Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

MrMusician18

Thomas_IV wrote: »

I have been waiting for her political demise for a Long time and was reckoning with it in 2017, 2018 and of course this year. Still, she 'keeps buggering on' (to use the Churchill phrase).

When I consider Boris Johnson taking over from her, this might be the final nail into the Tory's coffin. With JRM instead of Johnson it will even get worse.

As for the LP, that party would really be better off with Mr Starmer as leader. Corbyn was a failure right from the start cos he has shifted the LP as much to the far-left as the Tory Party got to the far-right by the influence of Tory Kippers.

Both parties need to return to the centre ground to solve this Brexit mess. But this seems too difficult with their present leaders in charge and a worse potential successor on the Tory side in a past-May time.

People say that Corbyn has shifted the LP too the far left, simply repeating what they've read or been told about him.

When you look at the policies and the last Labour manifesto, it doesn't read as being of the far left tbh.

Thomas_IV

Enzokk wrote: »

This is as much a reply to a point in both posts, the tweet from Nick Boles, if true, would make me sit up even more about the potential for bias at the BBC. Robbie Gibb was in charge of a lot of influential programs at the BBC during the referendum and it would go a long way to explaining why their interpretation of balance was so skewed as to make it unbalanced.

It would explain why the likes of the IEA got a lot of airtime and why economists views were contradicted by politicians who could just dismiss it out of hand.

Posts on Laura Kuenssberg had been accurate so far I think. She is way to invested in the politics of Westminster politicians instead of the policies. I think she would be a great journalist to pursue certain angles on what is happening with the politicians, not the Political Editor who is ignoring what is happening and is focusing instead on the people. It makes sense though, she has built up her sources and they are giving her gossip and she is not about to burn her sources by calling them out.

Her articles have become more tedious to me and I think the reasons for that it has become that way are pointed out in your post.

gucci

Forgive me for the mini rant, and I know this is not unique to the Brexit scenario / British Politics:

I am so sick of senior MPs (on both sides) who constantly bleet on about protecting their party values which actually translates as them protecting their own job, as they know they will have to face up to the minions while doing their next election drive.

I getthat its a really difficult job to constantly try and spin and manipulate public opinion, but if they actually focused on the job in hand rather than just one up man ship over they might have actually a strategy decided by now.

Lord knows what they could have wasted the last 3 years of their time doing instead of this political snakes and ladders.

Sparko

trellheim wrote: »

Indeed. The last couple of months I have noticed while Katy Adler remains unbiased Laura tends not to be, in the long run, it seems for her unable to stop bringing in the bias of those she has close connections to.

( Although, I may well be reading Katy's same bias on a pro-eu basis and ignoring). Tim Shipman's the same as Laura .... I do wonder how Laura and Tim would do without their contacts in the Tory party and whatsapp groups

Most unbiased for me is Faisal Islam for Sky, amazingly. Tony Connelly is a joy to read though hardly unbiased !

I've enjoyed Faisal's coverage, both on screen and on twitter. It's a shame he's leaving to join the BBC.

Enzokk

Thomas_IV wrote: »

The problem of the BBC as a primarily state funded company is to be obliged to stay neutral. This obligation makes them be perceived by people who follow their reporting critically as being biased.

Other (private funded) Broadcasting companies are more free in style and conduct of reporting about as well as interviewing politicians. I always keep that distinction between them in mind.

But I agree with your view, even the BBC should be that mature to question politicians on their choice of terms and wordings. That is what journalism is all about and should be after all.

I think the problem comes in that both sides will claim bias and the BBC will use that as justification that they are neutral. But having the ERG stating the BBC is biased because they are not using economists that agree with their own view and have experts saying their policies are not realistic is not the same as complaints that they are giving airtime to the likes of the IEA when they have not reported who funds them and what their aims are.

I always think of the analogy that if someone says it is raining you don't need to interview someone else to dispute this to be neutral. You put your head outside the window and see if it is raining. If it is not you call out the person that is lying, this is not happening enough at the BBC in my view. James O'Brien called this out a long time ago when they were considering him as a journalists but asked that he temper his views on Brexit.

Anteayer

Sparko wrote: »

I've enjoyed Faisal's coverage, both on screen and on twitter. It's a shame he's leaving to join the BBC.

