Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Peregrinus

Cryptopagan wrote: »

If you live in a strongly pro Brexit constituency, your choice will most likely be among leaver candidates anyhow, when the issue determining your preference is a national one.

But that's the point. The D'Hondt system doesn't give you any choice among the candidates; only among the parties. And, even there, it gives you the most basic possible choice; express an absolute preference for one party, and say nothing about any of the others. It couldn't be a more reductive system.

And I think it's going to play out particularly badly in the present circumstances. The big issue is Brexit, but both the major parties are headed by leaders who (a) both want pretty similar models of Brexit, but (b) don't enjoy the support of their parties in wanting that, and (c) have both hard brexit and remain wings in their parties. When all you can do is pick a party, how are you going to signal your wishes regarding Brexit through that pick?

Leroy42

Beth Rigby asked the question last night, but really what does it say about the Tories that they have no one to replace her as PM

How can she continue on after having to break promise after promise.

"We will be leaving on 29th March"
"Actually, no it will be 12th April"
"Definitely no later than end of June"
"Oh, ok, go on then. End of October, (unless we need another delay). Oh, and BTW, you wouldn't mind running those EU elections please, you know, the ones I stated would never be run?"

Anteayer

The whole thing is a complete farce and comes down to the fact that the majority leavers want to leave but want to keep all of the benefits and are not prepared to accept that there are real world consequences to their decisions.

If they want to go they can go in the morning, but they'll cause a massive economic problem and some kind of domestic quasi civil war because there's no consensus and massive regional and other divisions.

However they're too cowardly to step back from it. So, instead they've caused extremely expensive and disruptive chaos and seem incapable of stepping back from that.

My concern is they'll just stand on the cliff for years and the chaos will keep swirling.

I actually think Merkel and many others, including ourselves, who are used to consensus building politics are being overoptimistic about a sane outcome to this.

Macron's got a better understanding of brinkmanship and crazy first past the post style political systems and knows you have to jolt them out of this or they'll just continue to sit on the ledge.

I think there'll be a bit of calm for a few weeks and we'll be seeing s return to the insanity again the moment the pressure is off.

Spanish Eyes

Would someone please explain what would happen if the UK does crash out at some point having elected MEPS during this extension period?

Would they be obliged to surrender their seats, and those seats are re distributed amongst the remaining 27.

ArmaniJeanss

Cryptopagan wrote: »

I still can’t accept that counting my 7th preference is empowering. Personally I don’t list my preferences so far down the ballot, as I don’t see ranking my least preferred candidates as very meaningful.

The 4th and 5th seats are always decided (and quite often swung) by preferences down in 7th place and usually far lower. And these seats are as valuable as those that were elected in first or second place.

Personally it doesn't bother me what you do - as an aside I'm always amused by the 'I gave my #1 vote to XXXX and didn't vote for any of the rest of them, that'll show them' voters. It merely makes everyone elses lower votes more meaningful.

Peregrinus

Cryptopagan wrote: »

I still can’t accept that counting my 7th preference is empowering. Personally I don’t list my preferences so far down the ballot, as I don’t see ranking my least preferred candidates as very meaningful.

Well, it's up to you. If you don't actually have a preference between two candidates you've never heard of from two parties you find equally unappealing, I agree there's no point in expressing one. But if you do express a preference, and it becomes effective, it's every bit as effective as your first preference was. And I confess that I derive a certain satisfaction in expressing preferences for everyone except the candidate/party I especially loathe.

You have only one vote, all votes are weighted equally, and they're equally effective no matter what preference is being expressed.

ShooterSF

The big change I see is the EU saying it will no longer negotiate the WA. There had been comments that if TM dropped some of her red lines that it could be renegotiated but that's been ruled out. Which means her hand during negotiations with Corbyn is strengthened as she rightly can point out that any deal will have to be to do with the political declaration. Also if a GE was called and May stepped down her replacement either has to go to the people with a manifesto supporting her deal or a no deal brexit (or remain which I don't see) with no deal being a lot more popular among brexiteers...

Peregrinus

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Would someone please explain what would happen if the UK does crash out at some point having elected MEPS during this extension period?

