Brexit discussion thread IV

Professor Moriarty

judeboy101 wrote: »

PR can put the balance of power in the hands of a small group of lunatics and conmen. Look at the independent alliance.

Look at the group of lunatics and conmen FPTP has put into power across the water.

Leroy42

Its quite a snub for Raab. Why bring him in and let him lead the charge over in Brussels only to demote him in such a fashion?

Is May saying that she doesn't like the job he has done so far? Or that she should have been leading all the time?

Is she taking over at this point because things are going so badly?

This moves will also likely cause consternation in the ranks of the ERG and with Boris etc, who seem to regard TM as a Remainer and Raab was the only leaver of any consequence left.

VinLieger

judeboy101 wrote: »

PR can put the balance of power in the hands of a small group of lunatics and conmen. Look at the independent alliance.

Look at the DUP

Rjd2

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Britain really does have crappy politicians and a crappy system. I'd put Vradkar and Martin light years ahead of May and Corbyn. Ditto our electoral system.

Don't forget you have the leader of the third party who missed crucial votes the other week and may be helping setting up another centreist party (if only there was in the UK):pac: and whatever the hell the fourth party UKIP is at the moment. :pac:

Zubeneschamali

judeboy101 wrote: »

PR can put the balance of power in the hands of a small group of lunatics and conmen. Look at the independent alliance.

The government is FG backed by FF, the Independent Alliance are just window dressing.

judeboy101

VinLieger wrote: »

Look at the DUP

I don't think any of the dup believe in aliens or offered to go to NK to sort things out :-)

Water John

Well some of the DUP backers are Creationists, similar to a good block of the GOP.

An Ciarraioch

Interesting, if somewhat legalistic, summary of the UK's preliminary discussions with the WTO in relation to agricultural tariffs - to summarise in plain English, the non-EU members object to current tariff levels being maintained, as this would leave them at a disadvantage, and want a reduction in the post-Brexit UK marketplace, to allow them greater access:

http://ecipe.org/publications/the-uks-first-international-trade-negotiation/

Leroy42

Raab is in front of the Commons committee, along with Robbins.

Its....interesting. Particularly in light of the fact that he has just been sidelined by May so anything he now says is pretty much rubbish anyway.

But on a few things. He was asked about food stockpiling. He said the government itself wasn't going to do it, and that this idea that they only get food from one continent (EU) is wrong (he didn't explain how crashing out would cancel lots of other trade deals at the same time).

He was asked about the white paper, and danced around whether it was a final offer or a opening bid. It was there considered position, but open to negotiation.

They are continuing to run on the basis that the lack of any actual answers or details is merely to avoid giving their negotiation position away (despite claiming that the WP is not simply an opening bid!).

You have to feel sorry for the guy. Only a few days ago, you can imagine the pride and happiness at getting that ministerial gig. All the hard work, the local meetings, the committees, the party conferences. This is it, the big time. And no sooner is he in, then TM cuts his legs off and makes him a glorified tea boy.

EdgeCase

I think sometime we actually underestimate the Irish electoral system's benefits and take a lot of the way we do politics here completely for granted. The voting system genuinely is one of (if not the) most mature, developed and sophisticated examples of full proportional representation anywhere in the world. Over the past few decades it has really come into fruition too, particularly as the old tribal FF vs FG politics has melted away to a large degree. It's also supported by increasing use of cross-party committees and structures in the Dail that build consensus rather than driving open fractures.

Our systems basically drive the finding of consensus whereas the UK first-past-the-post 2-party system does the exact opposite, and tends to create tribal divides and bunker formation.

Ireland's also got huge experience in how to conduct referenda and as learnt (through trial, error and evolution) to come up with things like robust referendum commissions and seems to have an ability to keep debates relatively sane and fact-based and the campaigns, certainly in the recent two, have been shockingly mature, considered and genuinely teased issues out in a way that is actually rather impressive.

On top of that, we even have the whole development of experiments in participative democracy with the Citizens' Assembly approach to teasing things out.

I think you're really seeing a situation where one country's quite deliberately creating systems that are all about finding agreed, sane, pragmatic solutions and teasing things out while the other is still engaged in pure tribal politics and shouting at each other across the floor.

I would also suspect that political culture is possibly why we are a lot more able to negotiate things in Europe as that and of politics is not alien to our own systems.

I just think we are really witnessing the very worst of the pure two-party first past the post systems in the US and the UK at the moment.

judeboy101

Water John wrote: »

Well some of the DUP backers are Creationists, similar to a good block of the GOP.

If you believe in god you are technically a creationist, the degree to which you broadcast it, is what makes you crazy.

Zubeneschamali

EdgeCase wrote: »

Ireland's also got huge experience in how to conduct referenda

and if we got a bloody stupid result like Brexit, we'd hold a second one to be sure before jumping off any cliffs.

Professor Moriarty

judeboy101 wrote: »

If you believe in god you are technically a creationist, the degree to which you broadcast it, is what makes you crazy.

It means that you believe the world was created about 8,000 years ago. So stuff like dinosaur fossils are makey uppey.

judeboy101

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It means that you believe the world was created about 8,000 years ago. So stuff like dinosaur fossils are makey uppey.

No, it means you believe that god created the world/universe. Hinduism, Islam, judaism and Christianity have the creation at the core of their beliefs.some sects within those religions have very specific ideas of the creation e.g "creationists" but all believe in a creation

judeboy101

Dominic Raab gives DUP MP Sammy Wilson a reassurance the government "will do nothing that will draw a customs border down the Red Sea".

bilston

judeboy101 wrote: »

Dominic Raab gives DUP MP Sammy Wilson a reassurance the government "will do nothing that will draw a customs border down the Red Sea".

I'm sure the Egyptians are delighted

EdgeCase

judeboy101 wrote: »

Dominic Raab gives DUP MP Sammy Wilson a reassurance the government "will do nothing that will draw a customs border down the Red Sea".

Considering how little knowledge of Northern Ireland they have displayed, nothing surprises me at this stage.

Inquitus

EdgeCase wrote: »

I just think we are really witnessing the very worst of the pure two-party first past the post systems in the US and the UK at the moment.

Indeed we are, 2, essentially, 2 party systems that aren't even that democratic these days.

blanch152

EdgeCase wrote: »

I think sometime we actually underestimate the Irish electoral system's benefits and take a lot of the way we do politics here completely for granted. The voting system genuinely is one of (if not the) most mature, developed and sophisticated examples of full proportional representation anywhere in the world. Over the past few decades it has really come into fruition too, particularly as the old tribal FF vs FG politics has melted away to a large degree. It's also supported by increasing use of cross-party committees and structures in the Dail that build consensus rather than driving open fractures.

Our systems basically drive the finding of consensus whereas the UK first-past-the-post 2-party system does the exact opposite, and tends to create tribal divides and bunker formation.

Ireland's also got huge experience in how to conduct referenda and as learnt (through trial, error and evolution) to come up with things like robust referendum commissions and seems to have an ability to keep debates relatively sane and fact-based and the campaigns, certainly in the recent two, have been shockingly mature, considered and genuinely teased issues out in a way that is actually rather impressive.

On top of that, we even have the whole development of experiments in participative democracy with the Citizens' Assembly approach to teasing things out.

I think you're really seeing a situation where one country's quite deliberately creating systems that are all about finding agreed, sane, pragmatic solutions and teasing things out while the other is still engaged in pure tribal politics and shouting at each other across the floor.

I would also suspect that political culture is possibly why we are a lot more able to negotiate things in Europe as that and of politics is not alien to our own systems.

I just think we are really witnessing the very worst of the pure two-party first past the post systems in the US and the UK at the moment.

I would agree that our system is far better than the systems in the US and the UK, but we are far behind other countries in that our system is still welded to the parochial-pump type interventions by backbench TDs and the populist one-upmanship from opposition parties.

We could do with another look at our electoral system to see how it could be improved, but that is for another thread.

Gerry T

EdgeCase wrote:

EU law in Northern Ireland right now is implemented through the Northern Ireland Office which is responsible to the Northern Ireland Secretary who is a Tory minister in the UK Government.

Good post, not fully copied. Could there be an act of law in the UK that gives the NI assembly full control, not just in trade matters. Then the NI assembly could adopt and mirror all eu legislation as their own. I know this diverges NI from the UK but it solves a lot of other problems. The big stumbling block to this that I can see is what courts preside over this..UK or eu, ddp would have a fit

Inquitus

blanch152 wrote: »

I would agree that our system is far better than the systems in the US and the UK, but we are far behind other countries in that our system is still welded to the parochial-pump type interventions by backbench TDs and the populist one-upmanship from opposition parties.

We could do with another look at our electoral system to see how it could be improved, but that is for another thread.

The best way to do away with Parochial politics is go with a full STV vote based on lists submitted prior to the day. No link between candidates and their constituency that way, local government left to local government......

EdgeCase

Gerry T wrote: »

Good post, not fully copied. Could there be an act of law in the UK that gives the NI assembly full control, not just in trade matters. Then the NI assembly could adopt and mirror all eu legislation as their own. I know this diverges NI from the UK but it solves a lot of other problems. The big stumbling block to this that I can see is what courts preside over this..UK or eu, ddp would have a fit

The even bigger stumbling block is the Northern Ireland Assembly is regularly highly unstable and currently out of service as a result of that, so there's no legislature to even devolve anything to and this situation has to be resolved in a matter of months. They really couldn't have picked a worse time.

Trasna1

EdgeCase wrote: »

I think sometime we actually underestimate the Irish electoral system's benefits and take a lot of the way we do politics here completely for granted. The voting system genuinely is one of (if not the) most mature, developed and sophisticated examples of full proportional representation anywhere in the world. Over the past few decades it has really come into fruition too, particularly as the old tribal FF vs FG politics has melted away to a large degree. It's also supported by increasing use of cross-party committees and structures in the Dail that build consensus rather than driving open fractures.

Our systems basically drive the finding of consensus whereas the UK first-past-the-post 2-party system does the exact opposite, and tends to create tribal divides and bunker formation.

Ireland's also got huge experience in how to conduct referenda and as learnt (through trial, error and evolution) to come up with things like robust referendum commissions and seems to have an ability to keep debates relatively sane and fact-based and the campaigns, certainly in the recent two, have been shockingly mature, considered and genuinely teased issues out in a way that is actually rather impressive.

On top of that, we even have the whole development of experiments in participative democracy with the Citizens' Assembly approach to teasing things out.

I think you're really seeing a situation where one country's quite deliberately creating systems that are all about finding agreed, sane, pragmatic solutions and teasing things out while the other is still engaged in pure tribal politics and shouting at each other across the floor.

I would also suspect that political culture is possibly why we are a lot more able to negotiate things in Europe as that and of politics is not alien to our own systems.

I just think we are really witnessing the very worst of the pure two-party first past the post systems in the US and the UK at the moment.

Oh please, less of the back slapping. PR-STV was a British imposition at the time of the Anglo Irish treaty to ensure Protestants wouldn't be crowded our of representation. FF tried twice and failed in both referendums to get FPTP installed here - so it's not like it's always had the backing of the political system.

PR-STV is very representative, and that is one of it's biggest flaws. Because politicians always have to be looking to protect their vote, it often means they neglect national issues in favour of local ones and indeed often work against the national interest.

And as for the Citizens assembly, that was a total joke. It's only purpose was to insulate FG from the decision to call an abortion referendum which they wanted to call. If there is never another citizens assembly, it will be too soon. We shouldn't be outsourcing public policy to an unaccountable body - that's Governments job.

Bravery and consensus politics can take place in any system - both often lacking here at home. And there is nothing only arrogance preventing it in Westminster at the moment.

The reason Ireland is good at negotiation on Europe is because it is experienced. As a small country, it had always had to build alliances to meet it's goals, which is not always true of large powerful ones- who can steamroll their way.

megaten

Trasna1 wrote: »

And as for the Citizens assembly, that was a total joke. It's only purpose was to insulate FG from the decision to call an abortion referendum which they wanted to call. If there is never another citizens assembly, it will be too soon. We shouldn't be outsourcing public policy to an unaccountable body - that's Governments job.

