote that 'This House Has No Confidence in Her Majesty's Government', as felled Callaghan
>> in 1979, is still some way off.
>>
>> A vote that the Conservatives have no confidence in their leader, as did for Iain
>> Duncan-Smith, is a real and immediate possibility.
>>
I know the difference, I was seeking clarification of which was now being discussed. You seem to be saying the second.
There's a bit of confusion here about which is meant:
inews.co.uk/news/brexit/no-confidence-vote-theresa-may/
|
>> inews.co.uk/news/brexit/no-confidence-vote-theresa-may/
Jeez. That's not journalism it's stuff that would have got a fail for comprehension in current affairs when I was 16 and watching Callaghan have to stitch up the Lib/Lab pact.
|
>>We had a clear result
I really wish that was true.
Nobody agreed on exactly what the referendum was for (opinion or law), nobody had the truth of the remain implications, nobody had the truth of the leave implications, nobody had the truth of the advantages of either, there was and is no single understanding of what "leave" actually means, there is no agreement on what I or is not negotiable etc. etc. etc.
I like to think I'm reasonably clever and I can't work it out, so unless this place is run by geniuses we are screwed and will remain so.
Cameron and the rest fudged it right up, and t***s like Farage and Johnson were and are no better.
Either a clean leave or a clean stay would be better than this, and much as I would have preferred we remain, even I would prefer a clean leave.
But nobody knows or agrees on what that is.
|
>>> there was and is no single understanding of
>> what "leave" actually means
That is the crunch point. For all the desperately dire stuff 'project fear' turned out remain meant as you were; steady state.
My own recollection, albeit inevitably biased, was that leave focused on selling a Norway type solution; a Common Market not a USofE. Boris wanted a relationship based on trade not politics. Only a few 'neo-con' types for whom Gove was perhaps the cheerleader wanted a clean break.
Only later did the 17million voted out and suggesting that wasn't a massive mandate for a clean break = conspiracy view secure traction.
|
>
>>
>> Nobody agreed on exactly what the referendum was for (opinion or law),
The constitutional role of a referendum in the UK democratic process has never been established. It appears to have whatever significance you want to place on it.
To the SNP for example, their own referendum, had they won it, would have been a clear and near-instant binding vote for independence. As they lost it however, it merely meant "better luck next time".
|
>> The constitutional role of a referendum in the UK democratic process has never been established.
Surely it depends on the legislation.
IIRC the referendum on coalition's electoral reform (alternative vote) was binding - if vote had been yes we wouldn't be in this pickle now.
The EU referendum OTOH was advisory albeit govt publicly committed to follow outcome.
|
|
New Foreign Secretary is Jeremy C/Hunt.
|
>>New Foreign Secretary is Jeremy C/Hunt.
Really? Making a comment like that? That's not journalism, it's stuff that would have got a fail for just about anything when I was 16
|
"New Foreign Secretary is Jeremy C/Hunt"
Is that a direct quote from the Grauniad?
|
>>Is that a direct quote from the Grauniad?
Jim Naughtie on Radio 4 8 years ago iirc....
www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjH4arIn-80
|
>> Jim Naughtie on Radio 4 8 years ago iirc....
>>
>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjH4arIn-80
The same verbal slip has been made on Sky TV, BBC Music and on the Today programme again a fortnight ago:
www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/justin-webb-turns-air-blue-with-jeremy-hunt-name-blunder-37045702.html
I believe the C version is widely used in the NHS too.
|
"The same verbal slip has been made on Sky TV, BBC Music and on the Today programme again a fortnight ago:"
Fnarr, fnarr ....... he said a rude word!
|
>>
>>
>> IIRC the referendum on coalition's electoral reform (alternative vote) was binding -
Yes, maybe. But things are "binding" in the British constitution as a result of centuries of accumulated convention, which almost always everyone of all shades of opinion respects.
If we introduce an entirely new element of democracy, the referendum, with no such tradition, then surely there needs to be a very clear law, endorsed by both houses and all regional parliaments too, that a referendum result is absolutely binding and cannot be overturned by parliament.
What we seem to have now is a situation where the validity of a referendum result is decided after the event, and depends on whether you or your party agree with the result.
|
Surely one way forward to leave without the cliff edge is to agree to a gradual leave process whereby we leave a bit at a time. So all the things that needs agreements are done over time. Effectively we stay partly in the EU for many years.
It has taken decades to get so intertwined with the EU. It will take a long time to undo this and it cannot be done overnight without damaging the economy and mass job losses when companies relocate, etc. Investment will dry up for sure.
Thinking of needing technology to help with Mays preferred version of leave fills me with dread. Two years is not long enough to implement anything... You'd still probably be in the tender process.
|
|
This is Britain. We don't do long-term planning. We employ civil servants and jobsworths to make sure everything takes for ever, costs 10 X estimate, and isn't what anyone wants anyway.
|
Clegg or Cable - national unity - you ARE joking, surely?
Both are passionate Remainers who have been doing their damnedest to reverse the democratic result of the 2016 Referendum. They, as far as I have heard, along with that obnoxious person, Andrew Adonis (a misnomer if ever I saw, or heard, one) are quite prepared to go to almost any lengths to deny the choice made by voters.
A trio of prize, un-democratic, no-hopers.
|
What government? Oh! That one. Have you read The resignation letter from Boris?
moved from the Skripal thread as drifted into a Brexit conversation
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 10 Jul 18 at 13:06
|
|
Yes - I think he wants to be a fairy tale author.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 10 Jul 18 at 13:06
|
He makes some very good points and proves he's not quite the buffoon some may think.
Pat
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 10 Jul 18 at 13:06
|
>> He makes some very good points and proves he's not quite the buffoon some may
>> think.
The letter is typical of the Brexiteer genre. In second para he sets out the false promises the Brexit campaign offered and then goes on to criticise the PM for failing to deliver on them. Neither BoJo nor DD have ever put forward a vision of how out might be achieved.
Buffoonery is his act, he's obviously a very clever man but he doesn't have the first idea of how to deliver policy. Ken Clarke in his memoir 'A Kind of Blue' says Boris doesn't do detail.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 10 Jul 18 at 13:05
|
>> Buffoonery is his act, he's obviously a very clever man but he doesn't have the
>> first idea of how to deliver policy. Ken Clarke in his memoir 'A Kind of
>> Blue' says Boris doesn't do detail.
He may be clever, but he is not clever enough to realise that it is not a good idea in international politics to come over as a buffoon.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 10 Jul 18 at 13:05
|
He's not clever, he's not achieved any if his grandiose plans in any if his roles. He is well educated, but that's not the same as clever, there is a time when hiding behind Latin and literary quips runs out and you get found out.
He thinks he is Churchill, but he has none of the cunning doggedness or balls
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 10 Jul 18 at 13:05
|
>>He may be clever, but he is not clever enough to realise that it is not a good idea in international politics to come over as a buffoon.
It's quite difficult to know what he is.
However, his Achilles heel isn't his own intelligence, it's the very low opinion he has of everybody else's. He seems to think that everybody else is so much duller than him that he can practice whatever machinations he wishes without any comeback.
|
No he doesn't make some good points, just pops out the same old pre referendum bribes that he's no idea if he can deliver, the same jam tomorrow rubbish, jam that everyone now knows ain't coming
The strange thing is all these Tory pro Brexit types are wealthy and will be least affected by the economic fall out
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 10 Jul 18 at 13:05
|
But we are still calling it BREXIT, right? - DP
