Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Tell me how

Leroy42 wrote: »

So for me, its not his support of Brexit that is the issue, it is his complete lack of ability to paint the current government in the light they should be or indeed to give any credible alternative to the, frankly, sh1tshow that is happening.

I agree.

The conservatives have been an unmitigated disaster in every. single. respect. since Cameron announced the referendum.
The entire world is looking at the UK through their fingers, cringing, because they are so inept.
Theresa May's government suffered the biggest defeat in the house of commons since records began.
The Tories still lead Labour in many polls.
Corbyn is responsible for this.

lawred2

Tell me how wrote: »

I agree.

The conservatives have been an unmitigated disaster in every. single. respect. since Cameron announced the referendum.
The entire world is looking at the UK through their fingers, cringing, because they are so inept.
Theresa May's government suffered the biggest defeat in the house of commons since records began.
The Tories still lead Labour in many polls.
Corbyn is responsible for this.

Well I'd argue that it's because they ultimately offer nothing different.

The Tories are a Brexit party.
Labour are a Brexit party.

It was 52% to 48% (probably reversed now) yet circa 90% of parliament supports Brexit. So about 10% of parliament represents the wishes of at least 48% of UK voters.

There is no other show in town. All the other stuff is day to day Westminster micro politics - a position on Brexit that opposes a Tory Brexit is macro politics.

If you're a remainer (for idealogical reasons or pragmatic reasons) who do you turn to?

Neither of them.

They'd both disgust you. Both trying to fall over each other in proving their Brexit credentials.

demfad

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Oh for goodness sake! How EXACTLY is the leader of the opposition supposed to avert Brexit without first defeating the Government?

And he just did it by 230 votes!

Remainers would apparently prefer him to label Labour the Remain party even if that costs him votes next time and leaves the Tories in power.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/19/labour-finished-if-it-backs-brexit-in-a-snap-election-says-adonis?CMP=share_btn_tw

If Corbyn supports Brexit Labour's support will fall to 19% just 2 ahead of the Lib Dems.

Tell me how

lawred2 wrote: »

Well I'd argue that it's because they ultimately offer nothing different.

The Tories are a Brexit party.
Labour are a Brexit party.

It was 52% to 48% (probably reversed now) yet circa 90% of parliament supports Brexit. So about 10% of parliament represents the wishes of at least 48% of UK voters.

There is no other show in town. All the other stuff is day to day Westminster micro politics - a position on Brexit that opposes a Tory Brexit is macro politics.

If you're a remainer (for idealogical reasons or pragmatic reasons) who do you turn to?

Neither of them.

They'd both disgust you.

They may have been a breixt party given the trend for working class areas to vote to leave but these areas, I think, were sold a pup and the impact of leaving is largely going to hit them more.

The likes of David Lammy, Keir Starmer and Jess Philips have reacted to the realities since the referendum but have had no luck in changing policy.
They are being hamstrung by an idealist base which is living in dreamland because the words of their leader sounds good when they are left unexamined.

micosoft

jem wrote: »

The UK is in a mess everyone knows this.
A major part of this is that May and Corbyn are leavers while the actual majority of MP's are remainers.

Actually May was a remainer.

jem wrote: »

The gas part is that the hard right and the hard left are on the same side - anti EU and always were.

Little difference between hard right and hard left in the horseshoe of politics.

jem wrote: »

At the same time the EU largly caused this problem by overreaching with the commission trying hard to turn the EU into an actual state/country simular to the USA. There is a huge amount of people against this.

No it didn't. Every development of the EU has been put forward by members. Define huge because it seems to be restricted to a bunch of simpltons following populists who create EU strawmen and bogeymen.

jem wrote: »

How do the UK get out of this mess is the big question.

Question that only the UK can answer.

jem wrote: »

First thing I would do is look for an extension.

And why would the EU give it unless there is a meaningful change or offer from the UK.

jem wrote: »

Repeal the leave legislitation (if they dont and no agreement made before 27/3 they crash out)

A meaningful alternative has to be put forward.

jem wrote: »

Put to parliment a number of questions and vote on each indivudaly:
1. rule in or out hard brexit
2. vote on labour's common market.
3 vote on new referendum.
With this there would be at least clarity of what the MP's want or dont want.
Would have to be a free vote no whips.

for the new referendum there would need to be PR on the vote:
Mays deal
No deal
or stay
with transferable vote

Have they the common sense to do the above I totally doubt it.

Seems unlikely at the moment.

Hurrache

I think someone may have suggested at some point last night that France may step in to help Britain.

This firmly knocks that thought into touch. Macron certainty doesn't try to pretty up the picture as to what he thinks Britain will do

https://twitter.com/euronews/status/1085548829217341440?s=19

Leroy42

What I don't understand is why the likes of Lammy, Soubry etc have not moved to a different party.

