Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Anteayer

joeysoap wrote: »

Nicky Morgan hinting that EU changing their stance on WA and backstop. QT tonight.

The Tories have been wishfully thinking that for years!

Why would the EU throw one of its own member states and a founder member of the Eurozone under the bus to facilitate a country that's leaving the EU and being openly hostile to it? It makes absolutely no sense and would undermine everything that the EU stands for.

The EU negotiators have been absolutely stedfast and unequivocal in supporting the Irish backstop position. The UK also has basically no bargaining power at all other than to threaten to destroy its own economy.

The EU has been accommodating with extensions, but it hasn't blinked and I think it's becoming increasingly unlikely that it will, particularly as the UK's position has become ever less tenable.

I find the Tories still do not understand that the UK is not seen as a EU member anymore. It's seen as an external threat! They've continuously made comments and moves that are not only just about exiting the EU, but that would seem to have been suggesting that it should be dismantled or destroyed in some cases too.

We even have had a British Government minister coming out with nonsense about starving an EU member! That's like something a Russian political figure might say about a former Eastern bloc country. The Tories really have no perspective or ability to see themselves in the mirror.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/tory-mp-threatens-ireland-with-brexit-food-shortages-890762.html

Meanwhile you've had Home Office 'hostile environment' policies applied to EU citizens in the UK and so on.

It's like they are not comprehending that they've made a decision to leave, burn the bridges and go. That means the EU no longer has any reason to treat the UK as a member anymore. So, the UK's interests are no longer the EU's interests, but Ireland as a member *is* a component of the EU.

I would listen to Tories' speculation on the EU much like I would read the The Daily Express, largely for comic value only.

Laois_Man

joeysoap wrote: »

Nicky Morgan hinting that EU changing their stance on WA and backstop. QT tonight.

Katya Adler from the BBC was also spouting it out early this morning - some rubbish about how the EU are so scared of no-deal, they want to "de-dramatise" the backstop by setting out a backstop-ending timetable where bits of it can be shaved away gradually as post-Brexit trade talks progress, possibly via a separate legal document attached to the Withdrawal Agreement,

Alternatively there is a suggestion that the new UK PM will return to the original EU idea of a NI only backstop.

Unfortunately she has willfully chosen to ignore the fact that the first option isn't really new. The WA in its current form and with the possibility of none of it getting "shaved away" if trade-talks are not progressing, still has to pass thru parliament.

And the second option creates a UK general election with the DUP withdrawing support for the government, thus leaving no majority and the new PM possibly breaking the record as the shortest ever serving PM which currently stands at 119 days - and even that was only so short because that PM (George Canning) croaked it that soon after getting the job!

ambro25

Laois_Man wrote: »

Labour have held Peterborough by 683 votes ahead of BP - Tory vote held up well

Labour 10,484
Brexit Party 9,801
Conservative 7,243
Lib Dems 4,159
Green 1,035
UKIP 400
CPA 162
English 153
SDP 135
Looney 112
IND 101

It is worth noting by the way that this month 3 years ago, Peterborough voted 60.9% leave!
In this by-election, The Brexit Party + Tory's + UKIP = 51.6%

For Remainers, there really is nothing to crow about, particularly in view of the previous MP-electing figures (Lab at 10k, down 13k from 23k; Cons at 7k, down 16k from 23k as well).

29k votes were stripped from the Lab/Con mainstays relative to the previous election, with 10k of these to the Brexit Party and only 3k of these to the LibDems, leaving 16k (ex-)votes floating about in the wind.

The Tories underperformed the brand-shiny-new Brexit Party by 30%, that's going to influence the party's policies and messages further, just like it did in view of the UKIP vote yesteryear.

The 700-odd majority by the Labour MP candidate, campaigning on local issues relative to a parachuted candidate of a months-old single-issue 'party', looks more accidental than anything in that context.

Personally, I find that worrying for the UK.

That second referendum some are pushing? Bad idea if you ask me.

robinph

There are a million ways to spin the results to make it look like one side won, or not.

The turnout was down 18% though and the previous election Labour only won by 607 votes, this time they won by 683, which is a bigger margin than they had before both in number of votes and percentage of the vote.

Leroy42

Farage made a very good point about the result. At some point Conservative voters will catch on that the Tory has no chance and thus move their vote to the Brexit Party in order to try to stop Labour.

This is pretty much what the Brexit Party will run on, no actual policies beyond Brexit and stopping Labour.