Would they be obliged to surrender their seats, and those seats are re distributed amongst the remaining 27.

If the UK crashes out, or leaves with an agreement, its MEPs leave the parliament and the seats redistributed to other countries will be activated. We'll be electing MEPs to those seats in May, but they'll be in suspended animation until the UK leaves, and they'll only enter the Parliament then.

Anteayer

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Would someone please explain what would happen if the UK does crash out at some point having elected MEPS during this extension period?

Would they be obliged to surrender their seats, and those seats are re distributed amongst the remaining 27.

I would assume so. There's no established procedure for this so there would have to be some kind of summit to deal with reallocating seats, or working with a smaller number of seats until the next EP election.

We're in uncharted waters.

The issue of more concern to a lot of people would be if the UK were to appoint a new commissioner and then leave.

Cryptopagan

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

The 4th and 5th seats are always decided (and quite often swung) by preferences down in 7th place and usually far lower. And these seats are as valuable as those that were elected in first or second place.

Personally it doesn't bother me what you do - as an aside I'm always amused by the 'I gave my #1 vote to XXXX and didn't vote for any of the rest of them, that'll show them' voters. It merely makes everyone elses lower votes more meaningful.

“Always”? There aren’t even always 4th and 5th seats.

It’s generally not a good idea to try and explain why people voted the way they did by assuming they are stupid and don’t understand the system.

ancapailldorcha

Anteayer wrote: »

The whole thing is a complete farce and comes down to the fact that the majority leavers want to leave but want to keep all of the benefits and are not prepared to accept that there are real world consequences to their decisions.

If they want to go they can go in the morning, but they'll cause a massive economic problem and some kind of domestic quasi civil war because there's no consensus and massive regional and other divisions.

However they're too cowardly to step back from it. So, instead they've caused extremely expensive and disruptive chaos and seem incapable of stepping back from that.

My concern is they'll just stand on the cliff for years and the chaos will keep swirling.

I actually think Merkel and many others, including ourselves, who are used to consensus building politics are being overoptimistic about a sane outcome to this.

Macron's got a better understanding of brinkmanship and crazy first past the post style political systems and knows you have to jolt them out of this or they'll just continue to sit on the ledge.

I think there'll be a bit of calm for a few weeks and we'll be seeing s return to the insanity again the moment the pressure is off.

A lot of assumptions here.

Firstly, you're treating the UK as if it were a hive mind created on the 23rd of June 2016.

More importantly, I don't know if you've noticed the shift away from the rhetoric that Brexit would benefit the country to it being some sort of perverse necessity because dubiously funded Leave campaigns were able to convince the public of said benefits nearly three years ago.

Your point about cowardice might hold if you were talking about MP's who are allegedly pro-Brexit but would rejoice at cancelling it and are therefore keeping up the facade because "will of the people".

The point about endless staring at the abyss is moot. The EU won't facilitate this. We had Macron insisting on keeping the extension short which means a second referendum will need another extension from the EU27 to happen. I don't know why he has seen fit to expend so much political capital for so little gain. Maybe there are Anglophobes in France he's pandering to. I don't know. It's an odd thing for him to do with no clear explanation.

In the meantime, I hope that the anti-Brexit campaigns might finally stop dumping on each other.

Peregrinus

ShooterSF wrote: »

The big change I see is the EU saying it will no longer negotiate the WA. There had been comments that if TM dropped some of her red lines that it could be renegotiated but that's been ruled out. Which means her hand during negotiations with Corbyn is strengthened as she rightly can point out that any deal will have to be to do with the political declaration. Also if a GE was called and May stepped down her replacement either has to go to the people with a manifesto supporting her deal or a no deal brexit (or remain which I don't see) with no deal being a lot more popular among brexiteers...

That's not a change. As far as the EU is concerned, the WA has been closed since last November. Indeed, in requesting this latest extension, May explicitly acknowledged that the WA is closed.

What can be renegotiated, if the UK position "evolves" (i.e. if the red lines are relaxed or dropped) is the Political Declaration. That's not new either.

Cryptopagan

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Not an entirely fair comparison thought I'd be lying if I weren't simmering with jealousy. The Swiss are very well accustomed to having regular referenda and so have processes to ensure fair play that I can only dream of for the UK.

What, jealous of the Swiss? Who in one referendum voted to ban the construction of new minarets?

Switzerland’s referendum system seems like a dream for cranks and reactionaries to me.

Anteayer

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

A lot of assumptions here.

Firstly, you're treating the UK as if it were a hive mind created on the 23rd of June 2016.

More importantly, I don't know if you've noticed the shift away from the rhetoric that Brexit would benefit the country to it being some sort of perverse necessity because dubiously funded Leave campaigns were able to convince the public of said benefits nearly three years ago.

Your point about cowardice might hold if you were talking about MP's who are allegedly pro-Brexit but would rejoice at cancelling it and are therefore keeping up the facade because "will of the people".

The point about endless staring at the abyss is moot. The EU won't facilitate this. We had Macron insisting on keeping the extension short which means a second referendum will need another extension from the EU27 to happen. I don't know why he has seen fit to expend so much political capital for so little gain. Maybe there are Anglophobes in France he's pandering to. I don't know. It's an odd thing for him to do with no clear explanation.

In the meantime, I hope that the anti-Brexit campaigns might finally stop dumping on each other.

I think you're falling into the British tabloid trap of assuming the French are Anglophobic or that there's an audience in France that is excited by the prospect of the UK drowning in its own huberis.
In general the levels of francophobia displayed in the English media and discourse aren't reciprocated in France.

Macron's domestic concern is that Brexit is feeding into Le Pen's relaunched party, which is basically an economically centre left UKIP. Brexit is also feeding into some of the Gilets Jaunes politics. His interest is in ending the chaos that Brexit is bringing very quickly so that he can move French domestic politics away from the Euroscepticism that's also a big feature there.

In surveys, France isn't exactly rating as country full of EU enthusiasts. While the situation in terms of Euroscepticism isn't quite as extreme as the UK, it's been moving that direction and it's being whipped along by many of the same factors and players.

Macron is also faced with far worse domestic issues than the UK has in terms of the very damaging violent protests that are happening every Saturday. He's a huge reason for trying to end this instability and it's not Anglophobia.

murphaph

Cryptopagan wrote: »

I still can’t accept that counting my 7th preference is empowering. Personally I don’t list my preferences so far down the ballot, as I don’t see ranking my least preferred candidates as very meaningful.

It's precisely the ability to go down the list and express preferences for anyone but X or Y that makes it so powerful. You can (as often happens in Irish elections for example) deliberately give no preference to a candidate or party you really dislike.

ancapailldorcha

Anteayer wrote: »

I think you're falling into the British tabloid trap of assuming the French are Anglophobic or that there's an audience in France that is excited by the prospect of the UK drowning in its own huberis.
In general the levels of francophobia displayed in the English media and discourse aren't reciprocated in France.

Macron's domestic concern is that Brexit is feeding into Le Pen's relaunched party, which is basically an economically centre left UKIP. Brexit is also feeding into some of the Gilets Jaunes politics. His interest is in ending the chaos that Brexit is bringing very quickly so that he can move French domestic politics away from the Euroscepticism that's also a big feature there.

In surveys, France isn't exactly rating as country full of EU enthusiasts. While the situation in terms of Euroscepticism isn't quite as extreme as the UK, it's been moving that direction and it's being whipped along by many of the same factors and players.

Macron is also faced with far worse domestic issues than the UK has in terms of the very damaging violent protests that are happening every Saturday. He's a huge reason for trying to end this instability and it's not Anglophobia.

I never said the French were or are Anglophobic. I was mooting a possible explanation for Macron's actions yesterday. That's all. There's been plenty of desire on this site for the British to crash out and be humiliated so there's a lot more to it than it being a "British tabloid trap". By the way, I haven't spent a single cent or penny on a tabloid over the course of my life.

Brexit is the single greatest piece of anti-EU propaganda Europhiles and Eurofederalists could never have dreamt of. Anyone elsewhere in the EU27 advocating exiting from the EU has some serious questions to answer.

I'm aware that France has its Eurosceptics. All countries do, just in varying proportions. Le Pen's supporters who are elderly will have to be given satisfactory assurances about their savings not being damaged by leaving the Euro which is one thing that held her back. I don't think she has much of a future but I certainly can't say for certain.

Capt'n Midnight

Peregrinus wrote: »

Essentially the closed list system used in the UK takes the power of identifying popular and unpopular candidates away from voters, and gives that power to party officials. And it deprives you entirely of expressing any nuances of support for parties.

Many of the politicians involved in Brexit aren't elected by the public because most seats in the UK are safe seats.

Apart from the 1931 election Kate Hoey's seat has been Labour for the last hundred years. Tory examples go back hundreds of years for some seats. Like the US if you want your vote to count move to a key marginal or swing state. If an MP complains about unelected EU officials check to see if they a safe seat. Many do.


Other MPs get elected by default because people are voting against a party they hate more. Compare GB MEPs to MPs to see EXACTLY how GB voters vote when they know their vote won't be wasted on a third candidate. Here in a multi seat small parties have that chance in every election. The ratio of 3-4-5 seaters here is to not give small parties too much of an advantage.


This is the Oz system , people in the UK need to see it.
http://www.chickennation.com/voting/
Original in B&W http://politicalaustralia.com.au/blog/preferential-vote-explanation-you-cant-waste-your-vote/

BarryD2

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Yet nationalists are invisible to the DUP when it comes to Brexit. The DUP did their best to destroy the GFA and power-sharing and are still trying to run the north like it's their own 17th Century colony.

They deserve nothing.

Well they're here 300 odd years - they can hardly be kicked out now, so we may just as well reconcile ourselves to that and try persuasion for a change.

darem93 wrote: »

Obviously I can't speak for all Unionists, but I genuinely don't think there is any broken relationship between people in the North and the Irish government. It's just the DUP trying to push that narrative in an attempt to undermine the GFA (let's not forget they did vehemently oppose it).

This really isn't the green vs. orange issue that the DUP are trying to turn it into. This is about protecting peace and people's livelihoods both North and South. I live right on the border and both sides of the community want it to remain open at all costs.

I agree, the DUP are trying to use Brexit to hammer home the Union. But likewise we have Sinn Féin trying to use Brexit to engineer a border poll. Not convinced these parties are working in the best interests of ordinary decent citizens of either side.

Another six months of no effective representation, that's for sure.

ShooterSF

Peregrinus wrote: »

That's not a change. As far as the EU is concerned, the WA has been closed since last November. Indeed, in requesting this latest extension, May explicitly acknowledged that the WA is closed.

What can be renegotiated, if the UK position "evolves" (i.e. if the red lines are relaxed or dropped) is the Political Declaration. That's not new either.

In that case I just can't see how she passes it. The EU won't negotiate a future relationship until it passes and the Political Declaration is not legally binding so I can't see anyone being sold on changes to it. I can't help but feel October won't look awfully different to March...

First Up

ShooterSF wrote:

In that case I just can't see how she passes it. The EU won't negotiate a future relationship until it passes and the Political Declaration is not legally binding so I can't see anyone being sold on changes to it. I can't help but feel October won't look awfully different to March...

The only variable in all this is the political situation in the UK. May going or a General Election would change the dynamic. The Tories look to be hopelessly divided; Labour divided but not hopelessly (so far). How those situations evolve will change the landscape.

Its far simpler for the EU and the 27. Its either the WA or a crash out so plan for both and wait. Same goes for business.

Anteayer

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I never said the French were or are Anglophobic. I was mooting a possible explanation for Macron's actions yesterday. That's all. There's been plenty of desire on this site for the British to crash out and be humiliated so there's a lot more to it than it being a "British tabloid trap". By the way, I haven't spent a single cent or penny on a tabloid over the course of my life.

Brexit is the single greatest piece of anti-EU propaganda Europhiles and Eurofederalists could never have dreamt of. Anyone elsewhere in the EU27 advocating exiting from the EU has some serious questions to answer.

I'm aware that France has its Eurosceptics. All countries do, just in varying proportions. Le Pen's supporters who are elderly will have to be given satisfactory assurances about their savings not being damaged by leaving the Euro which is one thing that held her back. I don't think she has much of a future but I certainly can't say for certain.

Well, Macron is currently on a whopping 27% approval rating and RN / FN is poised to take a slice of the French EP seats that could be at least as big as Macron’s grouping, even if he’s just barely got a tiny lead now there isn’t likely to be much in it.

47% of French people recently polled for France Info (Radio France) and Le Monde see le Rassemblement national (RN) as getting into actual power in government. Unfortunately, I have to disagree with you. Le Pen has a future and seems to be successfully pulling off a rebrand of her party, which could easily see a French mess that’s as bad as Brexit or Trumpism emerge.

So Macron has more to worry about than most in the EU at the moment as there’s a rise of very toxic populism in France that’s very comparable to Brexit and possibly even a bit worse in many respects due to the kinds of politics being put forward.

From his point of view, the UK crashing out would be collateral damage compared to Le Pen gaining power.

My view of it is that the whole Brexit issue will end up reaching a boringly agreed settlement and that crashing the UK out would be damaging to Ireland and also would potentially feed an EU crisis rather than resolve one.

I’d be of the view that you hold the line and let them keep shouting but be reasonable at all times and try to avoid a disaster. This brinkmanship stuff is dangerous.

At this stage I would say the outcome is likely to be a customs union of some sort or even some parallel to EEA status but not part of the EEA or EFTA.

I don’t think Macron is much of a diplomat domestically or internationally. He’s extremely arrogant and a lot of French people don’t like that aspect. He’s managed to lecture people on the street who were unemployed, told a kid to address him properly (almost Bishop Brennan from Father Ted telling Dougle to : You’ll address me by my title! ya .#####) He’s also managed to miscalculate Trump with that rather stomach churning charm offensive which didn’t seem to achieve anything other than making a lot of French people reach for buckets.
The typically successful French President is a mixture of affable arrogance and charm - basically they’re able to seem powerful, yet good craic. The public don’t warm to know-it-all types demanding respect.

So, frankly I wouldn’t be surprised at all at the trying to be the hard man at the summit approach.

Also I don’t represent “this site” any more than any other poster here. We aren’t a hive mind either!

Leroy42

Dodds make a decent point during PMQ's today in regards to the latest extension.

TM was basically told only a few weeks ago that it was 12th April unless a plan was brought to them on how to resolve things.

She has now been granted an even longer extension for achieving the sum total of not much at all.

He says that they caved on the conditions, so time to force them on the backstop.

And that is a major danger of how the EU is handling this whole process. They are giving the impression that they are willing to put up with all sorts of messing because the costs to them are so high. I think this latest extension, since it is clearly a fudge, will come back to bite the EU.

lawred2

Leroy42 wrote: »

Dodds make a decent point during PMQ's today in regards to the latest extension.

TM was basically told only a few weeks ago that it was 12th April unless a plan was brought to them on how to resolve things.

She has now been granted an even longer extension for achieving the sum total of not much at all.

He says that they caved on the conditions, so time to force them on the backstop.

And that is a major danger of how the EU is handling this whole process. They are giving the impression that they are willing to put up with all sorts of messing because the costs to them are so high. I think this latest extension, since it is clearly a fudge, will come back to bite the EU.

WA is not for renegotiation. This is beyond boring.

Anteayer

I’d say the issue with the Backstop is that nobody, other than the DUP being incredibly awkward, would have objected to special status for Northern Ireland. That would render the backstop irrelevant as the issue would be resolved and the UK could walk away.

My sense is that if there’s a general election or a serious arrangement between the Tories and Labour emerges that allows some kind of center to emerge again and that they opt to continue Brexit, the DUP will be irrelevant and so will the backstop because they’ll just solve it with special status putting NI into a customs union with checks at the ports.

In the big scheme of things the ERG wants to deliver Brexit. Northern Ireland is only a side issue due to problematic arithmetic.

