Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Zubeneschamali

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/17/theresa-may-could-put-off-queens-speech-amid-brexit-turmoil

'Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, announced a two-year session after the last election in order to “build the broadest possible consensus for our Brexit plans”.'

Good one, Andrea!

Enzokk

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/17/theresa-may-could-put-off-queens-speech-amid-brexit-turmoil

The UK continues it's slide towards a dictatorship. You may say I'm being hyperbolic but when you've an unwritten constitution based on the most recent precedent it's not hard to imagine May's recent behavior being the foothold those individuals would use

Deleted User wrote: »

Can we get a forum where the word dictatorship isn't allowed.. The UK has a lame duck of a PM with zero power, and it's being called a slide into dictatorship? I know it's fun and all in the Trump thread, but in relation to her?

The Remainiacs podcast was discussing this point last week where there was a poll that indicated the UK would prefer a strongman who ignores rules in charge. They made the point that May is already that strongman, maybe the strong is not apt right now, but she ignores the rules all the time.

At any time in the past if a government loses a vote it would trigger an election as it would mean they have lost the confidence of the house. How many has she lost? She also said she would leave if her deal gets through but what if she doesn't? She doesn't care about rules or procedures and if they follow recent precedent then all it needs is that one person who is stronger than her and you are in a dictatorship, whether you like the word or not.

McGiver

Enzokk wrote:

At any time in the past if a government loses a vote it would trigger an election as it would mean they have lost the confidence of the house. How many has she lost? She also said she would leave if her deal gets through but what if she doesn't? She doesn't care about rules or procedures and if they follow recent precedent then all it needs is that one person who is stronger than her and you are in a dictatorship, whether you like the word or not.

Exactly, the absence of a written constitution is a big issue. Combine that with the gutter press propaganda and their influence ("traitors", "will of the people"), oligarch paid manipulation and Russian collusion, UK being quite a bit of a police state with CCTV virtually everywhere. And on top, you have 30-40% brainwashed population in one way or another who are ready to be manipulated. In a recent poll 54% people said that they would want a strong leader who is breaks rules and 40% would prefer leader who sidesteps the Parliament. It just needs a strong "leader" to abuse all that.

There is clearly movement in the authoritarian direction both within the political class and the society, and many prerequisites for sliding down from a democracy to some hybrid regime are also present.

ilovesmybrick

Ireland was a midget with a big advantage: British ineptitude. Downing Street failed to plan for Brexit before the referendum and never caught up.

This is a brilliant read this morning on the Irish governments preparations and actions over Brexit. To be honest I was quite surprised that they started back in 2014. I can't remember which article I read recently that essentially said recent Irish governments play a blinder on foreign policy and have a good reputation abroad,but the domestic policy is utterly hopeless. This kind of demonstrates that when you remember all that was happening around 2014/15 domestically!

nc6000

Why does Farage have such a prominent spot in the EU Parliament? In any of these clips he always has the likes of Juncker etc around him. It would be better if he was moved back a few rows to have him out of the way in the next parliament.

Leroy42

nc6000 wrote: »

Why does Farage have such a prominent spot in the EU Parliament? In any of these clips he always has the links if Juncker etc around him. It would be better if he was moved back a few rows to have him out of the way in the next parliament.

The decision as to how seats in the Chamber are allocated among political groups, non- attached MEPs and representatives of EU institutions is taken by the Conference of Presidents (the leaders of the political groups and the President of Parliament) at the start of each legislative term.


For the past few terms, political groups have sat like wedges in a pie chart, with the group leaders all in the first row, except when a new political group is formed half-way through the mandate.

I stand to be corrected, but I would guess that the UK have quite prominent seats as they are a very senior member. And Farage would be one of the highest vote getters and as such probably gets the key seats.

Regardless or how exactly, your points about the prominence of the seats is valid and of course goes directly against the idea that somehow the UK were ignored in the EU.

Hurrache

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Lewis Goodall of Sky News gets a Home Office document that, unsurprisingly, states a technological solution to the Border is impossible before 2030 at the earliest:

https://news.sky.com/story/technological-solution-to-irish-border-issue-could-be-a-decade-away-says-home-office-document-11696337

11 year extension so.

They certainly have lots to think about over there, what with Pelosi's and her delegations strong words, and what's obvious to the dog on the street in Ireland, there is no technological solution.