It is clear that there is now a split along Eu lines, rather than the traditional party lines. People like Hoey are quite happy to vote with the Tories on the EU rather than their 'own' party.

If what you believe in is on longer represented by your party, then is it really your party anymore?

LeinsterDub

demfad wrote: »

[
If Corbyn supports Brexit Labour's support will fall to 19% just 2 ahead of the Lib Dems.

But where do the displaced voters go. Liberals? Maybe but they don't run in every constituency I believe. I can see the SNP and the Welsh party making gains.

An Ciarraioch

May rules out a customs union, which suggests the plan is simply to carry on the same course:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/16/no-10-rules-out-customs-union-before-cross-party-talks-begin

Tell me how

Leroy42 wrote: »

What I don't understand is why the likes of Lammy, Soubry etc have not moved to a different party.

It is clear that there is now a split along Eu lines, rather than the traditional party lines. People like Hoey are quite happy to vote with the Tories on the EU rather than their 'own' party.

If what you believe in is on longer represented by your party, then is it really your party anymore?

That is a much wider conundrum than simply the Labour/Tories question in the UK.
Look at politics in the US.
PEople give out here about our parties but we have had 6 parties play a significant role in politics in the last 25 years (my frame of focus) FF, FG, Labour, SF, Greens and the PD's (who no longer exist).

The strength of the party name carries a lot of weight. It is actually very interesting. We saw what happened with Renua, it will be interesting to see how Peadar Tóibín gets on with his yet to be named party.

I think Politics suffers too much at this point from 'the role of opposition'. The sitting government could solve world peace and they'd be blamed because the buses don't run on time. Genuine complaints from opposition are lost in the rabble of consistent negativity. Brexit was one such time when the countries interest should have been prioritised. It is very clear that it wasn't.

Metroid diorteM

Hurrache wrote: »

An excellent website on the border, with a great interactive map to each border crossing and associated terrorist incidents that occurred at each one.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/brexit/borderlands/keeping-peace
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/brexit/borderlands/the-border

This was so disturbing I deleted my previous posts.

Thank you for reminding us about how disastrous a border in the North would be.

Hurrache

Metroid diorteM wrote: »

This was so disturbing I deleted my previous posts.

Thank you for reminding us about how disastrous a border in the North would be.

When you either click on each person who died, or delve into each border crossing, you starkly see the amount of mindless violence involved.

LeinsterDub

Tell me how wrote: »

That is a much wider conundrum than simply the Labour/Tories question in the UK.
Look at politics in the US.
PEople give out here about our parties but we have had 5 parties play a significant role in politics in the last 25 years (my frame of focus) FF, FG, Labour, SF and the PD's (who no longer exist).

The strength of the party name carries a lot of weight. It is actually very interesting. We saw what happened with Renua, it will be interesting to see how Peadar Tóibín gets on with his yet to be named party.

I think Politics suffers too much at this point from 'the role of opposition'. The sitting government could solve world peace and they'd be blamed because the buses don't run on time. Genuine complaints from opposition are lost in the rabble of consistent negativity. Brexit was one such time when the countries interest should have been prioritised. It is very clear that it wasn't.

Don't forget the Greens too.

An Ciarraioch

Tell me how wrote: »

That is a much wider conundrum than simply the Labour/Tories question in the UK.
Look at politics in the US.
PEople give out here about our parties but we have had 6 parties play a significant role in politics in the last 25 years (my frame of focus) FF, FG, Labour, SF, Greens and the PD's (who no longer exist).

The strength of the party name carries a lot of weight. It is actually very interesting. We saw what happened with Renua, it will be interesting to see how Peadar Tóibín gets on with his yet to be named party.

I think Politics suffers too much at this point from 'the role of opposition'. The sitting government could solve world peace and they'd be blamed because the buses don't run on time. Genuine complaints from opposition are lost in the rabble of consistent negativity. Brexit was one such time when the countries interest should have been prioritised. It is very clear that it wasn't.

Especially as Tóibín's party already appears to be gaining some traction in terms of securing councillors North of the Border.

Adamcp898

Leroy42 wrote: »

What I don't understand is why the likes of Lammy, Soubry etc have not moved to a different party.

It is clear that there is now a split along Eu lines, rather than the traditional party lines. People like Hoey are quite happy to vote with the Tories on the EU rather than their 'own' party.

If what you believe in is on longer represented by your party, then is it really your party anymore?

Where do they move? Not that I think either would bring a huge following with them wherever they'd go.

The split is "only" upon EU lines regarding brexit. As we'll see tonight everyone will still vote with their party. Once brexit is finally concluded, it'll be surprising how quickly it's "as your were".

marieholmfan

David Lammy is a socialist. But for Brexit he would be completely fine with Corbyn though he has been pretty clear about doubting Corbyn's competence.

ToBeFrank123

I can't but enjoy the British political classes tearing themselves apart, popcorn at the ready.

They can't agree how to leave, so probably best to have a second referendum with option 1 on the ballot paper being a hard Brexit and option 2 staying in the EU.

The Conservatives and Labour will never agree to anything. The EU won't drop the backstop and they don't want a hard border in Ireland. There is too much division in the Conservatives. Delaying Brexit another 6 months or a year won't make a difference, the same old divisions will arise. If Corbyn replaced May, he'd face similar issues to get a deal through parliament.

Hard Brexit or Remain seem to be the only possible options.

ancapailldorcha

prinzeugen wrote: »

2 posts which look like copy and paste jobs...

Essays that could have only been written by Tony Connolly or the KGB.

Banned.

marieholmfan

nc6000 wrote: »

Great, how are we going to pay for that?

4000 a year extra in income tax each.

josip

Which do UK people hold stronger, party loyalty or their Brexit position?
If they feel as strongly about Brexit as they claim, then in a GE, shouldn't Lib Dem hoover up most of the 48% or whatever Remain and Labour/Tories split the 52% Leave groups?
Obviously I'm simplifying things a lot, but there is no other option for the Remainers than to row in behind the Lib Dems.

robinph

josip wrote: »

Obviously I'm simplifying things a lot, but there is no other option for the Remainers than to row in behind the Lib Dems.

The LibDems were decimated by Cameron passing all the blame for student fees onto them. Was always going to happen that they would take the blame for something though, but will take a long time before they get back to where they were in 2010.

ToBeFrank123

josip wrote: »

Which do UK people hold stronger, party loyalty or their Brexit position?
If they feel as strongly about Brexit as they claim, then in a GE, shouldn't Lib Dem hoover up most of the 48% or whatever Remain and Labour/Tories split the 52% Leave groups?
Obviously I'm simplifying things a lot, but there is no other option for the Remainers than to row in behind the Lib Dems.

Its a very divisive issue and an election would likely lead to a further splintering of the political structure. An election would as you say become almost solely about Brexit and people voting for candidates based on their position on Brexit.

There's a golden opportunity for Britain to leave if they want to. They could also admit its not worth the hassle and even if they left, they'd still be bound by EU Laws in many respects if they stay in a customs union. I can't see Boris Johnson and co going for that. They seem to want to withdraw Britain almost entirely from Europe and want nothing to do with Europe. Admirable except when you want to trade with Europe. Johnson is living in the past imo.

Leroy42

I think, as AdamCP898, that many see this split as temporary, and once Brexit is done then things will get back to normal.

But of course we all know, but whether they go with TM deal or No Deal, this is really just the beginning of it. Next will following years of negotiation, during which an election will happen. As many vox pops have said, many voters just want Brexit done, "get it over with" is an oft heard response. But that of course fails to understand what Brexit actually is.

In that case a return to traditional party lines is not really going to be as straight forward as many seem to think. There is no end to this, Brexit day isn't it after which we never talk about it again.

You will have negotiations, which even if you take the line of Davis, Johnson et al, about a FTA, will need the parties of the day to consider how much regulatory alignment is acceptable. On non-EU trade deals, what positions of the FTA with the EU are they prepared to go against in order to secure a trade deal or will they opt to discuss only those issues outside of the FTA remit.

Its a nightmare and so far away from Take back control that you couldn't make it up.

But one thing is for certain, IMO, the traditional political set-up of the UK will be changed forever.

For Forks Sake

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

No, we are deflecting it seems.



Remember the global recession from 2008? the EU caused it.

Remember the London riots? - yep, the EU caused them.

Remember the Norman invasion of England? - you guessed it - the EU was behind it.


The EU has been the bogeyman for all their problems for the last 40 years, any disagreement with this you will be told to look at the current unrest in France, and you will be told it's the EUs fault.

Indeed, there's actually a page on the EU site specifically debunking 25 years worth of falsehoods published in the UK media: https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/euromyths-a-z-index/

Leroy42

robinph wrote: »

The LibDems were decimated by Cameron passing all the blame for student fees onto them. Was always going to happen that they would take the blame for something though, but will take a long time before they get back to where they were in 2010.

I always find this hard to understand.

Yesterday on C4 news, a Labour shadow minister was havig a go at the Lib Dems for the failings on the LibDems in the coalition. It is right that they are held accountable, but they were junior partners in a coalition. Coalitions have no real history in the UK, so it is clear that the LibDems played their hand really badly.

But if voters are going to hold parties to account for ever on how they performed in government, then surely Labour taking the UK into Iraq is a far worse betrayal of voters than third level fees. Surely the poll tax, the bedroom tax, the universal social scheme etc are far worse. Why the lib dems being held to such a high standard when they were junior partners in the first place

Adamcp898

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think, as AdamCP898, that many see this split as temporary, and once Brexit is done then things will get back to normal.

But of course we all know, but whether they go with TM deal or No Deal, this is really just the beginning of it. Next will following years of negotiation, during which an election will happen. As many vox pops have said, many voters just want Brexit done, "get it over with" is an oft heard response. But that of course fails to understand what Brexit actually is.

In that case a return to traditional party lines is not really going to be as straight forward as many seem to think. There is no end to this, Brexit day isn't it after which we never talk about it again.

You will have negotiations, which even if you take the line of Davis, Johnson et al, about a FTA, will need the parties of the day to consider how much regulatory alignment is acceptable. On non-EU trade deals, what positions of the FTA with the EU are they prepared to go against in order to secure a trade deal or will they opt to discuss only those issues outside of the FTA remit.

Its a nightmare and so far away from Take back control that you couldn't make it up.

But one thing is for certain, IMO, the traditional political set-up of the UK will be changed forever.

See I just don't see how that happens. At the moment the British people are stuck in this limbo where they've voted to leave the EU but haven't yet agreed to leave the EU. As soon as that point is reached, symbolic as it may be because as you rightly point out there's a minefield of legislation to disentangle yourself from that will require parliamentary debate, the people will feel like it's done.

I say they'll feel like it's done and they're out because the general population never get involved in the minutiae of trade agreements or visa legislation or a whole heap of other things.

And if there's one thing that the Brexit process has shown us it's that the general population have never been as disinterested or disenfranchised with politics as they are right now. You still have the leavers and the remainers protesting but a whole other swathe that just don't know (or care) because nobody ever made a proper attempt to engage them. People simply have lost the will to care because they don't see how they make a difference and for that simple reason will revert to the status quo.

MrMusician18

Leroy42 wrote: »

I always find this hard to understand.

Yesterday on C4 news, a Labour shadow minister was havig a go at the Lib Dems for the failings on the LibDems in the coalition. It is right that they are held accountable, but they were junior partners in a coalition. Coalitions have no real history in the UK, so it is clear that the LibDems played their hand really badly.

But if voters are going to hold parties to account for ever on how they performed in government, then surely Labour taking the UK into Iraq is a far worse betrayal of voters than third level fees. Surely the poll tax, the bedroom tax, the universal social scheme etc are far worse. Why the lib dems being held to such a high standard when they were junior partners in the first place

Lib Dems crossed the tuition fees red line in order to get a referendum on AV, which they lost. Clegg banked on winning that referendum and if that were true, the punishment for abandoning the students wouldn't have been as bad.

Adamcp898

Leroy42 wrote: »

I always find this hard to understand.

Yesterday on C4 news, a Labour shadow minister was havig a go at the Lib Dems for the failings on the LibDems in the coalition. It is right that they are held accountable, but they were junior partners in a coalition. Coalitions have no real history in the UK, so it is clear that the LibDems played their hand really badly.

But if voters are going to hold parties to account for ever on how they performed in government, then surely Labour taking the UK into Iraq is a far worse betrayal of voters than third level fees. Surely the poll tax, the bedroom tax, the universal social scheme etc are far worse. Why the lib dems being held to such a high standard when they were junior partners in the first place

That's an argument for the Lib Dem's to make, and until they manage to do so, you won't be hearing from them.

Slightly similar to the Green's here, but I'm never sure how much people actually liked them to begin with.

Professor Moriarty

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

May rules out a customs union, which suggests the plan is simply to carry on the same course:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/16/no-10-rules-out-customs-union-before-cross-party-talks-begin

There is no Plan B. She is much more concerned about keeping the Tory party together than facing up to the mess Britain is in. So, she is paralysed and afraid to move in any direction lest she spooks the Europhobe wing or she spooks the Europhile wing. Keep Calm And Carry On is now Stand Motionless, Close Your Eyes And Block Your Ears.

robinph

Leroy42 wrote: »

I always find this hard to understand.

Yesterday on C4 news, a Labour shadow minister was havig a go at the Lib Dems for the failings on the LibDems in the coalition. It is right that they are held accountable, but they were junior partners in a coalition. Coalitions have no real history in the UK, so it is clear that the LibDems played their hand really badly.

But if voters are going to hold parties to account for ever on how they performed in government, then surely Labour taking the UK into Iraq is a far worse betrayal of voters than third level fees. Surely the poll tax, the bedroom tax, the universal social scheme etc are far worse. Why the lib dems being held to such a high standard when they were junior partners in the first place

Because Labour and Conservatives make the rules and fill the most seats on QT and the likes and get to spout their opinion far more than the minority party I'd guess. LibDems lost the PR battle and as it was only really in 2010 that people started to vote for them in a big way they are easily forgotten?