Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

funkey_monkey

Water John wrote: »

Looking like about 30 Tories will not support TM's Deal whatever the DUP do.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/18/dup-backing-will-not-secure-may-brexit-deal-says-jim-wells
TM might not put it to a 3rd vote.
WTF is she going to say to the 27 when she meets them. They know that she can get her Deal passed in the HOC if she agreed to a 2nd Ref.

Jim Wells is a clown who has been partially ostracised from the DUP and lost the party whip. I don't know what links he still has in order to make those claims, but I'd take it with a pinch of salt until it comes from a more reliable source.

Infini

Water John wrote: »

Looking like about 30 Tories will not support TM's Deal whatever the DUP do.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/18/dup-backing-will-not-secure-may-brexit-deal-says-jim-wells
TM might not put it to a 3rd vote.
WTF is she going to say to the 27 when she meets them. They know that she can get her Deal passed in the HOC if she agreed to a 2nd Ref.

She should just be told either cancel Brexit and own the problem of your government and parties creation or cheerio lads it was nice knowing you. The simple truth is the British Politicians are refusing to own the responsibilities of Brexit and they will refuse to do so unless a gun like economic chaos is pointed at them and they're forced to confront that reality.

This has to end we can't go on indefinately with this incompetence and refusing to be practical has to entail consequences at some point for someone.

CelticRambler

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I wasn’t really getting into the nuances of various systems - which I’d be far from an expert on anyway tbh. Just made what i regarded a simple observation on the fpp system that still seems valid to me, but of course it can and needs to be qualified.

This video by CPGrey shows how FPTP creates the very situation that we're seeing. Note that it was produced in 2011, but describes exactly what happened in the US (Trump) and the UK (Brexit), and hinted at what would eventually happen in France (Macron).

The key point, buried in the middle of the video, is that FPTP undermines the democratic process by disregarding the views of the majority of the electorate and encouraging bad electoral practices - gerrymandering/safe-seats and negative campaigning.

I think the video is slightly flawed in one respect: the no-hoper extremist parties would never withdraw from the race, as they're driven by an all-consuming ideology, not political pragmatism. The logical extenstion is that you then encourage "radical thinking" - radical in the sense of extremism - as these parties constitute the rump rather than the centrists, and that's who the major parties target as they try to get their candidate(s) across the line.

I think the French got lucky with Macron - they'd recently had the experience of Sarkozy, who went too far in cosying up to the right; then they had Hollande who went too far to the left; that meant that even the extremists at both ends of the spectrum were tainted, and for once, a centrist emerged as a valid candidate for a protest vote.

Akrasia

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The EU is not cutting the UK loose. The UK is struggling to cut itself loose, or possibly just into smaller pieces.

I know that, I was responding to some comments suggesting that the EU should, basically dump the UK out without any deal.

I know this is a crisis of their own making, but 2 of the 4 countries of the UK voted against leaving, and all the recent polls suggest that a majority of voters want to remain in the EU. I think the EU should still do anything it can to facilitate the UK remaining in the EU. I think the brexit movement is a busted flush now as we saw with Farage's pathetic march for leave turnout.

The best case scenario for the EU is that the UK comes to it's senses at the last moment, cancels the whole thing, and in the aftermath have a proper national debate about the state of their democratic institutions leading to political reforms and a more informed and mature electorate

Joe_ Public

CelticRambler wrote: »

This video by CPGrey shows how FPTP creates the very situation that we're seeing. Note that it was produced in 2011, but describes exactly what happened in the US (Trump) and the UK (Brexit), and hinted at what would eventually happen in France (Macron).

The key point, buried in the middle of the video, is that FPTP undermines the democratic process by disregarding the views of the majority of the electorate and encouraging bad electoral practices - gerrymandering/safe-seats and negative campaigning.