That move is taking a very long time. I find Beth Rigby extremely good though. Seems to be very down to earth, no nonsense and hugely knowledgeable.

It's amazing how much Sky News has changed since it escaped from the Murdock empire. It was really risking being turned into a Fox News styled tabloid TV outlet for a while but is now really putting it up to the BBC as a quality news channel.

Sky's correspondents have been absolutely leagues ahead of BBC on Brexit.

Tell me how

gucci wrote: »

Forgive me for the mini rant, and I know this is not unique to the Brexit scenario / British Politics:

I am so sick of senior MPs (on both sides) who constantly bleet on about protecting their party values which actually translates as them protecting their own job, as they know they will have to face up to the minions while doing their next election drive.

I getthat its a really difficult job to constantly try and spin and manipulate public opinion, but if they actually focused on the job in hand rather than just one up man ship over they might have actually a strategy decided by now.

Lord knows what they could have wasted the last 3 years of their time doing instead of this political snakes and ladders.

I actually think that the whole Brexit conversation has moved most people outside of their concerns about their own job and has brought them to a place where they are showing their true beliefs or long term desires rather than their specific role.

Kate Hoey's constituency voted overwhelmingly to remain and yet she is discounting the will of the majority of her constituents in advocating for a hard brexit at any cost. I know she is from a staunchly Labour location but she does not seem concerned that her behaviour is going to alienate voters in the slightest.

The veneer of trying to appeal to most people by having a somewhat ambiguous position has disappeared entirely on all sides hence the rising levels of vitriol and sniping amongst MP's.

In fact, given what the last 2 years have been like, I suspect that some MP's who are more established and you could imagine have some form of financial security would suddenly decide to step aside if the Brexit they wanted was delivered. Similar to our own exodus at the 2011 election after the financial crash.

johnnyskeleton

Mod note:

The quality of broadcasters can be discussed in a different forum. Lets get back to Brexit itself please.

Spook_ie

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

There are various interpretations but according to Mathew Parris, who is usually on the money, Cooper's bill means that May must request a long extension if there is no agreement with Corbyn or the WA isn't passed by April 12th.

And if the EU say no extension unless you give up your first born ( or whatever ) is it the HoC or EU that is saying leave?

Thomas_IV

MrMusician18 wrote: »

People say that Corbyn has shifted the LP too the far left, simply repeating what they've read or been told about him.

When you look at the policies and the last Labour manifesto, it doesn't read as being of the far left tbh.

Frankly, during my life in which I have started to become interested in politics since my teenager days, I have learned to judge the politicians by their doings and not by the pamphlets they produce or let produce and publish as their own.

I read through some of this mans manifestos and as being a centre-left political leaning person myself, some points are there which I could agree with. Others are just old socialist theories which have been proved that they don't work for the benefit of the whole nation because when it becomes too much anti-capitalist it deters investors from investing because of overtaxation. The latter is the core or Corbyn's creed and thus of his manifestos.

What I will never forget and never forgive him is his stance in the Brexit Charade. Instead of being the leader of the pro-EU camp in the UK he - despite his self-admitted allegation that he voted for Remain (which I never believed him), he just joined this farce of 'Game of No 10' in order to get PM and finally proved what he really is, a Brexiter, the fact that he's rather a 'soft Brexiter' makes not much difference to me because he's with the Brexiteers after all.

It wasn't just for the few Brexit LP voters in deprived areas in the North of England, it was to his own nature and political record which proved him to be anti-EU all along in his whole political career.

He has let the Remain camp down, because his supporters in the Momentum movement are as much anti-EU as Corbyn is himself. The whole point in all this is this dream of a socialist Britain, in stark contrast to that of the ERG Brexiteers who dream of a BE2.0 which is even worse than Corbyn's ideas.

Both parties think that they can only realise their political aims once the UK has ceased to be a member of the EU and this is imo the real driving force behind them. The Corbynistas who dream of socialist UK with all the Benefits for all paid for by the rich (but they won't pay for it) and the Johnson-JRM Brexiteers who dream of a return of the Victorian era where they could treat employees like in the old days of that era which means no rights and low payment by exploitation.

