Brexit Referendum Superthread

ancapailldorcha

oscarBravo wrote: »

Of course they knew. They just tried to do an end run around Parliamentary sovereignty, and got caught.

Amazing how if anyone in Brussels had attempted this then the Eurosceptics would have been up in arms.

djpbarry

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Amazing how if anyone in Brussels had attempted this then the Eurosceptics would have been up in arms.

It's apparently ok for an elite few to force legislation on the UK in an undemocratic manner, so long as that elite is not foreign.

demfad

oscarBravo wrote: »

Of course they knew. They just tried to do an end run around Parliamentary sovereignty, and got caught.

They are still trying it. A one line Act of parliament that anyone who votes against will be vilified as against 'the will of the people'. Corbyn apparently agreee's with this so parliament may be sidetracked.
An amendment insisting that a vote after negotiations should be between 'Deal or No Brexit' (assuming recovability) is what the SNP are looking at.
The Govt want the vote to be between 'Leave with deal or leave without deal' i.e 'shoot in foot or head'.

Lemming

demfad wrote: »

The Govt want the vote to be between 'Leave with deal or leave without deal' i.e 'shoot in foot or head'.

Otherwise known as a fait accomplit; so cries of "democracy" and "sovereignty" would be both misplaced and hollow in the extreme given that the government would have effectively rendered any parliamentary scrutiny as moot.

Sam Russell

A few Tories want to increase the number of Lords to make sure they do not loose the bill in the un-elected House of Lords, the home of priveledge democracy.

ancapailldorcha

Sam Russell wrote: »

A few Tories want to increase the number of Lords to make sure they do not loose the bill in the un-elected House of Lords, the home of priveledge democracy.

There are over 1,000 Lords and they're mainly Lib Dems and Labour so that'll be some task and expense should they go ahead.

ambro25

Sam Russell wrote: »

A few Tories want to increase the number of Lords to make sure they do not loose the bill in the un-elected House of Lords, the home of priveledge democracy.

I seem to recall a lot of Leave noise about "unelected bureaucrats" and their "cost to the UK taxpayer", prior to June 2016. Or did I imagine that?
I've now formally quit trying to mend my irony meter[font=Calibri","sans-serif]™[/font]. Even fresh-from-the-factory-brand-new, it's a fire hazard most days these days.

An Ciarraioch

Corbyn imposes a three-line whip on Article 50 - whatever one might think of the Lib Dems, they have at least maintained a principled, consistent view on the issue.

djpbarry

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Corbyn imposes a three-line whip on Article 50 - whatever one might think of the Lib Dems, they have at least maintained a principled, consistent view on the issue.

I would not be at all surprised if a number of Labour MPs rebel.

First Up

djpbarry wrote:

I would not be at all surprised if a number of Labour MPs rebel.

Nor me. Its not as if Corbyn has their full backing anyway. I doubt it will affect the outcome - just more collateral damage to the British body politic.

demfad

ambro25 wrote: »

I seem to recall a lot of Leave noise about "unelected bureaucrats" and their "cost to the UK taxpayer", prior to June 2016. Or did I imagine that?
I've now formally quit trying to mend my irony meter[font=Calibri","sans-serif]™[/font]. Even fresh-from-the-factory-brand-new, it's a fire hazard most days these days.

The Deloitte report (they actually WERE working for Whitehall it turns out despite what May said) stated that the UK would need to emply 30,000 extra civil servants to make Brexit happen. That's more than in the EU.

Incidentally I think national Governments have a lot to answer for re perceived distance of EU bodies from EU citizens. Take EU elections:
In normal elections where you vote for a party who represent you in the dail there is a perceived demographic deficit. Imagine voting for a party who then join another party to represent you in a parliament. The parliament is perceived as distant, unrepresentative. People just use the vote to protest government parties, EU wide.
MEPs should campaign under their EURO parties whose policies actually affect people's lives. During the canvass they will be forced to explain these policies and answer real questions. This will give them a greater mandate and give the EU electorate more power.
The MEP now has his/her work cut out for re-election and will fight to strenghten the power of the EU parliament in EU. Proxy fights may take place as much in local parliaments to this end.

CMOTDibbler

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Corbyn imposes a three-line whip on Article 50 - whatever one might think of the Lib Dems, they have at least maintained a principled, consistent view on the issue.