I think the video is slightly flawed in one respect: the no-hoper extremist parties would never withdraw from the race, as they're driven by an all-consuming ideology, not political pragmatism. The logical extenstion is that you then encourage "radical thinking" - radical in the sense of extremism - as these parties constitute the rump rather than the centrists, and that's who the major parties target as they try to get their candidate(s) across the line.

I think the French got lucky with Macron - they'd recently had the experience of Sarkozy, who went too far in cosying up to the right; then they had Hollande who went too far to the left; that meant that even the extremists at both ends of the spectrum were tainted, and for once, a centrist emerged as a valid candidate for a protest vote.

I personally think that video would be more accurate if it was the snakes and monkeys emerging as the jungle kings (or the “flying monkeys”, as Dominic Cummings had it).

But seriously, that is all on the money. I wasn’t trying to suggest winner takes all was actually a good system, i don’t think that at all. GB should have changed it.

Donald Trump

They can't realistically cancel Brexit at this stage without serious repercussions. There would be anarchy and chaos

It might be mitigated somewhat if there was strong win in a second referendum first but for TM to make an emergency dash on 28th Feb to "unilaterally" revoke article 50 would trigger anarchy.

They've left it too late

Donald Trump

CelticRambler wrote: »

I think the French got lucky with Macron - they'd recently had the experience of Sarkozy, who went too far in cosying up to the right; then they had Hollande who went too far to the left; that meant that even the extremists at both ends of the spectrum were tainted, and for once, a centrist emerged as a valid candidate for a protest vote.

Didn't watch your link yet but don't the French have a 2-stage election for President? I assume you are talking about that. So you are free to vote for your minority candidate in the first round and then still have your "real" vote counted in the second. A poor man's STV

Zubeneschamali

Donald Trump wrote: »

They can't realistically cancel Brexit at this stage without serious repercussions. There would be anarchy and chaos

Food riots and medicine rationing will be much better.

Akrasia

The fundamental reason why FPTP is so anti democratic, is that anyone who tries to challenge the two established party candidates by running for office themselves becomes a 'spoiler' candidate, and the better they do in their campaign, the more likely they are to hand the election to the worst of the two established party candidates

In a race where Hitler is running against Nigel Farage, anyone who thinks they're both terrible candidates and runs as a moderate candidate, will take more votes from the less extreme candidate (in this case Farage) and hand the victory to Hitler.


And lets say there are there are multiple candidates for a single seat, extreme figures can unify a core vote while moderates can poach votes from each other.

If there's a 25% core support for an extreme right wing candidate, 20% core support for extreme left, and there are 5 candidates, 3 of them are centrists and 1 of them is extreme right wing, and 1 is extreme left, you have 3 candidates competing for 55% of the vote, and 1 candidate who hoovers up the 25% on their own, with the other coming 2nd on 20%. In countries that have run off elections, you could end up with the two worst candidates being the only option on the run off ballot even if they don't have the majority of popular support between them.

First part the post motivates candidates to appeal to their core vote of fanatical supporters knowing that their centrist opponents will split their vote between them and any moderates who try to offer an alternative will be attacked by the other moderates in the campaign as spoilers

Akrasia

Donald Trump wrote: »

They can't realistically cancel Brexit at this stage without serious repercussions. There would be anarchy and chaos

It might be mitigated somewhat if there was strong win in a second referendum first but for TM to make an emergency dash on 28th Feb to "unilaterally" revoke article 50 would trigger anarchy.

They've left it too late

There would be some street protests, but nowhere near the level of 'anarchy' that justifies crashing out of the EU with all of the trillions of pounds worth of economic damage and the very real prospect of a return to armed insurrection along the NI IRL border.

ambro25

Donald Trump wrote: »

They can't realistically cancel Brexit at this stage without serious repercussions. There would be anarchy and chaos

It might be mitigated somewhat if there was strong win in a second referendum first but for TM to make an emergency dash on 28th Feb to "unilaterally" revoke article 50 would trigger anarchy.