Hurrache

theguzman wrote: »

the EU is a Franco/German colonial project about control,

No, it's not. If you had been paying attention, even in the last couple of weeks, you'd have seen a wealth of evidence to disprove your fantasy.

Sam Russell

reslfj wrote: »

Note: The party based lists are not an EU requirement, but 100% a UK decision.

Lars

Of course, it is just the way that the UK appears to find a way of perverting the EU regulations to make it not work. The do it with immigration, they do it with the EU elections.

FPTP is a way to make the UK parliamentary election system be controlled by the major parties. The list system is just a way to keep that control, and keep it as undemocratic as can be.

Midlife

theguzman wrote: »

Who cares they are better off out and make their own laws as would Ireland also, the EU is a Franco/German colonial project about control, its very beginnings were in the bunkers of Berlin as the Red Army approached at the end of WWII. Do you think the rebels in the GPO were terrorists for breaking the law of British control at the time? Because your argument in analogous to that.

Can you explain the better off to make their own laws bit?

That's a very vague statement considering you're talking about the welfare of two countries.

Additionally, you'll note that at the time of the GPO, the empire didn't really allow refferenda on membership.

A better analogy would be leaving the commonwealth, which our politicians just decided to do.

Leroy42

And of course the question about which laws? Which laws do they want to change? And how would changing those laws possibly impact on trading with other countries?

And should each country within the UK then be allowed be inact their own laws? Maybe NI could stayed aligned to the EU laws if that is what suited the majority in NI.

Midlife

And while the British 1% have managed to convince enough of the squeezed middle that their lot is the fault of Europe..

It turns out that the same 1% own half the country.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/17/who-owns-england-thousand-secret-landowners-author

That includes James Dyson, the vacum cleaner company guy and prominent Brexiteer who makes all his goods in Asia and just recently moved his company's headquarters to Singapore. Sound.

Sam Russell

Infini wrote: »

And once again the conspiracy theories come out that have no bearing whatsoever to the reality of the situation aka the fact that the 2 biggest power-blocks were the USA and USSR post the WW2 ruination of Europe and the EU was an attempt to create a peaceful union of state's to rival them so as not to be thrown under tbe bus by them which succeeded as the EU has quite a bit of soft power especially in the area of quality control and standards today.

I think it should be remembered that the EU was not set up as a bloc to rival anyone. It was set up as an attempt to bring nations previously at war together in peace. It worked surprisingly well.

In 1945 and 1946 huge numbers of populations within Europe were forced to move from one region to another, and many were starving. The Soviets had taken control of Eastern Europe, and the USA and UK wanted to continue the war against them. This led to the blockade of Berlin and the cold war.

The EU was founded to make sure that there would never be another war in Europe like WW I and WW II. Nor would people starve.

It should not be forgotten that PEACE was the overarching aim of the EU together with food security. That has not changed.

First Up

Sam Russell wrote:

It should not be forgotten that PEACE was the overarching aim of the EU together with food security. That has not changed.

That's how it started but almost 70 years later its the world's second biggest economy so it has become a lot more than that.

First Up

Sam Russell wrote:

It should not be forgotten that PEACE was the overarching aim of the EU together with food security. That has not changed.

That's how it started but almost 70 years later its the world's second biggest economy so it has become a lot more than that.

Sam Russell

First Up wrote: »

That's how it started but almost 70 years later its the world's second biggest economy so it has become a lot more than that.

Has it though?

They have trade deals with third world countries that give them FTA 'for everything but arms'. If it was just economics or hegemony then the EU would not do that. Also the EU have a lot of east European countries to join, even though they would require substantial donor funds to bring up the level of their economies - sure were we not one of the beneficiaries ourselves.

No peace is a cornerstone of the EU. Just because you get rich, does not stop you being generous to those not well off.

Leroy42

Every EU citizen has a right to vote in the EU elections. My understanding is that in the UK you have to be a British citizen or an EU or Commonwealth citizen resident in the UK in order to vote in European parliamentary elections.

The point being that only UK citizens were entitled to vote in the ref, and thus there is a significant amount of 'new' votes available in this election.

If the remain side are really serious about keeping the Uk within the EU, then they need to make it priority to get out the vote. To mark this as the final chance to avoid the consequences of Brexit.

If, as the polls suggest, Farage and the Brexit party return a majority of MEPS then they will have failed and all those that marched would have wasted their time.