That is a pretty damning situation for the Tory party to find itself in. That many voters will start to see a vote for Tory as a wasted vote.

robinph

Leroy42 wrote: »

Farage made a very good point about the result. At some point Conservative voters will catch on that the Tory has no chance and thus move their vote to the Brexit Party in order to try to stop Labour.

This is pretty much what the Brexit Party will run on, no actual policies beyond Brexit and stopping Labour.

That is a pretty damning situation for the Tory party to find itself in. That many voters will start to see a vote for Tory as a wasted vote.

But does that actually change anything much overall, other than the shade of blue on the party rosette and the potential for new MP's being elected. The Tory campaigning has basically been "stop Labour" so no real change there.

Unless people are switching between blue and red it doesn't change much, and if the same percentages are switching from both blue and red to either orange or green then the house is still going to be split along the same lines as it is at the moment, just with more chances of needing coalitions.

BonnieSituation

joeysoap wrote: »

Nickys not the worst of them. She was endorsing Gove for leader of the party and therefore PM.

I used to think that. But some of the loopers she aligned with during the Malthouse meltdown have made me re-evaluate my stance somewhat.

kunst nugget

robinph wrote: »

But does that actually change anything much overall, other than the shade of blue on the party rosette and the potential for new MP's being elected. The Tory campaigning has basically been "stop Labour" so no real change there.

Unless people are switching between blue and red it doesn't change much, and if the same percentages are switching from both blue and red to either orange or green then the house is still going to be split along the same lines as it is at the moment, just with more chances of needing coalitions.

I think it makes a major difference. Without a manifesto, the Brexit Party are basically being given a blank slate by the voters to do whatever untold damage they want to the economy and healthcare system.

Enzokk

Laois_Man wrote: »

Katya Adler from the BBC was also spouting it out early this morning - some rubbish about how the EU are so scared of no-deal, they want to "de-dramatise" the backstop by setting out a backstop-ending timetable where bits of it can be shaved away gradually as post-Brexit trade talks progress, possibly via a separate legal document attached to the Withdrawal Agreement,

Alternatively there is a suggestion that the new UK PM will return to the original EU idea of a NI only backstop.

Unfortunately she has willfully chosen to ignore the fact that the first option isn't really new. The WA in its current form and with the possibility of none of it getting "shaved away" if trade-talks are not progressing, still has to pass thru parliament.

And the second option creates a UK general election with the DUP withdrawing support for the government, thus leaving no majority and the new PM possibly breaking the record as the shortest ever serving PM which currently stands at 119 days - and even that was only so short because that PM (George Canning) croaked it that soon after getting the job!

She seems to be musing to herself more than providing some spectacular insight. She may have convinced herself that her thoughts are what will be happening in the next few months, sprinkled in with the reality that none of this is guaranteed and it will all depend on the EU leaders and also what the parliamentary numbers looks like.

EU game-plans amid wait for new UK PM

Caught up in political turmoil (Italy and Germany) or scandal (Austria), in government-making (Denmark) or government dissolution (Greece), EU leaders are keeping only half an eye on the dizzying spectacle of the Conservative Party leadership race.


...

To be clear: this is not to suggest the EU would ditch the backstop if faced with a popular, hard-line Brexiteer UK prime minister. The EU fully intends to protect its single market, protect the Good Friday Agreement and protect member country Ireland, rather than make decisions in favour of departing member UK.

But talk is gradually returning in EU circles to the idea of "de-dramatising" the backstop. But that precise word is hardly used because of the outrage provoked in the UK when EU lead Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier tried the de-dramatising tactic back in summer/autumn 2018.

Instead EU diplomats are now at pains to underline that the backstop is not "a slab of marble" - meaning that bits of it can be shaved away as post-Brexit trade talks progress. An example I often hear is: as soon as an EU-UK post-Brexit deal is made on veterinary standards, then that can fall away from the backstop. The EU aim here is to convert the emotionally-charged backstop into a list of practical measures that can fall away at different times.

She goes on to say that the EU may just offer a timetable to the UK, but I suggest that as with any of the previous points along the negotiations that these will be to the EU terms and not the UK's terms. The EU will propose a date that the backstop can be looked at if certain conditions are met, if those conditions are not met then the backstop continues.

Basically she is waffling a bit by providing hope and reality at the same time, because the BBC pays her she has to let people know her thoughts.