They've left it too late

Highly doubtful.

To date Brexit has cost 214,000 jobs, directly or indirectly. Compare and contrast that figure with Farage's alleged 350 fee-paying registrants and 150-odd actual marchers.

After 20+ years living there (in t'North as well, rather than London), I'd argue that the made-redundant-to-Gammon ratio of the above figures is somewhat representative of the British character and propensity to demonstrate, violently or otherwise.

After 3 years, by and large they're fed up to the back teeth of Brexit for breakfast, lunch and diner: any opportunity to end the thing one way or the other, would be as welcome by the average Brit, as by the EU27.

Mr.Wemmick

Infini wrote: »

She should just be told either cancel Brexit and own the problem of your government and parties creation or cheerio lads it was nice knowing you. The simple truth is the British Politicians are refusing to own the responsibilities of Brexit and they will refuse to do so unless a gun like economic chaos is pointed at them and they're forced to confront that reality.

This has to end we can't go on indefinately with this incompetence and refusing to be practical has to entail consequences at some point for someone.

This. The UK needs to go home, go back to the beginning and sort itself out - educate the public to how political spin and lies have fed the electorate to vote for a fantasy, a lie.. their enemy is their own ignorance and the british political class that serve it.

While the UK have their internal fights and attempt to grow up, they can leave the rest of us alone. Ireland doesn't need their dog's dinner of a undeliverable mess, nor does the EU.

An Ciarraioch

I despair!

http://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1107617916755808256

http://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1107617974943399936

Enzokk

funkey_monkey wrote: »

Jim Wells is a clown who has been partially ostracised from the DUP and lost the party whip. I don't know what links he still has in order to make those claims, but I'd take it with a pinch of salt until it comes from a more reliable source.

Here is a tweet from an MP that almost backs the story though,

https://twitter.com/OwenPaterson/status/1107581889508982785

In other news it seems that David Davis, after rejecting May's deal the first time around had a change of heart when nothing changed and at the second time of asking decided to back her deal. Seems after nothing changing again he has changed his mind again and will now not back her deal.

https://twitter.com/KateEMcCann/status/1107541990772752385

And a scapegoat for this mess has been found. The person responsible and who will lose their job to get the vote through is, Olly Robbins. It is not May who has instructed Robbins on what he can negotiate on, but it is the civil servant that will lose his job to get her deal passed.

https://twitter.com/JoeMurphyLondon/status/1107611285477306370

From the story in the link,

Theresa May could sacrifice her chief Brexit negotiator Olly Robbins in a desperate last ploy to save her deal, it emerged today.

With Tory MPs increasing pressure on the Prime Minister to quit in June as the price of getting her deal through the Commons, senior figures at No 10 have instead suggested that senior aide Mr Robbins will go.

One MP was told that Mrs May would “update her negotiating team” before the next phase of talks, while another was told that Mr Robbins, a bête noire of the European Research Group of Tory Brexiteer MPs, would “go as soon as the deal is through”.

Leroy42

It is odd that many Brexiteers, and the public, are very much against TM but seem to draw a blank when asked what was the alternatives that they would have delivered.

How would they have solved the NI border issue? What would they have done in relation to financial obligations? What would they change in relation to citizens rights?

Instead they simply state that the whole team, from TM down, are Remainers and that real Brexiteers would have done far better. When pressed that both Davis and Raab, along with other members of the cabinet (such as Gove) are very much Brexiteers, they simply say that TM over-ruled all of them.

Quite apart from the attack on their own leader, and PM, that that is, what do it say about the people many of them think should be the future leaders when they are so easily sidelined.

Junkyard Tom

Anyone else sensing the media begin to turn on the Brexit crowd?

Loafing Oaf

Any clear indication yet as to whether the vote will go ahead this week? And if it doesn't what does May say at the European summit on Thursday? Does she try to stall the EU on the question of a prolonged extension to Brexit until the vote has taken place, if it ever does?

An Ciarraioch

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Any clear indication yet as to whether the vote will go ahead this week? And if it doesn't what does May say at the European summit on Thursday? Does she try to stall the EU on the question of a prolonged extension to Brexit until the vote has taken place, if it ever does?

It would seem the DUP talks are going nowhere, that the vote is currently more likely to be cancelled than held, and as such, that the UK will have to elect MEPs:

http://twitter.com/DanielHewittITV/status/1107621548767301632

http://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1107608543946031104

Capt'n Midnight

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Anyone else sensing the media begin to turn on the Brexit crowd?

Question time in Belfast should be interesting if they do.

BBC 1 Thursday 22:35.

Unless you live in Belfast in which case it's on at 23:15 on BBC1 NI.

PropJoe10

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

It would seem the DUP talks are going nowhere, that the vote is currently more likely to be cancelled than held, and as such, that the UK will have to elect MEPs:

http://twitter.com/DanielHewittITV/status/1107621548767301632

http://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1107608543946031104

How long is a "long" A50 extension, does anyone know?

Headshot

PropJoe10 wrote: »

How long is a "long" A50 extension, does anyone know?

Probably 2 years but afaik there's no limit on how long the extension can be

Zubeneschamali

PropJoe10 wrote: »

How long is a "long" A50 extension, does anyone know?

21 months is the only long number I have seen suggested.

Infini

I still think the EU should just turn around and turn down the request and basically tell her to accept the deal or cancel Brexit entirely. Put them on the spot and tell to make their decision and stop trying to escape the consequences of it because that's all the UK politicians are doing: Running away from their responsibilities and refusing to decide not own the problems of their own creation.

Charles Babbage

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

It would seem the DUP talks are going nowhere, that the vote is currently more likely to be cancelled than held, and as such, that the UK will have to elect MEPs:

MEPS would mean an interesting campaign in England. Would parties put up remain or leave type candidates?


In NI, you'd see only one unionist seat, likely with DUP, Alliance and SF winning. This would be an important measure of the two thirds of people that want the backstop.

When 3 seats were originally given to NI it was to ensure that nationalists would get a seat, now unionists will only get one.

Capt'n Midnight

Donald Trump wrote: »

They can't realistically cancel Brexit at this stage without serious repercussions. There would be anarchy and chaos

It might be mitigated somewhat if there was strong win in a second referendum first but for TM to make an emergency dash on 28th Feb to "unilaterally" revoke article 50 would trigger anarchy.

They've left it too late

what repercussions ? (28th Feb??)

May losing her job ? She's already promised to step down, sort of, but if it's the will of the people I'm sure she'd stay. The party rules say she's safe for a good while yet and a lot can happen. Hammond has promised, what was it £38Bn, if there isn't a Hard Brexit , so it's back to the magic-money tree.


Split the Tory party ?
Hell no, worst case is Corby wins realises that Brexit can't happen revokes Article 50 and lets McDonnell tax the rich and bails out the state industries and NHS that the Tories would rather asset strip.
Cancelling HS2 or setting an end date on Trident would release loads of money for the NHS.


The DUP would be able to hold their heads high and go "we fought the good fight" and keep the Assembly offline.



The UK could say that global conditions aren't right now, with the trade war and global warming and stuff.

At this stage the UK could simply say that the EU has stolen their tunder and gone out and gotten all the free trade deals they were going to get. Thus removing the competitive advantage they would otherwise have had. (The other way to get a competitive advantage is to devalue the currency and remove workers rights , but that's not spoken aloud. )

List of EU trade deals that have come into force since Cameron pledged a referendum.
Bosnia and Herzegovina
South Korea
Georgia
Moldova
Kosovo
Ukraine
Japan

In addition to the above there are a lot of deals in the pipeline
The UK has only managed to replicate a handful of them at a cost of £4Bn in aid. And can genuinely say that the EU having a deal doesn't help them.

