Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Peregrinus

20silkcut wrote: »

If he sold out the DUP and accepted a border in the Irish Sea,obviously triggering an election ,would he not be in a stronger position going in to that election on the deliverable promise of securing a Canada style agreement, if given a majority, post election.

Well, it's not easy.

Assuming he can't get the WA approved in Parliament, what he has to do is call a general election with a manifesto of approvlng the WA after the election and then seeking a Canada-style deal for GB. But the challenge would be to hold the party together in fighting an election on that manifesto, when so many of them have publicly nailed their head to the mast of not approving the WA.

Enzokk

Okay, so we seem to be in agreement about Stewart being the best candidate of the 6 that is left. But he is for a hard Brexit as well, so I don't see any light from any of the candidates. The best we can hope for is a hard Brexit with some serious unicorns and cherry picking, Theresa May mark 2, as a plan.

https://twitter.com/LittleGravitas/status/1140194838450753542

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, it's not easy.

Assuming he can't get the WA approved in Parliament, what he has to do is call a general election with a manifesto of approvlng the WA after the election and then seeking a Canada-style deal for GB. But the challenge would be to hold the party together in fighting an election on that manifesto, when so many of them have publicly nailed their head to the mast of not approving the WA.

Which would see them leaving the EU in 2028. By which time, many of the current Tory party membership will be pushing up daisies.

Professor Moriarty

Enzokk wrote: »

Okay, so we seem to be in agreement about Stewart being the best candidate of the 6 that is left. But he is for a hard Brexit as well, so I don't see any light from any of the candidates. The best we can hope for is a hard Brexit with some serious unicorns and cherry picking, Theresa May mark 2, as a plan.

https://twitter.com/LittleGravitas/status/1140194838450753542

Is staying in a CU considered a hard Brexit? His version of Brexit is very similar to Jeremy Corbyn's version.

Enzokk

So it is the second vote of MPs today, right? It seems like there is some games being played by Johnson to get the candidate he thinks he will easily beat.

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1140881524583256064

So he will get some of his supporters to lend their support to Hunt as he considers him a soft touch. This seems like a procession to Johnson becoming PM.

As for Johnson, I am not sure if this has been posted but his views on Scotland and someone from there becoming PM has been brought back. The Scottish view is replicated though.

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1140638974706429959


I wonder if those polls about the Conservative Party members views shows that they have had an influx of UKIP members to try and influence their views? You would not think that the Conservative and Unionist Party would be so open to the Union breaking apart.

Professor Moriarty

Enzokk wrote: »

So it is the second vote of MPs today, right? It seems like there is some games being played by Johnson to get the candidate he thinks he will easily beat.

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1140881524583256064

So he will get some of his supporters to lend their support to Hunt as he considers him a soft touch. This seems like a procession to Johnson becoming PM.

As for Johnson, I am not sure if this has been posted but his views on Scotland and someone from there becoming PM has been brought back. The Scottish view is replicated though.

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1140638974706429959


I wonder if those polls about the Conservative Party members views shows that they have had an influx of UKIP members to try and influence their views? You would not think that the Conservative and Unionist Party would be so open to the Union breaking apart.

If English exceptionalism didn't exist then Brexit wouldn't exist. Scotland, Wales and NI are pawns at best.

Russman

Russman wrote: »

This is the bit I just cannot get my head around. How can maybe 30% of a population not believe the consequences of a no-deal ? There's no metric I can see that justifies any part of Brexit but surely they can't really believe in the unicorns and sunlit uplands, can they ?


As for whether the HoC wants an election now, which is best (or worst) for them: an election now and the Tories get hammered by the Brexit Party ? or an election after a no-deal and they get hammered anyway ?

James O'Brien was on Matt Cooper yesterday talking about this. Essentially senior politicians and the media have been telling them for decades that it will be fine and that the EU is both unimportant and holding them back.

It is hard to argue against that when those same people either don't consider it further or if they do it is within the context of that same bubble.

I think the only thing that might pop that bubble is the short and long term consequences of a hard Brexit. Even then I'm not sure.

Enzokk

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Is staying in a CU considered a hard Brexit? His version of Brexit is very similar to Jeremy Corbyn's version.

It's not the customs union, its the priority to stop immigration. The only difference between his plan and May's seems to be he has not (yet) mentioned the UK having the ability to have their own trade deals. He also wants to leave all the EU institutions as well. So no EURATOM then?

Peregrinus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Which would see them leaving the EU in 2028. By which time, many of the current Tory party membership will be pushing up daisies.

Huh? If Johnson fight and wins an election in, say, October 2019 on a manifest of ratifying and implementing May's deal, there is no reason why the UK could not be out of the EU by the end of 2019, or early 2020 if they wanted a bit more time to get the necessary legislation through Westminster. Where are you getting 2028 from?

BonnieSituation

First Up wrote: »

It isn't automatic. The Prime Minister is elected by the HoC in the same way the Taoiseach is elected by the Dail. If one party has an overall majority, then no problem but if not then it comes down to whatever deals are done between parties.