The EU regulations are keeping the balance between those two extreme political ideas and for that reason, they seek to have Brexit delivered in order to 'be free' to create their own utopia without anybody interfering with their plans. It is just a matter who wins in a post-Brexit GE and gets the majority to work on the agenda in question. But both sides are ignoring the political realities outside of their bubbles and how this global world with all the intertwinned economical and financial ties will react to a UK which is About to become more isolationist (no matter whether under Corbyn or a hardline Bexiter) and of course dependent on Trump's USA.

Really, when I consider the Brits in all their history, good and bad doings, and their recent developments which make them appear like a Nation that has catched some illness (more of the mental sort), I wonder how anybody will ever trust and rely on them in the future. Nothing in trade is more important than trust and reliability.

Tell me how

^^^^^

A footnote to the whole discussion on Theresa May's Brexit performance will always read, "Even being this bad, she still lead Jeremy Corbyn in opinion polls throughout the entire process"

Sums it up really.

CelticRambler

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

while Remain has made some small gains in polls, what has really shot up is the popularity of No Deal, because with their leaders found out and Brexit in chaos, Leave voters would rather go over the top and charge the machine guns than admit it is all a horrible mistake.

Reading this today while sitting within spitting distance of the Somme battlefields, I can't help but see the parallels. Plus ça change and all that ...

And if that wasn't enough to highlight the insularity and retrospective nature of British politics, this evening will see the first televised debate in France between (twelve) candidates in the European Parliament elections. Yep, over here we're in full pre-election mode while those on the far side of the Channel are still picking the petals off daisies, trying to decide whether or not to join in. We love EU, we love EU not, we love EU, we love EU not ... :rolleyes:

Laois_Man

Thomas_IV wrote: »

I have been waiting for her political demise for a Long time and was reckoning with it in 2017, 2018 and of course this year. Still, she 'keeps buggering on' (to use the Churchill phrase).

When I consider Boris Johnson taking over from her, this might be the final nail into the Tory's coffin. With JRM instead of Johnson it will even get worse.

As for the LP, that party would really be better off with Mr Starmer as leader. Corbyn was a failure right from the start cos he has shifted the LP as much to the far-left as the Tory Party got to the far-right by the influence of Tory Kippers.

Both parties need to return to the centre ground to solve this Brexit mess. But this seems too difficult with their present leaders in charge and a worse potential successor on the Tory side in a past-May time.

Well, the difference is now she has said she is going to let someone else take on the Brexit negations in the next phase (although she doesn't actually have a choice). So if they have left, by any means on either April 13th or May 23rd, she's gone. If they are not gone, her chance to complete Brexit is finished and she's still gone. If the DUP have been shafted, they won't care about propping up the Tory's any longer, their agreement will have been broken and there is no government any longer. Parliament wouldn't even have a majority in electing a new Tory PM.

The assumptions about Boris becoming PM were also there in 2016 and they were wrong. They would be wrong again IMO and there's even less chance of JRM getting it. And I personally don't think there's a hope that the Tory's are getting back in anyway and they will be extremely anxious not to run an election campaign with May as Tory leader if at all possible.

It could pose an interesting conundrum if parliament failed to either elect a new PM or vote for a General Election. Such is the chaos over there, don't be surprised.

Thomas_IV

gucci wrote: »

Forgive me for the mini rant, and I know this is not unique to the Brexit scenario / British Politics:

I am so sick of senior MPs (on both sides) who constantly bleet on about protecting their party values which actually translates as them protecting their own job, as they know they will have to face up to the minions while doing their next election drive.

I getthat its a really difficult job to constantly try and spin and manipulate public opinion, but if they actually focused on the job in hand rather than just one up man ship over they might have actually a strategy decided by now.

Lord knows what they could have wasted the last 3 years of their time doing instead of this political snakes and ladders.

Hear, hear!!!! That is all straight to the point and I see it quite the way you do.

gucci

Tell me how wrote: »

I actually think that the whole Brexit conversation has moved most people outside of their concerns about their own job and has brought them to a place where they are showing their true beliefs or long term desires rather than their specific role.

Kate Hoey's constituency voted overwhelmingly to remain and yet she is discounting the will of the majority of her constituents in advocating for a hard brexit at any cost. I know she is from a staunchly conservative location but she does not seem concerned that her behaviour is going to alienate voters in the slightest.