List of Agreements provisionally applied
Dominican Republic

Antigua and Barbuda
Bahamas
Barbados
Belize
Dominica
Grenada
Guyana
Haiti
Jamaica
Montserrat
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Suriname
Trinidad and Tobago

Comoros
Madagascar
Mauritius
Seychelles
Zambia
Zimbabwe

Costa Rica
Guatemala
Honduras
Nicaragua
Panama
El Salvador

Côte d'Ivoire
Colombia
Peru
Cameroon

Fiji
Papua New Guinea
Samoa

Botswana
Lesotho
Mozambique
Namibia
South Africa
Swaziland

Ghana

Ecuador

Canada


Agreements signed
Singapore

negotiations concluded, but not signed
Benin
Burkina Faso
Cape Verde
Ivory Coast
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Liberia
Mali
Mauritania
Niger
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Togo
Burundi
Kenya
Rwanda
Tanzania
Uganda

Vietnam

Solomon Islands

CelticRambler

Donald Trump wrote: »

but don't the French have a 2-stage election for President? I assume you are talking about that. So you are free to vote for your minority candidate in the first round and then still have your "real" vote counted in the second. A poor man's STV

No the French system is FPTP hidden behind an irrelevant first round. Until now, it has always worked to keep the fight between the two major parties.

Akrasia wrote: »

The best case scenario for the EU is that the UK comes to it's senses at the last moment, cancels the whole thing, and in the aftermath have a proper national debate about the state of their democratic institutions leading to political reforms and a more informed and mature electorate

But what are the chances of the UK having a proper debate? We're seeing in so many polls and vox-pops and phone-ins and newspaper front-page headlines that even in the face of a parliament that has become a farce and exit negotiations conducted with the greatest incompetence, the electorate (and those who feed it) would much rather scream NONSENSE at each other in capital letters.

Water John

Ext of 9 months seems to be TMs idea of a long ext. One would feel if she goes looking for that, the EU will be ready with some onerous conditions.
Olly was leaving anyway, gosh they are gullible if that's a win for them.

Laois_Man

I think, barring something really dramatic happening, it's fairly clear there isn't going to be an MV3 before Thursday's summit and the UK are going to be requesting a long extension - 21 months at best guess!

The main question now is, what are the going to propose to do to get one

1. The departure of Teresa May?
2. A General election?
3. A Second referendum?
4. Revoke Art. 50?


#1 happening within the 21 months is inevitable - but that on its own isn't enough

There's a danger that #2 will return similar numbers and continued deadlock

The only real solution is #3, but has to be a vote that makes people who want to exit the EU, specify between a hard Brexit or the current WA (or a new WA negotiated by a new PM without May's red lines)

In my opinion, #4 will never happen - the UK will still leave eventually

Inquitus

Laois_Man wrote: »

I think, barring something really dramatic happening, it's fairly clear there isn't going to be an MV3 before Thursday's summit and the UK are going to be requesting a long extension - 21 months at best guess!

The main question now is, what are the going to propose to do to get one

1. The departure of Teresa May?
2. A General election?
3. A Second referendum?
4. Revoke Art. 50?


#1 happening within the 21 months is inevitable - but that on its own isn't enough

There's a danger that #2 will return similar numbers and continued deadlock

The only real solution is #3, but has to be a vote that makes people who want to exit the EU, specify between a hard Brexit or the current WA (or a new WA negotiated by a new PM without May's red lines)

In my opinion, #4 will never happen - the UK will still leave eventually

#3 Has to have remain on the ballot, you'd think, they don't want to use transferable voting, so what will they do?

May's Deal v Remain
May's Deal v No Deal

The only truly decent way to do this is to have 3 options on the ballot:

May's Deal v No Deal v Remain

Laois_Man

John Bercow to release a statement in 20 minutes time

Speculation that he might announce that no MV3 will be permitted - or at least announce no MV4 can ever occur.