Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Zubeneschamali

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It's when the UK is successful, and they will be, the edifice will crumble because especially the bigger countries will see that and want that.

If the UK were successful after Brexit, this still wouldn't be true. The EU is a peace project, a political one started to prevent war in Europe, and the UK turning into Singapore-on-Thames won't change that.


But even the Brexiteers know the UK will not be successful. Rees-Mogg will bank a fortune when it crashes, and is predicting maybe 50 years before the UK sees a dividend from Brexit.

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If the UK were successful after Brexit, this still wouldn't be true. The EU is a peace project, a political one started to prevent war in Europe, and the UK turning into Singapore-on-Thames won't change that.


But even the Brexiteers know the UK will not be successful. Rees-Mogg will bank a fortune when it crashes, and is predicting maybe 50 years before the UK sees a dividend from Brexit.

. . . a period chosen not because by then he expects the UK to be prospering, but because by then he expects to be dead, and so can't be called on to explain why his prediction has proven bogus.

J Mysterio

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The QT audience is fixed.

I thought the audience was a 'representative sample' of the local populace. From what I can see, the great majority were applauding <SNIP. No insults please>, and this was broadcast to the nation.

Arguments about democracy, whatever, but this was just a nasty, mean-spirited and idiotic little diatribe about how the EU should basically not exist.

trellheim

A reminder for those that think a revoke of A50 is on the cards.

When voting for A50 in December 2016 498 MPs voted for, with 114 Against
Every single Conservative MP who voted, voted for A50 invoking BAR ONE

The single NAY is Ken Clarke

see https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2017-02-01b.1005.405

I cant see them turning that iceberg(fatberg ? ) around

MrMusician18

MrMusician18 wrote: »

To be fair, the concessions won by Ireland were fairly meaningless, and related to things that weren't in the treaty anyway. i.e. one confirming that abortion policy was a domestic competence. There was some other BS about neutrality too afaik.

The only meaningful concession that was won was after Nice rejection, that every country got a commissioner. It was an easy sell since most countries were a little miffed by that lost opportunity for patronage, even if it did make the commission more workable.

They had to be put in because of the disinformation campaign by the No side.
Their posters claimed all sorts of things.

I still think that all referendum material (posters, leaflets etc) should have to be approved by the referendum commission

Sam Russell

It appears to be missed in the revulsion of A. Widdicombes tirade that she mentioned colonies revolting against their empires on July 4th - American Independence day, where they celebrate the 1776 declaration against British rule.

Is the irony lost on everyone?

By the way, the Brexit Party are not shackled in the EU, just supping the gravy on the train.

Edit: Of course, she was wrong to describe the divvying out of jobs as being undemocratic. As a former Tory MP, she must have witnessed many queues outside No. 10 as would be and wannerbies queue up to get crumbs or jobs. At least the EU Parliament get to approve the results.

Perhaps the fact they were meaningless just serves to highlight the sheer b***** that was being spread by w*******.

hometruths

This could scupper Johnson's plans:

The Conservatives’ chances of retaining the Brecon and Radnorshire constituency in a byelection at the start of next month have slimmed after other pro-remain parties opted to stand aside to give the Liberal Democrat challenger a free run.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/05/pro-emain-parties-strike-brecon-and-radnorshire-byelection-pact-to-fight-conservatives

If remain parties get their act together to put 1 candidate in each constituency before a GE they could do very well.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Can we take the Lisbon treaty and financial stuff to a new thread please?

trellheim

Back to the issue at hand

We know the DUP are against same-sex marriage in NI

See https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/foreign-affairs/brexit/news/105075/government-forced-u-turn-mps-given-more-time-same-sex

We will see how onside they are if these amendments go through or not

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2017-2019/0417/amend/niexec_rm_cwh_0704.1-7.html

( the idea being that DUP will pull support , and thus the government, if it goes through ) not getting much press tho

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Mod: Can we take the Lisbon treaty and financial stuff to a new thread please?

Just done that now.