Enzokk

Leroy42 wrote: »

Farage made a very good point about the result. At some point Conservative voters will catch on that the Tory has no chance and thus move their vote to the Brexit Party in order to try to stop Labour.

This is pretty much what the Brexit Party will run on, no actual policies beyond Brexit and stopping Labour.

That is a pretty damning situation for the Tory party to find itself in. That many voters will start to see a vote for Tory as a wasted vote.

This will only happen if the Brexit Party is allowed to get away without any policies. Once they have to put down what they stand for they will either overtake the Tories, if the policies are good, or they will find their share of Tory voters they currently have abandon them again.

CelticRambler

kunst nugget wrote: »

I think it makes a major difference. Without a manifesto, the Brexit Party are basically being given a blank slate by the voters to do whatever untold damage they want to the economy and healthcare system.

Since when has any election manifesto stopped a party (especially the Tory party) inflicting untold damage on the economy and heathcare system?

Enzokk

Seems as though the situation is still the same for Labour, you will need to get behind remain or the very least a second vote if they want to be in power.

https://twitter.com/BestForBritain/status/1136355979463987200

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

Farage made a very good point about the result. At some point Conservative voters will catch on that the Tory has no chance and thus move their vote to the Brexit Party in order to try to stop Labour.

Or they will catch on that the Brexit Party is an empty slogan, and only the Tories can stop Labour.


If we are betting on which lasts longer, Brexit Party or Tory Party, I'll bet on the one that has lasted 350 years over the one that was born yesterday.

Zubeneschamali

Enzokk wrote: »

She may have convinced herself that her thoughts are what will be happening in the next few months

Which is, coincidentally, the same as what she thought would happen in March and in April and in May - the EU would blink at the last minute and water down their position.


She was wrong then, too.

CelticRambler

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If we are betting on which lasts longer, Brexit Party or Tory Party, I'll bet on the one that has lasted 350 years over the one that was born yesterday.

Before I take you up on your bet, can you explain why the mood in Britain would not be the same in Britain as it has been in France? Over here, the equivalents of both Tories and Labour (albeit not quite so long-established ) have been reduced to footnotes in the current chapter of political history, while the equivalents of the other two (one, a simmering presence for a long time, the other a party that sprung out of nowhere) are suddenly way out in front.

funkey_monkey

Laois_Man wrote: »

Alternatively there is a suggestion that the new UK PM will return to the original EU idea of a NI only backstop.

...

And the second option creates a UK general election with the DUP withdrawing support for the government, thus leaving no majority and the new PM possibly breaking the record as the shortest ever serving PM which currently stands at 119 days - and even that was only so short because that PM (George Canning) croaked it that soon after getting the job!

Where did you pick this up about the NI only backstop reemerging?

Stop moaning ffs

funkey_monkey wrote: »

Where did you pick this up about the NI only backstop reemerging?

Would it not be the most sensible option to make it a NI only backstop?
It answers everything. Throw the DUP under the bus, NI gets the best of both worlds and all to the good.

No?

volchitsa

CelticRambler wrote: »

Before I take you up on your bet, can you explain why the mood in Britain would not be the same in Britain as it has been in France? Over here, the equivalents of both Tories and Labour (albeit not quite so long-established ) have been reduced to footnotes in the current chapter of political history, while the equivalents of the other two (one, a simmering presence for a long time, the other a party that sprung out of nowhere) are suddenly way out in front.

Not nearly so long standing though. The Conservatives are of a similar age and standing as the US Republicans and Democrats and while Labour is more recent, it's still over a century old.

I don't think there is that tradition of party longevity in French politics, they seem to have changed parties and names several times since I studied French - many years ago, admittedly, but not that many!

volchitsa

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Would it not be the most sensible option to make it a NI only backstop?
It answers everything. Throw the DUP under the bus, NI gets the best of both worlds and all to the good.

No?

It's such an obvious solution that the very fact that it hasn't been done long ago is what makes me hesitate to predict it now. It would have saved Theresa's bacon for one thing.

Laois_Man

funkey_monkey wrote: »

Where did you pick this up about the NI only backstop reemerging?

Katya Adler from the BBC - who probably just has a feeling in her waters!

https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1136592344512376832

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Would it not be the most sensible option to make it a NI only backstop?
It answers everything. Throw the DUP under the bus, NI gets the best of both worlds and all to the good.

No?

