Brexit discussion thread IV

Spanish Eyes

There doesn't seem to be the same worry in the UK about this at the moment. Well not in any media I can see anyway. Apart from the "knife edge" situation that possibly beckons and is being ramped up.

All choreographed down to the wire I think. DUP know this too. And they are fkd.

Spanish Eyes

First Up wrote: »

The EU has no interest in the optics of concessions either.

It's a game in the long grass my friend. There will always be concessions.

First Up

Spanish Eyes wrote:

It's a game in the long grass my friend. There will always be concessions.

Good luck with that.

prawnsambo

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

A change of Tory leader/PM won't improve matters as the front runners are Johnson, Hunt, Javid and Mogg.

Mogg does not have the support at all. There will be an election if talks fail and May goes. The prospect of JC getting into power may well unite all factions against the unthinkable. It's all they care about.

Spanish Eyes

First Up wrote: »

Good luck with that.

Well I just hope that a deal will be done somehow. If that means a bit of give and take so be it.

But I do realise that a crash out may happen also. I doubt anyone wants that on any side though.

Professor Moriarty

prawnsambo wrote: »

Mogg does not have the support at all. There will be an election if talks fail and May goes. The prospect of JC getting into power may well unite all factions against the unthinkable. It's all they care about.

He still appears in the betting odds though. I don't know if it would be in the party interest to go for another GE as I could see UKIP taking a lot of their votes. Indeed, the prospect of losing power might unite them but that pesky Brexit thingy still needs sorting.

Spanish Eyes

Those post colonial xenophobics are a laughing stock to us, but in UK may be lauded by many.

Interesting times.

Nody

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Well I just hope that a deal will be done somehow. If that means a bit of give and take so be it.

But I do realise that a crash out may happen also. I doubt anyone wants that on any side though.

The difference is that one side has it as a real option (EU) while the other does not (UK). Simply look at the position papers from each party; EU clearly outlines exactly what being a third party without a deal will mean; UK's papers on the other hand has on pretty much every item "Well we're going to do this and expect EU will do the same for us". Even the "hardcore" brexiteers are not talking a real crash out; their definition of crash out is simply that instead of one big deal there's multiple small deals struck on the issues.

And that clearly shows who's going to be bending their requirements to get a deal in the end...

Spanish Eyes

First Up wrote: »

Good luck with that.

It is not my call. But we shall see what happens.

Mr.Nice Guy

First Up wrote: »

The EU has not the slightest interest in making concessions to the UK. The EU has always helped member states in selling union-wide initiatives to their electorates. It has no reason to care how the UK government deals with its internal problems.

The EU has made a concession if these reports are to be believed that the backstop on customs will be UK-wide.

prawnsambo

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

He still appears in the betting odds though. I don't know if it would be in the party interest to go for another GE as I could see UKIP taking a lot of their votes. Indeed, the prospect of losing power might unite them but that pesky Brexit thingy still needs sorting.

Ah yeah. But bookies will always give odds to punters who want to throw their money away. It never actually means that they have a serious chance. UKIP have never won a Westminster seat. It's possible they could, but unlikely.

Professor Moriarty

prawnsambo wrote: »

Ah yeah. But bookies will always give odds to punters who want to throw their money away. It never actually means that they have a serious chance. UKIP have never won a Westminster seat. It's possible they could, but unlikely.

I dunno. Betting odds are often a fair indicator. Who do you think would have a better chance other than those four? For UKIP to damage the Tories, they don't actually have to win a seat. They just need to siphon off some of the Tory Little Englander vote.

Spanish Eyes

If there was PR in the UK I wonder if UKIP would have garnered more seats. Same for LibDems.

I cannot understand how FPTP is tolerated there. Seems to me to be the opposite of democracy. But sure what do I know.

prawnsambo

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I dunno. Betting odds are often a fair indicator. Who do you think would have a better chance other than those four? For UKIP to damage the Tories, they don't actually have to win a seat. They just need to siphon off some of the Tory Little Englander vote.

It really depends on whether the Tories accept that brexit is a circle that can't be squared or not. If they carry on the glorious charge of the light brigade, then any of a bunch of boneheads can apply. Otherwise it's a lot more difficult to assess. There are so many chameleons in that party.

BonnieSituation

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

If there was PR in the UK I wonder if UKIP would have garnered more seats. Same for LibDems.

I cannot understand how FPTP is tolerated there. Seems to me to be the opposite of democracy. But sure what do I know.

There's no wonder, they would have.

Enzokk

catrionanic wrote: »

I still think a deal may be coming. We always knew all along that May would have to leave it so close to the wire that the Brexiteers wouldn't have time to torpedo things. I was sceptical that they would announce tonight of a deal being done, because it would give the ERG, DUP et al. too much time to kick up a fuss. Plus, all this posturing and drama and last-minute crisis palaver will add to the ruse of May pushing the EU to their absolute limits, and emerging from the jaws of Brussels at the eleventh hour with a hard-won deal under her belt. "Bloody difficult woman" and all that.

It isn't over yet.

There seems to be only two options now, take the EU deal or leave without one. There is no time for a third deal or more negotiations. If there is to be an agreement then you can make a safe bet that it will be the UK that will take what is on the table, as they have done so far in all the negotiations. Look at last year December, there wasn't going to be a deal until there was and it was a great deal for the EU because there isn't any other option.