Anteayer

The EU has definitely got a lot more going on than a transactional relationship based on business and economics. There's a definite sense of solidarity and a willingness to pool and share a lot of things.

A large % of the UK seem to see it as just a simple transactional relationship and I think that's where the problem has always been in how the UK and EU don't understand each other.

I also think the UK may be in for a shock when it deals with global players who have absolutely no concern for at all beyond what they can get and how much leverage they can use.

The EU has a lot of big overarching principles that they're taking for granted, even around economic areas like the Single Market, which aims to be barrier free and fair. It's driven by an political ideology and a philosophy, not just economics.

They're also going to be free floating in a far more dog-eat-dog world without the leverage of being a huge player.

The UK may be in the 5th or 6th largest economic unit kind of position but, the top three : US, EU and China are vastly bigger. It's not a scale that goes in small, evenly spaced steps.

So basically the UK has a future of being bounced between all 3 of those world scale players.

The other thing you see a lot in British (and sometimes US commentary) is constantly separating the EU statistics into individual members, which makes the British situation seem a lot better than it is.

robinph

UK and Irish citizens can vote in ALL elections end referendums in the UK.

EU citizens can vote in local and European elections.

awec

https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1118625935794868225?s=20

Pertinent.

L1011

Sam Russell wrote: »

Of course, it is just the way that the UK appears to find a way of perverting the EU regulations to make it not work. The do it with immigration, they do it with the EU elections.

FPTP is a way to make the UK parliamentary election system be controlled by the major parties. The list system is just a way to keep that control, and keep it as undemocratic as can be.

Most of the EU uses the same system though. Only a few use STV

First Up

Sam Russell wrote:

No peace is a cornerstone of the EU. Just because you get rich, does not stop you being generous to those not well off.

I didn't say otherwise. The EU has had a Stabilisation and Association agreement with a number of East European countries for many years. This has been chanelling expertise and money to them to help bring them closer to the standards needed for eventual EU membership. A number of EU countries also operate their own programmes along similar lines.

Its part altruism and part self interest.

briany

awec wrote: »

https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1118625935794868225?s=20

Pertinent.

Would have been interesting to be in the room when Pelosi laid that on on the ERG.

There might hardly be a country in the world with whom the UK would not have a strained relationship in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

Leroy42

awec wrote: »

https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1118625935794868225?s=20

Pertinent.

Particularly so given Sky reporting that the UK official reports don't foresee any technological solution to the border issue for at least 10 years.

WomanSkirtFan8

briany wrote: »

Would have been interesting to be in the room when Pelosi laid that on on the ERG. ]


Indeed. Thats an extremely stark warning for the UK if there ever was one. Would love to have seen her saying that the HOC and the ERG. Their reactions would have been absolutely priceless.:)

briany

Leroy42 wrote: »

Particularly so given Sky reporting that the UK official reports don't foresee any technological solution to the border issue for at least 10 years.

The classic Brexiteer response to the border question is that they simply won't put up a border, thus the border will be invisible on their side. Whatever the EU want to do on their side is their business. The problems with this approach are summarily poo-pooed.

trellheim

The classic Brexiteer response to the border question is that they simply won't put up a border, thus the border will be invisible on their side.

You will then see many migrants using this route as a road to the NHS, which will lead to a border in double-quick time.

briany

trellheim wrote: »

You will then see many migrants using this route as a road to the NHS, which will lead to a border in double-quick time.

The UK would likely be a more inhospitable place to migrants generally in the case of a no deal. Additionally, if a no-deal made the UK an economic basket case, would there even be much of an NHS to come to?

breatheme

briany wrote: »

The UK would likely be a more inhospitable place to migrants generally in the case of a no deal. Additionally, if a no-deal made the UK an economic basket case, would there even be much of an NHS to come to?

It still remains a possibility.

reslfj

trellheim wrote: »

You will then see many migrants using this route as a road to the NHS, which will lead to a border in double-quick time.

The RoI-Ni border problem has nothing to do with people. The Common Travel Area - CTA - takes care of people travelling across the border and with other laws of Irish and UK citizens moving address and workplace across the border.

All EU citizens can now and will continue to be able to easily enter the CTA or indeed any UK 'port of entry' by showing their passport at arrival.

The Brexit border problem/backstop is only about 100% frictionless movement of goods across the border. This requires that at least NI is effectively part of the EU's SM for goods.
Allowing this (for goods only) is a very major concession from the EU.

Lars