What is wrong with that man? Has he not the wit to see past his ideologies and realise that he's become a puppet for the Tories?

He's making the Labour party completely irrelevant.

djpbarry

djpbarry wrote: »

I would not be at all surprised if a number of Labour MPs rebel.

That didn't take long:

A shadow minister has quit Labour's front bench after being told to back legislation paving the way for the UK's departure from the EU.

Tulip Siddiq said she "cannot reconcile myself to the front bench position".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38753808

ancapailldorcha

Is this likely to make a difference though? There'd be an unreal backlash if Parliament actually blocked the triggering of Article 50.

An Ciarraioch

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Is this likely to make a difference though? There'd be an unreal backlash if Parliament actually blocked the triggering of Article 50.

I guess the broader point would be that if parties took a certain stance on the matter before the referendum, they should maintain it at least until the vote is triggered, the Tories being the exception as the pro-Brexit faction now controls the party.

djpbarry

Another Labour MP resigns:

Jo Stevens has quit as Jeremy Corbyn's shadow Welsh secretary after he forced Labour MPs to back the Article 50 bill.

The Cardiff Central MP said she believed Brexit was "a terrible mistake" and "cannot reconcile my overwhelming view" that to endorse the bill would make it inevitable.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38768383

Enzokk

djpbarry wrote: »

Another Labour MP resigns:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38768383

I was hoping Jeremy Corbyn could shake things up among the electorate, his biggest problem is that his own personal record of voting for what he believes is right against his own party meant that as a leaser he was never going to succeed. How could he tell people to vote against their beliefs when he didn't do it himself.

I didn't want to believe the analysis when he was elected leader that it would be a disaster, but I cannot see any way that he can turn this around. Maybe if Labour wins all the by-elections they have coming up will turn the tide, but I just don't see it.

CMOTDibbler

Enzokk wrote: »

I was hoping Jeremy Corbyn could shake things up among the electorate, his biggest problem is that his own personal record of voting for what he believes is right against his own party meant that as a leaser he was never going to succeed. How could he tell people to vote against their beliefs when he didn't do it himself.

I didn't want to believe the analysis when he was elected leader that it would be a disaster, but I cannot see any way that he can turn this around. Maybe if Labour wins all the by-elections they have coming up will turn the tide, but I just don't see it.

I just can't see them winning. Perhaps in Labour strongholds, but how can you expect people to vote for your policies when you don't seem to be able to agree on them yourselves?

How the Brexit vote panned out was a direct result of this schizophrenia. The Parliamentary party and the front bench were almost totally in favour of remain, the party policy was to remain and the party leader was against remaining, but made a lukewarm effort at best in the run up.

ads20101

Enzokk wrote: »

I was hoping Jeremy Corbyn could shake things up among the electorate, his biggest problem is that his own personal record of voting for what he believes is right against his own party meant that as a leaser he was never going to succeed. How could he tell people to vote against their beliefs when he didn't do it himself.

I didn't want to believe the analysis when he was elected leader that it would be a disaster, but I cannot see any way that he can turn this around. Maybe if Labour wins all the by-elections they have coming up will turn the tide, but I just don't see it.

The problem isn't really Jeremy Corbyn here, it is arguably the labour party itself. I feel that Jeremy is only a symptom of a far larger problem and that is the fractured nature of the party.

There are essentially at least 2, almost opposing ideologies within labour and is a geographical north / south divide.

If Jeremy doesn't take a hard line on this he could lose seats up north (where the brexit vote was strong amongst the working class) to ukip. This will have some lesser repercussions in the south west especially where many labour constituencies voted to remain.

The fact that Jeremy's juggling act has kept the labour balls in the air this long actually amazes me.

Lemming

ads20101 wrote: »

If Jeremy doesn't take a hard line on this he could lose seats up north (where the brexit vote was strong amongst the working class) to ukip.

Hard to tell, despite the vote count being the way it was in the northern half of England. Initially UKIP might gain a swelling of numbers, but when the promised magical unicorn return to 18th century Rule Britannia doesn't happen, those numbers will be decimated.

Bear in mind that traditionally, Labour has drawn much of its strength of numbers from Scotland, so I'd be keeping an eye towards the future of Labour hinging on how Scotland perceives it's being treated by "England" during Brexit negotiations.

The fact that Jeremy's juggling act has kept the labour balls in the air this long actually amazes me.

I don't think Corbyn has done anything of particular note yet. Sure he's made all manner of gaffes and internal party faux-pas, but we'll really only see for sure when the Labour party are led into widespread elections under his leadership.

KingBrian2

Lemming wrote: »

Hard to tell, despite the vote count being the way it was in the northern half of England. Initially UKIP might gain a swelling of numbers, but when the promised magical unicorn return to 18th century Rule Britannia doesn't happen, those numbers will be decimated.

Bear in mind that traditionally, Labour has drawn much of its strength of numbers from Scotland, so I'd be keeping an eye towards the future of Labour hinging on how Scotland perceives it's being treated by "England" during Brexit negotiations.



I don't think Corbyn has done anything of particular note yet. Sure he's made all manner of gaffes and internal party faux-pas, but we'll really only see for sure when the Labour party are led into widespread elections under his leadership.

The Labour vote in the north abandoned them went for the SNP which is now the largest party in Scotland. A sign of the success of that party they still look good to try and get a second referendum bill through their parliament. The public might still vote against Independence even so the threat of the SNP is real and are the new force in the north of Britain.

Lemming

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The Labour vote in the north abandoned them went for the SNP which is now the largest party in Scotland. A sign of the success of that party they still look good to try and get a second referendum bill through their parliament. The public might still vote against Independence even so the threat of the SNP is real and are the new force in the north of Britain.

Labour are terrified of either a) Scotland leaving the union or b) a change to the 'West Lothian question', either of which would irrevocably change the balance of power in politics for England & Wales and would see Labour and pretty much every other party consigned to the opposition benches indefinitely short of alliances against the Tories whilst the Tories were unable or unwilling to enter their own alliances to hold power should it come to it.

Charles Babbage

Lemming wrote: »

Labour are terrified of either a) Scotland leaving the union or b) a change to the 'West Lothian question', either of which would irrevocably change the balance of power in politics for England & Wales and would see Labour and pretty much every other party consigned to the opposition benches indefinitely short of alliances against the Tories whilst the Tories were unable or unwilling to enter their own alliances to hold power should it come to it.

The West Lothian question is an almost inevitable outcome of the present situation, even if Scotland does not leave.

Labour were not wholly supportive of the AV referendum, so they obviously hope to come back somehow.

Lemming

Charles Babbage wrote: »

The West Lothian question is an almost inevitable outcome of the present situation, even if Scotland does not leave.

I don't believe it's an inevitable outcome if Scotland does not leave, although it most certainly would have more visibility the further the rise of English nationalism grows. Certainly there would be more calls from the fringes and perhaps even one or two not-so-fringe politicians, but to-date there has been no political appetite to address the issue because it would be a particularly messy fight to have. However, if Scotland cedes from the union it happens by default. So, one outcome yields a guaruanteed outcome, the other status quo albeit unpredictable. I know which I'd roll with if I was a Labour MP.

Nody

So May's white paper is out and these are the highlights I see:

EU nationals in UK will only have rights protected if similar promise is made for Britons on continent

Makes sense and I don't think this will turn out to be a big issue in itself but the question of future people could turn this into a no go area.

UK to seek to continue science and research programmes with EU countries

Doubt it as I'd expect this to be way to costly from May's view when she gets a bill for it.

Overall though a relatively big yawn of nothing new; biggest news is the idea of cherry picking a trade deal is not going to work finally appears to have sunk in.

A Dub in Glasgo

They must have got their interns to prepare it - Graph on Page 32 :rolleyes:

Nody

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

They must have got their interns to prepare it - Graph on Page 32 :rolleyes:

Or simply been really really tired...

Furthermore the document's creation date is time-stamped as "Feb 2nd. 04:26am" – suggesting it was an all-night last-minute job.

Havockk

Nody wrote: »

Or simply been really really tired...

They really don't know what they're doing.... at all.

Lemming

Havockk wrote: »

They really don't know what they're doing.... at all.

You're only figuring that out now?

The only "good" thing to come out of the brexit farce over the last few days was the entertaining gem of a speech by Ken Clarke and his reference to Alice in Wonderland.

50 extra days holidays?

Remoaner no longer!