When it was first announced I that it was the very definition of passing the buck but considering the breakdown of its recommendations on abortion mirroring the actual referendum result quite closely I thought it worked out pretty well in the end and wouldn't object to it being run again. (though not necessarily in the near future)

listermint

Trasna1 wrote: »

Oh please, less of the back slapping. PR-STV was a British imposition at the time of the Anglo Irish treaty to ensure Protestants wouldn't be crowded our of representation. FF tried twice and failed in both referendums to get FPTP installed here - so it's not like it's always had the backing of the political system.

PR-STV is very representative, and that is one of it's biggest flaws. Because politicians always have to be looking to protect their vote, it often means they neglect national issues in favour of local ones and indeed often work against the national interest.

And as for the Citizens assembly, that was a total joke. It's only purpose was to insulate FG from the decision to call an abortion referendum which they wanted to call. If there is never another citizens assembly, it will be too soon. We shouldn't be outsourcing public policy to an unaccountable body - that's Governments job.

Bravery and consensus politics can take place in any system - both often lacking here at home. And there is nothing only arrogance preventing it in Westminster at the moment.

The reason Ireland is good at negotiation on Europe is because it is experienced. As a small country, it had always had to build alliances to meet it's goals, which is not always true of large powerful ones- who can steamroll their way.

Yes because you know hearing the opinions of the public in a political setting is bad.


Ridiculous point .

Did their view not sit with yours I presume.


Off topic anyway

Trasna1

listermint wrote: »

Yes because you know hearing the opinions of the public in a political setting is bad.


Ridiculous point .

Did their view not sit with yours I presume.


Off topic anyway

Hearing public's opinions is good, outsourcing the setting of public policy is not.

Last post on this, because it's important. Whether or not my views aligned with the assemblies recommendations is not relevant. I'm critical of it because it was designed as a political smokescreen for Fine Gael under the pretense of listening to the people. FG were reasonably confident that there would be a majority for reform of the abortion laws among the general population but not among their older grassroots supporters. The CA was designed to give FG political cover so those in the socially liberal wing of FG would get their referendum without alienating their older base.

FG should have been brave enough to put a referendum in their manifesto and to call the referendum without the BS of representative CA - something with only 99 politically interested citizens with the ability to give 10 Saturdays in Dublin could never be.

Capt'n Midnight

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It means that you believe the world was created about 8,000 years ago. So stuff like dinosaur fossils are makey uppey.

About ??

22rd of October 4004 BC, 6 pm.

Other religions have different dates. But this one you can count on as surely as the Lord Jesus Christ himself spoke Ulster Scots.



Ian jr has been suspended :pac:

The electorate in North Antrim is 75,657, of whom 7,878 had a first preference gvote for SF.
More than enough to get a petition for an election.


If everyone else stood back and let Jim Allister of the TUV run it could get really interesting.

Sam Russell

Trasna1 wrote: »

Hearing public's opinions is good, outsourcing the setting of public policy is not.

Last post on this, because it's important. Whether or not my views aligned with the assemblies recommendations is not relevant. I'm critical of it because it was designed as a political smokescreen for Fine Gael under the pretense of listening to the people. FG were reasonably confident that there would be a majority for reform of the abortion laws among the general population but not among their older grassroots supporters. The CA was designed to give FG political cover so those in the socially liberal wing of FG would get their referendum without alienating their older base.

FG should have been brave enough to put a referendum in their manifesto and to call the referendum without the BS of representative CA - something with only 99 politically interested citizens with the ability to give 10 Saturdays in Dublin could never be.

If David Cameron had tried a CA approach to see how Brexit could be achieved or scrapped, he might have kept the UK out of its current mess.

The CA to everyone's surprise worked very well.

1. They were randomly selected with a set of views that were supposed to be representative of the nation. [Difficult to do].

2. They were informed by experts in the field they were trying to advise on.

3. They had open discussions between tables of 10 people, with facillitators.

4. Following these discussions, they voted on questions related to the discussions.

Now that is what I call democracy.

EdgeCase

It's going to be a weird few weeks as the EU institutions are largely off-line for August, as is Westminster.

Capt'n Midnight

El Weirdo wrote: »

I assume that would also apply to many Irish people who moved back home after spending their working lives in the UK?

Don't think it would given our history and legacy deals done before we both joined the EU. And the mutual recognition of lots of legal stuff.

Lots of British Army pensions down the years, even when there was customs at the border.