Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

lawred2

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

So No Deal happened in March and in April too?

Well it was the EU that granted an extension when requested.

I'm not sure that the UK can rely of extensions being granted in perpetuity!

What did that vote lay down as at the mechanics for actually blocking no deal? No deal is the default end point.

Nody

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Why would Labour whip against a vote of no confidence in the the Tories?

Because Corbyn don't want to be in power until after the crash out (to be able to play the saviour card and excuse to take over the companies due to the chaos) nor have to actually have to work on pushing remain as an option. Corbyn is very much pro brexit but can't be seen to be to overtly so but every step of the way he (and his closest cronies) have pushed for it by refusing to do anything to support a remain vote in any form.

Professor Moriarty

Nody wrote: »

Two words; borrowing and inflation. I agree the economy will shrink; I agree that Boris will be walking on thin ice ready to crack at any time; I agree that Boris is unlikely to be the next PM but asking for an extension guarantees he will not remain as a PM. Small chance vs. no chance option with a politician who's as hardcore believer as May was it does not really become hard to see how he's likely to swing.

I think he'll be found out to be the bluffer that he is. Borrowing after crashing out would be an expensive strategy and inflation will only make things worse. Rather than tax cuts and increased spending, there would be an emergency budget increasing taxes and slashing spending. He'll face a vote of no confidence unless he backs down and if he backs down the Brexiteers will break him. He's in a Catch 22 of his own making and he hasn't the character or intellect to deal with it.

Nody

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I think he'll be found out to be the bluffer that he is. Borrowing after crashing out would be an expensive strategy and inflation will only make things worse. Rather than tax cuts and increased spending, there would be an emergency budget increasing taxes and slashing spending. He'll face a vote of no confidence unless he backs down and if he backs down the Brexiteers will break him. He's in a Catch 22 of his own making and he hasn't the character or intellect to deal with it.

Not really disagreeing with anything you state except as I noted earlier I think he'll take crash out to avoid guaranteed kick out by his own party and gamble he can keep bluffing after a crash out. I don't think he can and that he's not up to the task but the common theme for most UK politicians in senior positions is an never ending belief that they are the savior UK (and their party) needs no matter what facts are put forward.

Professor Moriarty

Nody wrote: »

Because Corbyn don't want to be in power until after the crash out (to be able to play the saviour card and excuse to take over the companies due to the chaos) nor have to actually have to work on pushing remain as an option. Corbyn is very much pro brexit but can't be seen to be to overtly so but every step of the way he (and his closest cronies) have pushed for it by refusing to do anything to support a remain vote in any form.

Corbyn was never pro No Deal though. Anyway Corbyn is powerless these days. The membership is staunchly remain and his shadow cabinet is either ignoring him or defying him. His best chance now is to do what he's told.

Professor Moriarty

Nody wrote: »

Not really disagreeing with anything you state except as I noted earlier I think he'll take crash out to avoid guaranteed kick out by his own party and gamble he can keep bluffing after a crash out. I don't think he can and that he's not up to the task but the common theme for most UK politicians in senior positions is an never ending belief that they are the savior UK (and their party) needs no matter what facts are put forward.

I agree. I think he is that ambitious that he will try to take whatever road he thinks will keep him in power - including No Deal. He's a populist through and through.

Nody

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Corbyn was never pro No Deal though. Anyway Corbyn is powerless these days. The membership are staunchly remain and his shadow cabinet is either ignoring him or defying him. His best chance now is to do what he's told.

Yet about half of the pro remain MPs are likely to be ousted this summer as they changed the requirement from half to one third of party members in the district required to raise a challenge as requested by Momentum. This was done specifically to get rid of "troublesome" MPs who're not willing to tow the Corbyn line (or threaten them enough that they will). The problem with Labour is not it's MPs but the fact they got a well organized hardcore zealot left wing ready to do anything and everything to ensure Corbyn remains as the leader to bring back the good old days. Exactly as the Tories card carrying party members look for the same time period of prosperity but they got very different views on how the era looked like and how to get there.

Tell me how

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Corbyn was never pro No Deal though. Anyway Corbyn is powerless these days. The membership is staunchly remain and his shadow cabinet is either ignoring him or defying him. His best chance now is to do what he's told.

If things were as bad as that for him, he'd be gone already. He still is a favourite with many of the grass roots who like his socialist ideals without shining too much of a light on them in terms of realism.
Many of those who are remain haven't yet realised that he is not that way inclined and that he is helping to push the country to the brink.
I do think the clock is ticking for him given their polling position but I've thought he should be gone with at least 12 months already and yet he is still there.