The DUP has spotted an opportunity to try and impose very hardline NI positions on the entire U.K. and a way of undoing the GFA. To be fair to May, despite everything, she hasn’t done that.

The spanner in the works has been the DUP. May grossly miscalculated by going into government with their support as it’s made Brexit about Northern Irish sectarian politics.

The British Government is a signatory to the GFA, the DUP never was and spent years trying to undermine it. That's why I'm always surprised by the fact that people are in anyway shocked by this line. This is what the DUP have always done. They were a known quantity.

RobertKK

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Would someone please explain what would happen if the UK does crash out at some point having elected MEPS during this extension period?

Would they be obliged to surrender their seats, and those seats are re distributed amongst the remaining 27.

The seats were redistributed to other nations. Now it will stay as is, but the people who would have taken those seats will be like subs now waiting for the UK to vacate the seats they were suppose to have given up at this stage.

So both Dublin and the South constituency will each have an MEP elected who is on standby. I am not sure how it works in terms of wages etc but that was the plan the government talked about recently.

robinph

Leroy42 wrote: »

Dodds make a decent point during PMQ's today in regards to the latest extension.

TM was basically told only a few weeks ago that it was 12th April unless a plan was brought to them on how to resolve things.

She has now been granted an even longer extension for achieving the sum total of not much at all.

He says that they caved on the conditions, so time to force them on the backstop.

And that is a major danger of how the EU is handling this whole process. They are giving the impression that they are willing to put up with all sorts of messing because the costs to them are so high. I think this latest extension, since it is clearly a fudge, will come back to bite the EU.

The EU haven't caved in at all, they have just come up with the "plan" on behalf of May. The plan admittedly doesn't consist of anything other than hold the EU elections and leave the EU alone for a bit whilst the UK carries on arguing with itself.

All the EU have done is send the UK off to sit in a corner on their own for a bit until they calm down and can think of another idea for how to disentangle themselves from themselves.

Zubeneschamali

Cryptopagan wrote: »

It’s generally not a good idea to try and explain why people voted the way they did by assuming they are stupid and don’t understand the system.

If you don't vote all the way to the bottom of your ballot paper (leaving the very last place blank if you like) you are not using your vote to the fullest.

Even then, there is a chance your vote won't count for anyone that gets elected, happened to me in 2007, but it is much less likely than if you stop at 2 or 3.

But go right ahead, since it makes my vote count for more.

Penn

robinph wrote: »

The EU haven't caved in at all, they have just come up with the "plan" on behalf of May. The plan admittedly doesn't consist of anything other than hold the EU elections and leave the EU alone for a bit whilst the UK carries on arguing with itself.

All the EU have done is send the UK off to sit in a corner on their own for a bit until they calm down and can think of another idea for how to disentangle themselves from themselves.

Agreed. The extension is more a case of "We'll give you more time to agree to our deal" than opening up the possibility of changing the WA.

Igotadose

robinph wrote: »

The EU haven't caved in at all, they have just come up with the "plan" on behalf of May. The plan admittedly doesn't consist of anything other than hold the EU elections and leave the EU alone for a bit whilst the UK carries on arguing with itself.

All the EU have done is send the UK off to sit in a corner on their own for a bit until they calm down and can think of another idea for how to disentangle themselves from themselves.

But, come Halloween and no progress in Westminster, do the EU give a 3 year extension? What the EU has done has said, "Your problem, UK." But it's been 3 years, and all we know is, "more or less", the UK don't want to crash out. That's it. Everything else is a maelstrom - yes to the WA/no WA/stay in the EU/etc.

Just seems like nothing's going to change in 7 months+, and come October it'll be the rolling cliff edge yet again.

There really doesn't seem to be a forcing function in place for the UK to do *something.* The fact that Brexit's costing jobs and money has meant nothing to the pols in Parliament. Over the next 7 months, that just gives business more time to move out.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

That's not a change. As far as the EU is concerned, the WA has been closed since last November.

In fact the bit the Brexiteers and DUP are mostly arguing with, the backstop for NI, has been "green ink", closed since the UK agreed it in December 2017.


The only change since was to widen it to cover the whole UK at the UKs request.