The veneer of trying to appeal to most people by having a somewhat ambiguous position has disappeared entirely on all sides hence the rising levels of vitriol and sniping amongst MP's..

I would agree with what your saying in some cases, like you have highlighted, but for the guys who are flipping and flopping and changing their position every time they are asked and just generally talking hot air and hyperbole are getting way too much air time.

Tell me how wrote: »

In fact, given what the last 2 years have been like, I suspect that some MP's who are more established and you could imagine have some form of financial security would suddenly decide to step aside if the Brexit they wanted was delivered. Similar to our own exodus at the 2011 election after the financial crash.

Of course they are. Unfortunately like our own exedos, the new breed who come in to replace them will be cut from the same cloth and any who arent will be strangled by the water threaders.

Thomas_IV

Tell me how wrote: »

^^^^^

A footnote to the whole discussion on Theresa May's Brexit performance will always read, "Even being this bad, she still lead Jeremy Corbyn in opinion polls throughout the entire process"

Sums it up really.

That is because the alternatives from within her party are all just worse than she is. In other words, the people see her as the 'lesser evil'.

Anteayer

My concern is that the UK tends to imagine it's history as having been one of absolute calm and stability.

When you look back at post war British political and economic history : you've had periods of hair-raising inflation that hit 25%, astronomically high income tax, the IMF bailout in the mid 1970, massive problems with industrial relations, riots that were every bit as bad as what's happening in France now, Northern Ireland (which they like to pretend has nothing to do with them) being the worst conflict in Western Europe in the post war period, absymal diplomatic relations with small neighbours - the Cod Wars with Iceland, terrible relations with Ireland at various stages etc.
In more modern times you've had a systemic banking failure and massive state backed bailout valued at a total of 1/2 trillion, yet they tend to see the 2008 financial crisis as being exclusive to the Eurozone.

If anything the period of calm and economic prosperity in the 90s and sadly 00s is the unusual period. You could argue this kind of mayhem and chaos is actually the normal state of affairs.

To me this looks like the last of 90s centrism fell away and we have sort of gone back to something more like the 1970s style of hard left Vs hard right.

Tell me how

Thomas_IV wrote: »

That is because the alternatives from within her party are all just worse than she is. In other words, the people see her as the 'lesser evil'.

No, that explains why she hasn't been ousted as leader of the Conservatives. It is down to Corbyn's incompetence that she is still leading him after everything that has gone on.

Thomas_IV

Laois_Man wrote: »

Well, the difference is now she has said she is going to let someone else take on the Brexit negations in the next phase (although she doesn't actually have a choice). So if they have left, by any means on either April 13th or May 23rd, she's gone. If they are not gone, her chance to complete Brexit is finished and she's still gone. If the DUP have been shafted, they won't care about propping up the Tory's any longer, their agreement will have been broken and there is no government any longer. Parliament wouldn't even have a majority in electing a new Tory PM.

The assumptions about Boris becoming PM were also there in 2016 and they were wrong. They would be wrong again IMO and there's even less chance of JRM getting it. And I personally don't think there's a hope that the Tory's are getting back in anyway and they will be extremely anxious not to run an election campaign with May as Tory leader if at all possible.

It could pose an interesting conundrum if parliament failed to either elect a new PM or vote for a General Election. Such is the chaos over there, don't be surprised.

I haven't followed developments in NI regarding the DUP playing the second but decisive fiddle in this Brexit Charade and I always wonder why there is no such opposition from the majority of the people in NI who voted for Remain in the BrexitRef 2016. The DUP constantly ignores the expressed will of the people of NI (as they always didn't care about the people but their own Protestant Unionists) and get away with it. They can nowadays even be that reckless to even threaten the existence of the GFA just for their desire to get back to direct rule for NI in case of a hard Brexit.

I think that your last paragraph in your post really sums up the current situation in Westminster. We haven't seen the end of all that yet.

Laois_Man

Tell me how wrote: »

No, that explains why she hasn't been ousted as leader of the Conservatives. It is down to Corbyn's incompetence that she is still leading him after everything that has gone on.

The latest opinion polls, taken last week and published on Saturday evening, gives Labour a 5 point lead

http://www.deltapoll.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Deltapoll-MoS190330.pdf

Thomas_IV

Tell me how wrote: »

No, that explains why she hasn't been ousted as leader of the Conservatives. It is down to Corbyn's incompetence that she is still leading him after everything that has gone on.

That is also true and the reverse of the whole coin. IMO, both (Corbyn and May) are useless but selfish politicians who have only one interest to themselves which is 'power'.

CelticRambler

Laois_Man wrote: »

So if they have left, by any means on either April 13th or May 23rd, she's gone. If they are not gone, her chance to complete Brexit is finished and she's still gone. If the DUP have been shafted, they won't care about propping up the Tory's any longer, their agreement will have been broken and there is no government any longer. Parliament wouldn't even have a majority in electing a new Tory PM.

<snip>

It could pose an interesting conundrum if parliament failed to either elect a new PM or vote for a General Election. Such is the chaos over there, don't be surprised.

And the EU sees all of this. Don't forget that there'll be a whole new team in Brussels come July regardless of what happens in the UK, so with no apparent prospect of political stability on the English side of the Channel in the foreseeable future, the best thing is to let the new EU guys and girls start with a clean slate.

I'm now fully convinced that there'll be no further extension offered, because there's nothing the HoC can do in the next 8 days that'll satisfy the EU's test. Barnier, Juncker & Tusk are just going through the motions now to make it as clear as possible (for historians, at least :pac: ) that the EU tried its best, but the UK's disintegration made it impossible to conclude a deal.

Professor Moriarty

Spook_ie wrote: »

And if the EU say no extension unless you give up your first born ( or whatever ) is it the HoC or EU that is saying leave?

Sin ceist. For me, it's the Tory right wingers seizing their last opportunity by crashing out - not the HoC. But the EU won't twist the knife too much. They'll probably say it must be at least until 2020 and Britain must take part in the EU elections. May will probably put their terms to parliament and it will probably pass.

Here's the thing though. There is a lot of disquiet in the EU about Britain having a place in all decision making until they leave. Essentially, they will have input into policy and legislation even though they might not be there to implement it. That could set up a variety of very unhelpful scenarios for the EU.

Thomas_IV

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Sin ceist. For me, it's the Tory right wingers seizing their last opportunity by crashing out - not the HoC. But the EU won't twist the knife too much. They'll probably say it must be at least until 2020 and Britain must take part in the EU elections. May will probably put their terms to parliament and it will probably pass.

Here's the thing though. There is a lot of disquiet in the EU about Britain having a place in all decision making until they leave. Essentially, they will have input into policy and legislation even though they might not be there to implement it. That could set up a variety of very unhelpful scenarios for the EU.

That's a very good point.

Professor Moriarty

Thomas_IV wrote: »

That's a very good point.

Thanks. I wish I had come up with it but it was in an article I read yesterday.

Thomas_IV

CelticRambler wrote: »

And the EU sees all of this. Don't forget that there'll be a whole new team in Brussels come July regardless of what happens in the UK, so with no apparent prospect of political stability on the English side of the Channel in the foreseeable future, the best thing is to let the new EU guys and girls start with a clean slate.

I'm now fully convinced that there'll be no further extension offered, because there's nothing the HoC can do in the next 8 days that'll satisfy the EU's test. Barnier, Juncker & Tusk are just going through the motions now to make it as clear as possible (for historians, at least :pac: ) that the EU tried its best, but the UK's disintegration made it impossible to conclude a deal.

In the minds of the right-wing to far-right Brexiteers, British history knows only the bright side and ignores the dark one in which shadow the many people they ever ruled suffered for generations. That of course includes their own. For that reason, no matter what the EU is doing, in their minds and history narrative the EU is and will remain the scapegoat for all the domestic shortcomings and failures of the Brits own doings.

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

anyone listening to JO'B this morning, he just made an absolute fool of a remainer.

Thomas_IV

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Thanks. I wish I had come up with it but it was in an article I read yesterday.

One can't read every single article in the media that is about Brexit because a) the whole thing has become tedious and b) it would drive one really mad without picking articles here and there and give it a rest in breaks to keep one calm.

VinLieger

Millie Delightful Molding wrote: »

anyone listening to JO'B this morning, he just made an absolute fool of a remainer.

Only just flicked on, hopefully they throw it up as a video

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

I meant LEAVER, not remainer

jesus