Also, the big problem is still that unless she gives up her red lines and appeals to the middle ground of both Labour and the Conservatives that she cannot get any deal through parliament. If it is too hard then you will have those "rebels" that will vote against it. If it is too soft then the ERG and the DUP will vote against it. She will also lose some of her own cabinet in the process.

So no deal seems the most likely outcome right now. I would say after tonight we are at about 70% or so whereas before Salzburg it was probably 50% chance. My guess is if there is no deal on Wednesday then the EU will hold a summit without the UK in November to prepare for no deal. Then the pressure will be on May to either resign, get a new deal quickly or prepare to be the PM that will be in charge of a disaster.

Professor Moriarty

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

If there was PR in the UK I wonder if UKIP would have garnered more seats. Same for LibDems.

I cannot understand how FPTP is tolerated there. Seems to me to be the opposite of democracy. But sure what do I know.

There was a referendum to change from FPTP to an Alternative Vote system in 2011. The proposal was heavily defeated.

Kermit.de.frog

Peter Foster of the Telegraph

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1051573541337014274

prawnsambo

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

There was a referendum to change from FPTP to an Alternative Vote system in 2011. The proposal was heavily defeated.

Even multi-seat constituencies would be more democratic.

Professor Moriarty

prawnsambo wrote: »

It really depends on whether the Tories accept that brexit is a circle that can't be squared or not. If they carry on the glorious charge of the light brigade, then any of a bunch of boneheads can apply. Otherwise it's a lot more difficult to assess. There are so many chameleons in that party.

There needs to be a visceral realignment of British party politics as both main parties are inherently disunited. Brexit seems to be the trigger but unfortunately there isn't time for change and FPTP only adds petrol to the fire. The EU has rejected Chequers and anyway May wouldn't get it through parliament such is the state of her party. It's now very possible they will crash out while eating each other alive like rats in a sack.

Spanish Eyes

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

There was a referendum to change from FPTP to an Alternative Vote system in 2011. The proposal was heavily defeated.

Yes I know. But I still wonder why it was defeated.

The devil you know and all that maybe, but a proper debate would have helped.

So there they are now. Red or Blue at every election. No chance of any other voice. Seems unusually unrepresentative to me. But it is their choice.

Professor Moriarty

prawnsambo wrote: »

Even multi-seat constituencies would be more democratic.

A show of hands would be more democratic. Or the toss of a coin.

Professor Moriarty

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Yes I know. But I still wonder why it was defeated.

The devil you know and all that maybe, but a proper debate would have helped.

So there they are now. Red or Blue at every election. No chance of any other voice. Seems unusually unrepresentative to me. But it is their choice.

It was the usual lies in the Tory press wot done it.

Mr.Nice Guy

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Yes I know. But I still wonder why it was defeated.

The devil you know and all that maybe, but a proper debate would have helped.

So there they are now. Red or Blue at every election. No chance of any other voice. Seems unusually unrepresentative to me. But it is their choice.

As I recall, one of the main arguments for retaining FPTP was that to scrap it would lead to weak governments and greatly strengthen the hands of smaller parties, which is hysterical given the state of things now.

Lib Dems initially were in favour of PR but agreed to the watered down compromise of AV. It came across like they weren't as enthusiastic for that, so it wasn't that surprising that it lost.

First Up

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

The EU has made a concession if these reports are to be believed that the backstop on customs will be UK-wide.

That is not a concession by the EU. It is essentially what May offered.

The integrity of the Single Market will not be compromised. It is up to the UK to find the hoops to jump through to create a backstop. Their failure to do so is what is bringing us to reality.

prawnsambo

First Up wrote: »

That is not a concession by the EU. It is essentially what May offered.

The integrity of the Single Market will not be compromised. It is up to the UK to find the hoops to jump through to create a backstop. Their failure to do so is what is bringing us to reality.

Their failure to understand what a backstop is isn't helping.

Rhineshark

First Up wrote: »

That is not a concession by the EU. It is essentially what May offered.

The integrity of the Single Market will not be compromised. It is up to the UK to find the hoops to jump through to create a backstop. Their failure to do so is what is bringing us to reality.

The EU has made concessions though. It has rules that are flexible for pragmatism's sake but they will only go so far. The NI offer was a concession as was allowing checks by British customs officers on British territory. While given short shrift, it was quite a large concession. It was open to the UK joining programs it wanted to pay towards, national defence related projects aside.

While yes, it is down to the UK to figure out which hoop to go through and it shouldn't expect the SM-damaging concessions it demands, it is not because of a blanket refusal to make concessions by the EU.

Sam Russell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It was the usual lies in the Tory press wot done it.

It was a Cameron type referendum, where the option was one that could not succeesd because it was a dog's dinnr of a system. The STV system woud be too complicated for British voters - where the voter puts the candidates in the order of thei choice - simples. Instead, they had STV where you nly chose first and second. It was then rushed with little attempt to explain it.

The last time a British Parliament had a single party government that enjoyed a popular majorit was in 1932.

The House of Lords is unelected, and the HofC is a minority government (since 1932), so that means it is undemocratic. What is it they say about the EU?

Spanish Eyes

Oh leave them at their Red/Blue divide forever.

What about Brexit though. I feel a bit nervous about it.

Cannot understand how the British feel, they seem quite stoic.

Water John

It's a good bit away in political terms, but there will be a Remain protest in London next Saturday.