The obvious obstacle to it is that the Tory's lose DUP support which triggers a General Election

An Ciarraioch

The Guardian article on the result noted that Brexit Party insiders blamed their defeat on Pakistani voters supporting Labour - given Asians were stronger supporters of Brexit than the public at large, it shows Farage hasn't changed his tune a great deal.

Hurrache

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The Guardian article on the result noted that Brexit Party insiders blamed their defeat on Pakistani voters supporting Labour - given Asians were stronger supporters of Brexit than the public at large, it shows Farage hasn't changed his tune a great deal.

Not just that, but because they were Asian there was huge numbers of them per house which meant more votes for his opposition.

Flex

Laois_Man wrote: »

Katya Adler from the BBC - who probably just has a feeling in her waters!

https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1136592344512376832

I have to say, she is a dreadful reporter and its crap like hers that is fuelling the no deal camp in the UK; reporters like her constantly telling them

• the EU is terrified of no deal,
• publically they back the backstop but privately theyre doing everything they can to dump it/force Ireland to dump it,
• Ireland's government isnt even that committed to the backstop, the government party only wants it because if they drop it Sinn Fein will win the next general election,
• the Germans are terrified of no deal,
• the EU is trying to make an example of the UK to quash other leave movements elsewhere in the EU (basically that everyone is rooting for the UK in the negotiations to show them to inspire them to do the same)

The stuff she reports is absolute bollocks and is feeding and growing this idea in English nationalists heads that the EU is basically ready to crumble, they just need a PM who's brave enough to go through with no deal

Stop moaning ffs

Laois_Man wrote: »

Katya Adler from the BBC - who probably just has a feeling in her waters!

https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1136592344512376832



The obvious obstacle to it is that the Tory's lose DUP support which triggers a General Election

But it looks like they’re headed for one anyways.
And the fact that nobody’s even mentioned the idea, across any of the parties, is the really shocking part.

Boris Johnson £350m claim case thrown out by judges

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48554853
The High Court has thrown out an attempt to prosecute Boris Johnson over claims he lied during the 2016 referendum campaign by saying the UK gave the EU £350m a week.

The Tory leadership candidate challenged a summons for him to attend court on three claims of misconduct in public office.

His lawyers said he denied acting improperly or dishonestly.

Campaigner Marcus Ball launched the private prosecution.

This happened after he crowdfunded more than £300,000 for the case.

Mr Johnson, a former Foreign Secretary, was handed a summons to attend Westminster Magistrates' Court on 29 May.

One less obstacle in his way to the PM job.

cml387

Ann Widdicombe was on SO'R this morning.
Initially she was pretty sensible, saying that Rabb's idea for proroguing parliament is a non starter, and that Boris, Young and Gove are the main contenders for leader.

On the NI border unfortunately she went a bit astray, her point was that it was nonsense to say you can't have a border with the EU, after all doesn't Switzerland have a border with the EU. Not really the point but Sean let it pass.

Sean did bring up the"treatment for gays" thing she's been on about,although she apparently had said before the interview to RTE that she wouldn't be discussing it (fair do's to Sean, he brought it up anyway). She said that she was being denied free speech, which let to Sean asking if she felt she was being denied free speech now she had an opportunity to say what she meant, a point she failed to grasp.

lawred2

I'd like to see a thread ban for Katya Adler tweets. She's a troll.

FrancieBrady

cml387 wrote: »

Ann Widdicombe was on SO'R this morning.
Initially she was pretty sensible, saying that Rabb's idea for proroguing parliament is a non starter, and that Boris, Young and Gove are the main contenders for leader.

On the NI border unfortunately she went a bit astray, her point was that it was nonsense to say you can't have a border with the EU, after all doesn't Switzerland have a border with the EU. Not really the point but Sean let it pass.

Sean did bring up the"treatment for gays" thing she's been on about,although she apparently had said before the interview to RTE that she wouldn't be discussing it (fair do's to Sean, he brought it up anyway). She said that she was being denied free speech, which let to Sean asking if she felt she was being denied free speech now she had an opportunity to say what she meant, a point she failed to grasp.

She wasn't on to give an opinion, she was on to make speeches. SO'R let her off too many times.

Water John

If it comes to a LB coalition, their partner would be well looking for a PM other than Corbyn. Doubt he has the skills to lead a coalition or cabinet.

An Ciarraioch

Scotland, surprisingly, starts a fishing dispute over Rockall:

http://twitter.com/AngusMacNeilSNP/status/1137064672941793285

As it transpires, marine law formally declares uninhabitable rocks to be international waters:

https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm