Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

McGiver

trellheim wrote: »

This is entirely correct.
(IMHO of course) The correct view is

1. Issue A50 notice
2. Carry out detailed referendum planning with absolute nailed-on options so you know exactly what you are voting for up to no-deal
3. Require something more than a simple majority to push one or other over the line - say 2/3 majority
4. if no clear winner then status quo - stay in the EU
5. If theres a clear Out We Go by all means do it , not my monkeys.

Any PM doing this would have to self-sacrifice; this is not possible under Johnson.

I think 55-60% would make more sense. Nobody really does 2/3 i.e. 66%...

Even Switzerland doesn't do 2/3 majorities. They do super-majority in terms of 50+% cantons and 50%+ popular vote. If 14/26 cantons and 50%+1 public vote in favour, it wins. Quite silly system in Swizterland imho when it comes to constitutional changes, for ordinary laws it's fine. Note that Swiss EEA membership, rather serious constitutional matter, was rejected 50.3 vs 49.7%!

Under these terms Leave would have won the referendum as well - almost all electoral regions voted leave (9/12) and the vote was 51.9%.

Kermit.de.frog

All countries in the EU will have their own government assessments. They don't have to be made public.

Sam Russell

robinph wrote: »

They would never be able to sell a 2/3rds majority requirement, and not sure that it's even required to ensure that an actual reliable view of the population has been met. Requiring a certain percentage turn out and 60%+ to vote for it is more likely, or require a defined majority in each country and approval by each devolved parliament/ assembly.

I think my point was misunderstood.

The 2/3rds majority is for the HoC vote sending the Art 50 notice. A second referendum would be nuts.

If there is a GoNU is set p, I would recommend they setup a Royal Commission to gt all the dirt on the Leave campaign out into the public domain - concentrating on the funding and voter manipulation. Also put pression on the Met Police fr prosecutions.

trellheim

McGiver wrote: »

I think 55-60% would make more sense. Nobody really does 2/3 i.e. 66%...

Even Switzerland doesn't do 2/3 majorities. They do super-majority in terms of 50+% cantons and 50%+ popular vote. If 14/26 cantons and 50%+1 public vote in favour, it wins. Quite silly system in Swizterland imho when it comes to constitutional changes, for ordinary laws it's fine. Note that Swiss EEA membership, rather serious constitutional matter, was rejected 50.3 vs 49.7%!

Under these terms Leave would have won the referendum as well - almost all electoral regions voted leave (9/12) and the vote was 51.9%.

There would not be a simple leave option here ; No-deal, WA , CU would all be on the table.

brickster69

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

All countries in the EU will have their own government assessments. They don't have to be made public.

Oh i get ya. So when the sh#t hits the fan then they say to the public " oh we knew this was going to happen, we did a report on it but we did not want to tell you how it would effect you "

Get's worse by the day.

Tell me how

Just one day after issuing her letter to fellow female MP's seeking to organise a GONU, Caroline Lucas has had to apologise for the list being all white females. Talk about watching May/Corbyn/Johnson being some of the worst party leaders in UK history and thinking you can out-do them in terms of the amount of egg you can cover your face in. Meanwhile, the Brexit Party's Nigel Farage has been found to have referred to the Queen Mother as an 'overweight, chain smoking, gin drinker' and the non Westminster represented UKIP has selected a man called 'Richard Braine' as their leader.

Any wonder Steve Bannon is looking at the UK and licking his lips as to what potential lies their for his type of manipulation and influence.
I suspect the reason the EU have gone so quiet is so as to save the UK some embarrassment by not pointing out the mess they have made of everything.

I'm watch 'The Thick of It' from the start again and the early episodes contain the Minister being removed from the Dept of Social Affairs and the new Minister and their strategists trying to make up or launch/defend policy on the fly and I imagine it is virtually a documentary of what actually goes on.

briany

Just as a reminder: the Cons and DUP are one seat away from being a minority government, and that's not even counting the absent Sinn Fein. Thing are going to get very, very interesting into the Autumn.

Water John

You'll have to change your user name Brainy. People will think you lead UKIP.

storker

McGiver wrote: »

I'm of the same opinion, such movements typically end with self-destruction, many times preceded by a general destruction of their environment (including and up to a war). Hope this lot will only self-destruct and won't cause some major destruction....

The appetite for Brexit and the virulence of many of the Brexit brigade (if in doubt, take a look at the comments in the Mail and Express) makes me think the UK may be dangerously close to large-scale civil unrest and maybe even civil war since the days of Charles I. Mostly I think that's very unlikely, mainly because it's the loudest, most strident voices that tend to get the widest hearing and hopefully the rational people (even on the Brexit side) will outnumber the more deranged. Events, however, can have a way of snowballing, and when patriotism is being invoked, expectations are being raised, accusations of treason are being made, wild soundbites are being made about vassalhood slavery and servitude, and there is talk of bypassing or shutting down parliamentary process, the UK appears to be steering itself into very dangerous waters with charts that are at least 70 years out of date.

serfboard

brickster69 wrote: »

No meeting planned between Boris and Varadkar
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/boris-johnson-has-no-meeting-scheduled-with-leo-varadkar-1.3983882

I'm sorry but you've misread the article you've quoted which says that there is no meeting scheduled - different thing. In fact the article actually says:

The Irish Times wrote:

Although no date is scheduled for the meeting, Downing Street said Mr Johnson has accepted Mr Varadkar’s invitation. Work on finalising an the date, and other arrangements, for the meeting is ongoing.

So in other words, a meeting is planned, but, since a date has not been fixed, it is not scheduled. I'm not being pedantic for the sake of it - the words used are important.

I was glad to see further in that article, that Jo Swinson has visited the border:

The Irish Times wrote:

On her first visit to the Irish Border, Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson said there is no “good Brexit” for Northern Ireland.

“I felt it was important to come and listen to people and community groups about their experiences and about what the prospect of a hard border means to the communities. It’s very powerful hearing from those individuals who live and work in this area,” she said.

And she had a nice swipe at Boris:

The Irish Times wrote:

Ms Swinson also said she was “not surprised” that Mr Johnson took almost a week to contact Mr Varadkar after his appointment as prime minister.

“He was perhaps our worst ever foreign secretary and does not possess the skills or diplomacy that was required for that role so we shouldn’t be shocked that in the role of prime minister he is also not demonstrating that statesmanlike approach that ought to be needed,” she added.

briany

storker wrote: »

The appetite for Brexit and the virulence of many of the Brexit brigade (if in doubt, take a look at the comments in the Mail and Express) makes me think the UK may be dangerously close to large-scale civil unrest and maybe even civil war since the days of Charles I. Mostly I think that's very unlikely, mainly because it's the loudest, most strident voices that tend to get the widest hearing and hopefully the rational people (even on the Brexit side) will outnumber the more deranged. Events, however, can have a way of snowballing, and when patriotism is being invoked, expectations are being raised, accusations of treason are being made, wild soundbites are being made about vassalhood slavery and servitude, and there is talk of bypassing or shutting down parliamentary process, the UK appears to be steering itself into very dangerous waters with charts that are at least 70 years out of date.

If push comes to shove, I don't think that there will be large scale civil unrest. Violent protests? Sure, but not this dystopian vision where the police lose the handle on things and law and order breaks down. We have Twitter, now, to act as a sort of release valve for public anger, so ranting on there will help keep the pressure down. Most people would probably chose likes and retweets over affecting real change anyway.

brickster69

Although no date is scheduled for the meeting, Downing Street said Mr Johnson has accepted Mr Varadkar’s invitation. Work on finalising an the date, and other arrangements, for the meeting is ongoing.

That was yesterday's news

A report in the Sunday Telegraph said an offer to meet Mr Varadkar to talk about the backstop, an insurance policy aimed at avoiding a hard Border that was included in the withdrawal agreement reached between the EU and UK, had been accepted and dates were being discussed.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/no-breakthrough-on-brexit-deadlock-despite-talk-of-varadkar-and-johnson-meeting-943156.html

Joe_ Public

Tell me how wrote: »

Just one day after issuing her letter to fellow female MP's seeking to organise a GONU, Caroline Lucas has had to apologise for the list being all white females. Talk about watching May/Corbyn/Johnson being some of the worst party leaders in UK history and thinking you can out-do them in terms of the amount of egg you can cover your face in. Meanwhile, the Brexit Party's Nigel Farage has been found to have referred to the Queen Mother as an 'overweight, chain smoking, gin drinker' and the non Westminster represented UKIP has selected a man called 'Richard Braine' as their leader.

Any wonder Steve Bannon is looking at the UK and licking his lips as to what potential lies their for his type of manipulation and influence.
I suspect the reason the EU have gone so quiet is so as to save the UK some embarrassment by not pointing out the mess they have made of everything.

I'm watch 'The Thick of It' from the start again and the early episodes contain the Minister being removed from the Dept of Social Affairs and the new Minister and their strategists trying to make up or launch/defend policy on the fly and I imagine it is virtually a documentary of what actually goes on.

Has brexit done and gone political satire, just as Trump has severely weakened it in the US? Why bother making stuff up to be funny or absurdist anymore, when we have to feast on this omnishambles every day of the week?

I've always had time for Caroline Lucas but even without the gaff she was seriously overstretching herself with this stunt. I know she is truly horrified at the prospect of no deal, but this wasn't the way to go about it and it just goes to show that the tories and labour aren't the only ones playing political games with this crisis. They're all doing it, including the Lib Dems.

serfboard

brickster69 wrote: »

A report in the Sunday Telegraph said an offer to meet Mr Varadkar ... had been accepted and dates were being discussed.

So a meeting is planned - as I said.

Stop moaning ffs

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Has brexit done and gone political satire, just as Trump has severely weakened it in the US? Why bother making stuff up to be funny or absurdist anymore, when we have to feast on this omnishambles every day of the week?

I've always had time for Caroline Lucas but even without the gaff she was seriously overstretching herself with this stunt. I know she is truly horrified at the prospect of no deal, but this wasn't the way to go about it and it just goes to show that the tories and labour aren't the only ones playing political games with this crisis. They're all doing it, including the Lib Dems.

Superficially and deeply satirical but it’s not funny. It’s alarming.

That said.

Look up the name of the new leader of UKIP.
You couldn’t make it up.

brickster69

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Has brexit done and gone political satire, just as Trump has severely weakened it in the US? Why bother making stuff up to be funny or absurdist anymore, when we have to feast on this omnishambles every day of the week?

Here is a good one for ya. The fixed Term Parliament Act 2011 which enables the PM to set the date for an election was designed by who ?

Answer - Dominic Grieve who was the Attorney General at the time. Now he is saying it is illegal.

brickster69

serfboard wrote: »

So a meeting is planned - as I said.

That was Sunday's news today is Monday

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breaki...ng-943156.html

Joe_ Public

brickster69 wrote: »

Here is a good one for ya. The fixed Term Parliament Act 2011 which enables the PM to set the date for an election was designed by who ?

Answer - Dominic Grieve who was the Attorney General at the time. Now he is saying it is illegal.

Sorry, i dont know what you're talking about. Where did Dominic Grieve say its illegal for the PM to set the date for an election? All i know is he doesnt agree that the PM can "squat" in power if losing a VONC and suggests the monarch might have to get involved to ensure he goes. Lots agree with him, but it may have to be put to the test.

brickster69

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Sorry, i dont know what you're talking about. Where did Dominic Grieve say its illegal for the PM to set the date for an election? All i know is he doesnt agree that the PM can "squat" in power if losing a VONC and suggests the monarch might have to get involved to ensure he goes. Lots agree with him, but it may have to be put to the test.

He enabled it. The PM is in power until a new government is elected. If he sets a date of 1/11/2019 no one can do anything.

trellheim

The PM does not set the date of a UK GE

Imreoir2

brickster69 wrote: »

He enabled it. The PM is in power until a new government is elected. If he sets a date of 1/11/2019 no one can do anything.

To be fair, the Queen actually could. Parliament also could by passing an amendment to the Fixed term parliament act that requires a PM who has lost a vote of Confidence to resign and / or set the date for election with in a certain amount of time which would require the election to be held before the 31st of Oct. They probably wont though, if their politics were sane enough to prevent all this, we would not be looking at the likelyhood of an unelected PM who has lost the confidence of the HOC squatting in NO 10 and crashing the UK out of the EU anyway.

Water John

I would suggest Dominc Grieve wrote the Law, 'in good faith'. He didn't foresee a Rasputin type character taking over the running of No 10 and telling the PM of the day how to flout convention, which is a large part of the UK Consitution.

brickster69

trellheim wrote: »

The PM does not set the date of a UK GE

He does if he loses a VONC

Kaybaykwah

Nobel laureate to be; UK Transport minister has an airlift plan in case of a no deal scenario that would throw transport of certain commodities out of whack. lol.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/10/trucks-full-food-medicines-could-flown-uk-cargo-planes-part/

trellheim

He does if he loses a VONC

He does not. Go look at the FTPA

Valhallapt

Initially I’m surprised by the arrogance of this:
https://twitter.com/SteveBarclay/status/1160955101323911169

But then when you put it alongside the rhetoric of the express column posted above, you realize that it’s a case of gross exaggeration. He probably had a sheepish phone call, then went back to his mates to tell them how he put big Phil in his place,

It reminds me of Jay from the inbetweeners, embellishing his love making conquests ;-)

lawred2

Valhallapt wrote: »

Initially I’m surprised by the arrogance of this:
https://twitter.com/SteveBarclay/status/1160955101323911169

But then when you put it alongside the rhetoric of the express column posted above, you realize that it’s a case of gross exaggeration. He probably had a sheepish phone call, then went back to his mates to tell them how he put big Phil in his place,

It reminds me of Jay from the inbetweeners, embellishing his love making conquests ;-)

And it's as simple as this apparently

https://twitter.com/LanceForman/status/1160968745864630274?s=09

This lad still hasn't realised that the trade talks happen after an orderly withdrawal...

Another one who has confused the withdrawal agreement with trade talks. It beggars belief really. But it's uttered with such surety and confidence.

I hope he enjoys the back of the line.

brickster69

trellheim wrote: »

He does not. Go look at the FTPA

Here is the timetable. Assuming he loses a VONC which will be called by Jeremy Corbyn

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-election-explainer/explainer-is-it-too-late-to-hold-an-election-before-brexit-yes-probably-idUKKCN1UW0TP

BonnieSituation

Kaybaykwah wrote: »

Nobel laureate to be; UK Transport minister has an airlift plan in case of a no deal scenario that would throw transport of certain commodities out of whack. lol.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/10/trucks-full-food-medicines-could-flown-uk-cargo-planes-part/

In case people don't click the link:

Telegraph wrote:

New tendering documents for a £300 million no-deal contract show that the Department for Transport wants firms to supply planes to air-lift vital supplies if the UK leaves the European Union without a deal.

I mean do they not read this and think "Hmmmmmmmmm, this is a bit batshít crazy!"

It's beyond my comprehension that we've gotten here.

Enzokk

BonnieSituation wrote: »

In case people don't click the link:



I mean do they not read this and think "Hmmmmmmmmm, this is a bit batshít crazy!"

It's beyond my comprehension that we've gotten here.

Some trucks can carry 40 tonnes in weight it seems. Cargo aircraft can carry 134 000 tonnes for a new 748. So that is about 3 and a half lorries per flight. There are what, 7000 lorries that a day that go through Dover. Let's say a thousand has essential supplies (why a thousand, no idea just picking a number out of the sky), that would mean to bypass the port you will need about 280 flights to replace the capacity.

There has been around 280 sales of the 777F and 748F. So I think there is a flaw in that plan, before you even start looking at where they will land and the logistics from there.