IAmTheReign

schmittel wrote: »

This could scupper Johnson's plans:



https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/05/pro-emain-parties-strike-brecon-and-radnorshire-byelection-pact-to-fight-conservatives

If remain parties get their act together to put 1 candidate in each constituency before a GE they could do very well.

I just saw that myself. I don't get why they couldn't get their act together and do the same during the EU elections but if this is a sign of what will happen if a GE gets called the pro remain parties could clean up with the Cons and the BP splitting the brexit vote.

A Dub in Glasgo

J Mysterio wrote: »

I thought the audience was a 'representative sample' of the local populace. From what I can see, the great majority were applauding <SNIP. No insults please>, and this was broadcast to the nation.

No, the audience is loaded to a notional national level irrespective of the local area. Why they bother to tour QT is beyond me. In fact, why they still bother with QT is beyond me

Strazdas

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

No, the audience is loaded to a notional national level irrespective of the local area. Why they bother to tour QT is beyond me. In fact, why they still bother with QT is beyond me

Problem with QT is that Leave voters are always very loud, opinionated, belligerent and tend to take over the show. It gives the impression that 80 to 90% of the audience are pro-Brexit.

trellheim

I find QT to be an excellent regional indicator , look at the huge differences between scotland QTs, london ones, and rural UK ones

Irish Praetorian

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The QT audience is fixed.

Fixed and dilated more like.

J Mysterio

Last week Boris Johnson delivered a speech to a Royal Horticultural Society audience in Wisley, Surrey, before heading to the affluent village of Oxshott to buy some fennel and tarragon sausages and have a cup of tea in the Munch and Wiggles cafe. In a series of interviews later that day, he was unwilling to reveal the provenance of the staged photograph of him and his partner, Carrie Symonds.

He was, however, able to insist that Britain would leave the European Union, “do or die”, by the end of October.

On the same day, the Sutton Trust and the Social Mobility Commission issued a report into elitism in Britain that “paints a picture of a country whose power structures are dominated by a narrow section of the population [where] social mobility is low and not improving”.

Those who went to private school comprise 7 per cent of the country’s population but 39 per cent of the elite; those who went to Oxford or Cambridge university comprise less than 1 per cent of the population but 24 per cent of the elite. Senior judges, junior ministers, permanent secretaries and diplomats are among the least representative professions. But the media, and particularly newspaper columnists, are right up there, too.

There is a clear and undeniable link between the entrenched and calcifying class stratification in British society and the inept chaos in which we currently find ourselves. The gene puddle from which the elite siphons its ranks has become shallow and fetid. Those who make the laws in government, oversee the civil service that will implement them, adjudicate on them in court or assess them in newspapers, are drawn from such a narrow social layer that they might as well be the same person.

Even when they do not form a majority, their critical mass is such that they set the tone, define the culture and shape the parameters for what is institutionally permissible.

This was never healthy and always absurd. But recently it has become untenable. The prime minister who got us into this Brexit mess a few years back went to the same school and joined the same supper club at the same university as the person who will most likely be prime minister in a few weeks’ time. Nobody thinks that is an uncanny coincidence. It’s how Britain works. It’s also why it’s not working.

“The country’s model of leadership is disintegrating,” wrote the Economist, not known for its Marxist tendencies, in December. “Britain is governed by a self-involved clique that rewards group membership above competence and self-confidence above expertise.”

Gary Younge for The Irish Times

This is a portion of the article, but it's really worth reading in its entirety. Class system can't go on, Britain is broken.

trellheim

But so what ? It's easy to point at that. At the moment if a GE was held the Brexit equation would swing even harder to Brexit as parties would have to try and out-Brexit each other but thats not a function of the toffs at the top

Leroy42

It is being entirely driven by the toffs at the top. The sudden concern for democracy, yet no one voted for No Deal TM was not even voted for by her own party.

Party manifestos are regularly ignored because of circumstances. But somehow, suddenly failure to deliver on a vague question imperils the whole of democracy!

This whole mess is entirely down to internal Tory infighting, so endemic that they couldn't even agree on how to leave.

McGiver

Zubeneschamali wrote:

Swiss people I have spoken with laughed at the idea that their part time army of weekend warriors defends the country.