Professor Moriarty

Nody wrote: »

Yet about half of the pro remain MPs are likely to be ousted this summer as they changed the requirement from half to one third of party members in the district required to raise a challenge as requested by Momentum. This was done specifically to get rid of "troublesome" MPs who're not willing to tow the Corbyn line (or threaten them enough that they will). The problem with Labour is not it's MPs but the fact they got a well organized hardcore zealot left wing ready to do anything and everything to ensure Corbyn remains as the leader to bring back the good old days. Exactly as the Tories card carrying party members look for the same time period of prosperity but they got very different views on how the era looked like and how to get there.

But Momentum members are very much pro a second referendum so deselection of remain MPs isn't in their interest. Plus almost all Labour heavyweights including Starmer, McDonnell, Abbot and Watson, have made it clear just this week that they expect Corbyn to now publicly commit to a second referendum. Another important point to remember is that any deselected MPs may well be re-elected as independents with Labour the big losers - the next GE will be fought primarily along Brexit rather than party lines.

Professor Moriarty

Tell me how wrote: »

If things were as bad as that for him, he'd be gone already. He still is a favourite with many of the grass roots who like his socialist ideals without shining too much of a light on them in terms of realism.
Many of those who are remain haven't yet realised that he is not that way inclined and that he is helping to push the country to the brink.
I do think the clock is ticking for him given their polling position but I've thought he should be gone with at least 12 months already and yet he is still there.

It's a mirror image of the ERG running the Tory party. Momentum have a stranglehold on Labour. But Corbyn can no longer r defy his shadow cabinet's and Momentum's demands for a second referendum.

Nody

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

But Momentum members are very much pro a second referendum so deselection of remain MPs isn't in their interest. Plus almost all Labour heavyweights including Starmer, McDonnell, Abbot and Watson, have made it clear just this week that they expect Corbyn to now publicly commit to a second referendum. Another important point to remember is that any deselected MPs may well be re-elected as independents with Labour the big losers - the next GE will be fought primarily along Brexit rather than party lines.

And once again I'm not disagreeing with your facts or general conclusion but with the simple matter we're dealing with a person who cares about ideology only. Look at the beating they were told they would take in the EU election due to not taking a clear remain position; polls showing how they would more than double if they said outright they would back a second referendum. Yet they did nothing of the sort. Look at the general polls all stating the same thing; yet Corbyn refuses to actually speak up clearly for remain and rather waddle it all up in ambiguity to allow him to pretend he agrees with everyone when in reality he wants out. Any rational person should have gone remain and rocked those polls months ago yet he refused to do so even when challenged by his own MPs. His ministers would come up state Labour is pro referendum only to have him come out and deny that. Most party leaders would align with you; Corbyn however is a reverse May were hell and high water he'll keep forcing his vision on everyone until he gets his way no matter the cost in terms of MPs or voters backing him.

Professor Moriarty

Nody wrote: »

And once again I'm not disagreeing with your facts or general conclusion but with the simple matter we're dealing with a person who cares about ideology only. Look at the beating they were told they would take in the EU election due to not taking a clear remain position; polls showing how they would more than double if they said outright they would back a second referendum. Yet they did nothing of the sort. Look at the general polls all stating the same thing; yet Corbyn refuses to actually speak up clearly for remain and rather waddle it all up in ambiguity to allow him to pretend he agrees with everyone when in reality he wants out. Any rational person should have gone remain and rocked those polls months ago yet he refused to do so even when challenged by his own MPs. His ministers would come up state Labour is pro referendum only to have him come out and deny that. Most party leaders would align with you; Corbyn however is a reverse May were hell and high water he'll keep forcing his vision on everyone until he gets his way no matter the cost in terms of MPs or voters backing him.

He's presiding over the death of Labour. The dire personal and party polling aside, the antisemitism isn't going away. That's his fault - he's the boss. Panorama will be doing a programme on how Labour threatened whistleblowers. That's his fault. On Brexit, he's completely out of tune with the party membership and the vast majority of his MPs. That's his fault. I think that the worm is turning though. Even his close friends such as Abbot and McDonnell are now publicly disagreeing with him. And Momentum and the general membership want a second referendum. He's completely isolated now. All this with a possible No Deal and/or a possible GE by November. It's crunch time for him. I don't think Labour has any other choice - he either gets in line or there will be a heave.

Akrasia

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Why would Labour whip against a vote of no confidence in the the Tories?

They wouldn't. But would they actually enforce their own whip when inevitably the vote fails because some of their own MPs abstain or vote against the No confidence vote.

Akrasia

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

He's presiding over the death of Labour. The dire personal and party polling aside, the antisemitism isn't going away. That's his fault - he's the boss. Panorama will be doing a programme on how Labour threatened whistleblowers. That's his fault. On Brexit, he's completely out of tune with the party membership and the vast majority of his MPs. That's his fault. I think that the worm is turning though. Even his close friends such as Abbot and McDonnell are now publicly disagreeing with him. And Momentum and the general membership want a second referendum. He's completely isolated now. All this with a possible No Deal and/or a possible GE by November. It's crunch time for him. I don't think Labour has any other choice - he either gets in line or there will be a heave.

Corbyn is gone the day Barry Gardiner refuses to support him publically.

So far. Gardiner has made some criticism of Party decisions like allowing Hatton back into Labour, but he has allowed himself to be put forward front and centre to defend Corbyn's position on Brexit.

He's been one of his key backers in public in the past year but he is listed as 'neutral' on that leaked list of Labour mps attitudes to Corbyn

Corbyn will always have his core support, and those who are opposed to him, but when he can not longer rely on the influential middle ground then the end is nigh.

CelticRambler

It's mildly amusing to see, on this thread full of "Irish" opinions, the future of England/GB/UK still framed in terms of Tory vs. Labour. Is there no-one who considers (never mind believes) that the Lib Dems might run a campaign with the slogan "Do the Unthinkable" and win enough seats to form a stable coalition with e.g. the SNP and Plaid Cymru ?

I do.

And if that were to happen, chances are the second thing they'd do (the first being to revoke Art.50) would be to scrap FPTP and change the British political landscape forever more.

Tell me how

CelticRambler wrote: »

It's mildly amusing to see, on this thread full of "Irish" opinions, the future of England/GB/UK still framed in terms of Tory vs. Labour. Is there no-one who considers (never mind believes) that the Lib Dems might run a campaign with the slogan "Do the Unthinkable" and win enough seats to form a stable coalition with e.g. the SNP and Plaid Cymru ?

I do.

And if that were to happen, chances are the second thing they'd do (the first being to revoke Art.50) would be to scrap FPTP and change the British political landscape forever more.

Your second paragraph is why the first won't happen.

I'm not saying Labour/Conservatives will dominate for ever more but we are bit away from a Lib Dem, Snp, Plaid Cymru just yet.
No spotlight has been shine one them or their policies yet because they're not seen as a realistic threat yet.

Print media, in particular, will eviscerate a lot of their candidates should they be judged to be approaching the top table.

Unfortunately, if a disruptive force us to emerge at next GE, it'll likely be the Brexit Party.

robinph

CelticRambler wrote: »

It's mildly amusing to see, on this thread full of "Irish" opinions, the future of England/GB/UK still framed in terms of Tory vs. Labour. Is there no-one who considers (never mind believes) that the Lib Dems might run a campaign with the slogan "Do the Unthinkable" and win enough seats to form a stable coalition with e.g. the SNP and Plaid Cymru ?

I do.

And if that were to happen, chances are the second thing they'd do (the first being to revoke Art.50) would be to scrap FPTP and change the British political landscape forever more.

It might be that LibDem becomes a more dominant party, but not within the next couple of months, and not in one massive flip from having 11 MPs to having 250+ of them which is what would be needed to then do a coalition with the SNP and PC.

If they team up with the Greens and ensure that they win any remain leaning constituency, and also any that have both Brexit Party and a wobbly Tory candidate standing, then they might be able to make a bit of an impact. But it will be too late for revoking, unless the EU makes the next extension a multi year one.

Zubeneschamali

lawred2 wrote: »

I'm not sure that the UK can rely of extensions being granted in perpetuity!

Brexit will cost the EU a lot of money if it ever happens. Extensions are cheap and keep the door open to the whole thing being called off.


An extension is a no-brainer from the EU side.

robinph

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Brexit will cost the EU a lot of money if it ever happens. Extensions are cheap and keep the door open to the whole thing being called off.


An extension is a no-brainer from the EU side.

All an extension requires from the EU is an extra security person on the door to any committee rooms to tell the UK they can't come in for this session because they are leaving, someone else to staff the mail room waiting for the A50 revoke letter and otherwise say No to any new suggestions that the UK come up with.

Meanwhile various business can relocate in a bit less of a rush.

Professor Moriarty

Akrasia wrote: »

They wouldn't. But would they actually enforce their own whip when inevitably the vote fails because some of their own MPs abstain or vote against the No confidence vote.

I can't see very many Labour MPs not voting for a no confidence vote to bring down an elitist, populist Tory PM who is about to crash Britain out of the EU. If that happened I would love to be at their next constituency meeting. Maybe a few would leave the party to keep the Tories in power and to facilitate a crash out, but I can't see it.

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Brexit will cost the EU a lot of money if it ever happens. Extensions are cheap and keep the door open to the whole thing being called off.

An extension is a no-brainer from the EU side.

Not necessarily. Continuing uncertainty over the future has economic impacts with the EU as well as within the UK. They are, of course, smaller impacts for the EU but that's not the point; the EU's willingness to bear them indefinitely is not assured simply by the fact that the UK is suffering worse impacts.

And that's before we look at the political consequences of an unfinished brexit as running sore for the EU.

I think there comes a point where the EU seens no point to an extension simply for the sake of an extension, and they'll be more and more inclined to the view that an extension is only to be granted to faciliate some specific, imminent step which is is highly likely change the UK's continuing paralysis. Everybody talks about a general election or a second referendum in this context; I wouldn't necessarily say the menu of option is strictly limited to those two items, but it really has to be something which offers a similar chance of opening up some progress.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

Not necessarily. Continuing uncertainty over the future has economic impacts with the EU as well as within the UK.

Refusing an extension and causing an immediate disaster in order to eliminate uncertainty about whether the disaster might or might not happen at some future date makes no sense.

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

Not necessarily. Continuing uncertainty over the future has economic impacts with the EU as well as within the UK. They are, of course, smaller impacts for the EU but that's not the point; the EU's willingness to bear them indefinitely is not assured simply by the fact that the UK is suffering worse impacts.

And that's before we look at the political consequences of an unfinished brexit as running sore for the EU.

I think there comes a point where the EU seens no point to an extension simply for the sake of an extension, and they'll be more and more inclined to the view that an extension is only to be granted to faciliate some specific, imminent step which is is highly likely change the UK's continuing paralysis. Everybody talks about a general election or a second referendum in this context; I wouldn't necessarily say the menu of option is strictly limited to those two items, but it really has to be something which offers a similar chance of opening up some progress.

They won't offer an extension to Johnson on the basis that he needs to keep the Tory party intact - which is impossible anyway. It will have to be signing the WA, a GE or second referendum. That's what makes the next few months so interesting. Interesting in that whatever he does his government will be in chaos. Couldn't happen to a nicer person.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think there comes a point where the EU seens no point to an extension simply for the sake of an extension, and they'll be more and more inclined to the view that an extension is only to be granted to faciliate some specific, imminent step which is is highly likely change the UK's continuing paralysis. Everybody talks about a general election or a second referendum in this context; I wouldn't necessarily say the menu of option is strictly limited to those two items, but it really has to be something which offers a similar chance of opening up some progress.

No, I don't see it. Why should the EU care that Westminster is paralyzed? As long as they stay that way, trade continues on today's terms, freedom of movement continues, the Courts continue as is, everything is pretty normal.


There is no reason why the EU can't keep that up for 25 years, 50 years.

Tell me how

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Refusing an extension and causing an immediate disaster in order to eliminate uncertainty about whether the disaster might or might not happen at some future date makes no sense.

It wouldn't be an immediate disaster. It would be the predicted, warned about disaster which has now come about after 3 leave dates have been missed.

EU have to get back to focussing on EU. UK have gotten sufficient attention to this point.

lawred2

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Brexit will cost the EU a lot of money if it ever happens. Extensions are cheap and keep the door open to the whole thing being called off.


An extension is a no-brainer from the EU side.

A never ending Brexit doesn't come without its costs... It is far too much a distraction for the EU and the uncertainty does nothing for the Eurozone economies.

Shelga

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, I don't see it. Why should the EU care that Westminster is paralyzed? As long as they stay that way, trade continues on today's terms, freedom of movement continues, the Courts continue as is, everything is pretty normal.


There is no reason why the EU can't keep that up for 25 years, 50 years.

When is the next 7 year budget due to be negotiated? The UK will cause a world of pain for the EU if they’re forced to contribute to it.

robinph

Tell me how wrote: »

It wouldn't be an immediate disaster. It would be the predicted, warned about disaster which has now come about after 3 leave dates have been missed.

EU have to get back to focussing on EU. UK have gotten sufficient attention to this point.

Other than the UK press saying that the EU is scared and about to cave into the unspecified demands the EU is now free to get on with what they need to do. They just need to keep saying no to any renegotiation requests and otherwise carry on as they want.

There isn't really any problems for the EU now other than the toddler screaming in the corner who can otherwise be ignored.

Professor Moriarty

lawred2 wrote: »

A never ending Brexit doesn't come without its costs... It is far too much a distraction for the EU and the uncertainty does nothing for the Eurozone economies.

A Britain that continues to be a basket case while the EU continues to engage with Britain under FOM and a CU is in the EU's interest in many ways. Investment continues to flow out of Britain and into the EU. The EU has more time to prepare. Britain stands as a stark example of what happens when you try to leave the EU.

Zubeneschamali

Tell me how wrote: »

EU have to get back to focussing on EU. UK have gotten sufficient attention to this point.

I agree that the EU should focus on the EU, but for all the noise, the UK are not actually taking much EU time now. The WA negotiations have been over for months, the team have moved on to other things.


All the EU has to do is extend an extension if asked (let's say 1 year at a time) and in the meanwhile ignore the antics in Westminster, and wait for the UK to Revoke A50, ratify the WA, or leave with No Deal.