But those are only reserves. RoI has none such.

Zubeneschamali wrote:

The banks defend Switzerland.

Yes, partially.

Military personnel, total, % of labour force
RoI - 9,000 (3.86%)
CH - 21,000 (4.27%)

Military spending
RoI - $1b
CH - $4.6b

The RoI deficit is clear especially in spending, infrastructure and active reserves, but anyway...

/OT

McGiver

Podge_irl wrote:

A federal Europe is not happening, so your entire point is somewhat irrelevant.

This is the main point. It is moving towards that point but it is not imminent at all, realistically decades away and also all members will have to agree and I can see only small incremental slow steps being taken, like we have seen in last 30 years.

And if some sort of con-federation finally happens, given the complexity, variety and history, I can predict a Swiss type of a looser federation where federal government controls 10% of gdp at most, and individual states set their own budgets, taxation, legislation, police etc.

To compare budgets of the following 'federal governments':
Current EU budget - <1% GDP
Swiss federal government - 11% GDP
Canadian federal government - 20% GDP
US federal government - 40% GDP

ThePanjandrum

Instead, the EU passed this. The ‘Articles’ are the bit which are actually law. The 14 paragraphs under “whereas” are just explanation. So note Article 2 on the third and final page of the document (no one else seems to have). Here is what it says:

“This decision shall cease to apply on 31 May 2019 in the event that the United Kingdom has not held elections to the European Parliament in accordance with applicable Union law and has not ratified the Withdrawal Agreement by 22 May 2019.”

The vital words are in bold here, but not (sadly) in the original. Have we ratified the Withdrawal Agreement? Nope. That means that this second extension of time ceased to apply, as it says, on the 31 May. So according to EU law, we’ve gone. We’ve been outside the EU, without a WA or an Free Trade Agreement, for a whole month and we’re still not all dead yet. Remarkable.

Charles Day - Spectator - 05.07.19

So does that mean that the Brexit discussion is now ended and we have "no deal"?

"This" is https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32019D0584&from=PT

A Dub in Glasgo

The Scottish hustings for the Tory leadership guys tonight and Hunt comes out with this bit of democracy in action

https://twitter.com/TheScotsman/status/1147176630843953152

BonnieSituation

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

The Scottish hustings for the Tory leadership guys tonight and Hunt comes out with this bit of democracy in action

https://twitter.com/TheScotsman/status/1147176630843953152

Even Boris wasn't stupid enough to explicitly rule it out. He knows that just strengthens the waverers who will go to the SNP when being faced with an English Toff telling Scottish people they can't have something.

fash

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Charles Day - Spectator - 05.07.19

So does that mean that the Brexit discussion is now ended and we have "no deal"?

As neither the UK not the EU nor third countries think so, who gives a sh*t?

ThePanjandrum

fash wrote: »

As neither the UK not the EU nor third countries think so, who gives a sh*t?

Everyone can think you've bought a house but if the law says that you haven't then you should be bothered, or is this a little subtle for you?

ThePanjandrum

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Charles Day - Spectator - 05.07.19

So does that mean that the Brexit discussion is now ended and we have "no deal"?

"This" is https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32019D0584&from=PT

The UK did hole elections and has elected a new match of MEPs, so accordingly the UK are still in the running.

brickster69

Deleted User wrote: »

The UK did hole elections and has elected a new match of MEPs, so accordingly the UK are still in the running.

And is a small word.

This decision shall cease to apply on 31 May 2019 in the event that the United Kingdom has not held elections to the
European Parliament in accordance with applicable Union law and has not ratified the Withdrawal Agreement
by 22 May 2019.

ThePanjandrum

brickster69 wrote: »

And is a small word.

This decision shall cease to apply on 31 May 2019 in the event that the United Kingdom has not held elections to the European Parliament in accordance with applicable Union law and has not ratified the Withdrawal Agreement by 22 May 2019.

Good spot, thanks.

Sand

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Swiss people I have spoken with laughed at the idea that their part time army of weekend warriors defends the country.

The banks defend Switzerland.

If the Swiss people think banks defend them, then you should have laughed at them.