The Conservatives don't have an overall majority so for their nominee to be elected, some members of other parties will have to vote for him. May only became PM because the DUP backed her. Boris or whoever the Tories chose will face the same problem so I wouldn't expect anyone to rock the DUP boat this side of a general election.

The systems differ in that the Dáil elect the Taoiseach whereas in the HOC, the PM, who by dint of being leader of the largest party will be summoned by the Queen to form a government that would be expected to command a majority/confidence in the HOC.

There's no procedure for testing this "command" outside of a confidence motion. So like everything in the "sink of parliamentary democracy" that is Britain, it's done on a nod and a wink and on the principal of "good chaps".

How anyone could think we are comparable is mad.

jacool

1/6 Johnson
12/1 Stewart
20/1 Hunt
55/1 Gove
95/1 Raab
290/1 Javid

looks over alright

Professor Moriarty

Enzokk wrote: »

It's not the customs union, its the priority to stop immigration. The only difference between his plan and May's seems to be he has not (yet) mentioned the UK having the ability to have their own trade deals. He also wants to leave all the EU institutions as well. So no EURATOM then?

Whisper it, maybe the shiny new Rory is playing to the middle ground (relatively speaking) within the Tory party membership. He's a remainer at heart though. No more than Boris has managed to get Francois and Rudd to back him.

Peregrinus

jacool wrote: »

1/6 Johnson
12/1 Stewart
20/1 Hunt
55/1 Gove
95/1 Raab
290/1 Javid

looks over alright

Although interesting that Stewart has moved up to second place, having started as the rank outsider.

Call me Al

Enzokk wrote: »

So it is the second vote of MPs today, right? It seems like there is some games being played by Johnson to get the candidate he thinks he will easily beat.

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1140881524583256064

So he will get some of his supporters to lend their support to Hunt as he considers him a soft touch. This seems like a procession to Johnson becoming PM.

As for Johnson, I am not sure if this has been posted but his views on Scotland and someone from there becoming PM has been brought back. The Scottish view is replicated though.

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1140638974706429959


I wonder if those polls about the Conservative Party members views shows that they have had an influx of UKIP members to try and influence their views? You would not think that the Conservative and Unionist Party would be so open to the Union breaking apart.

They are so blinkered in pursuing this hard Brexit they're canibalising themselves. And by all accounts they are ok with that.
But I don't think its UKIP personnel infiltration. This is the diehard true-blue C voter who believes UKIP/BP ideology in his core. Just think back to the abuse Dominic Grieve received from his Beaconsfield Tory association.

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

Huh? If Johnson fight and wins an election in, say, October 2019 on a manifest of ratifying and implementing May's deal, there is no reason why the UK could not be out of the EU by the end of 2019, or early 2020 if they wanted a bit more time to get the necessary legislation through Westminster. Where are you getting 2028 from?

Here's what you said - note the bold bit:

Assuming he can't get the WA approved in Parliament, what he has to do is call a general election with a manifesto of approvlng the WA after the election and then seeking a Canada-style deal for GB. But the challenge would be to hold the party together in fighting an election on that manifesto, when so many of them have publicly nailed their head to the mast of not approving the WA.

It took Canada seven years to negotiate a deal with the EU. Assuming GE in 2020, seven years to negotiate and a year to leave: 2028.

Professor Moriarty

jacool wrote: »

1/6 Johnson
12/1 Stewart
20/1 Hunt
55/1 Gove
95/1 Raab
290/1 Javid

looks over alright

Javid at 290/1. Yikes.

First Up

BonnieSituation wrote: »

The systems differ in that the Dáil elect the Taoiseach whereas in the HOC, the PM, who by dint of being leader of the largest party will be summoned by the Queen to form a government that would be expected to command a majority/confidence in the HOC.

There's no procedure for testing this "command" outside of a confidence motion. So like everything in the "sink of parliamentary democracy" that is Britain, it's done on a nod and a wink and on the principal of "good chaps".

How anyone could think we are comparable is mad.

The two systems are comparable inasmuch as it is the MPs elected by commoners who ultimately decide who will be PM. If there is no overall majority then the parties (as represented by their elected MPs) negotiate. The Queen's role is constitutional - she can't just pick the one she likes.

Peregrinus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Here's what you said - note the bold bit:

Assuming he can't get the WA approved in Parliament, what he has to do is call a general election with a manifesto of approvlng the WA after the election and then seeking a Canada-style deal for GB. But the challenge would be to hold the party together in fighting an election on that manifesto, when so many of them have publicly nailed their head to the mast of not approving the WA.

It took Canada seven years to negotiate a deal with the EU. Assuming GE in 2020, seven years to negotiate and a year to leave: 2028.

Perhaps I should have been clearer. If you approve the existing WA you leave pretty well immediately, and enter the transition period - that's what the WA itself provides will happen. You then start negotiating a Canada-style FTA. That may well take 7 years, but you're out of the EU before the negotiations start, not after they end.

I didn't intend to suggest that Brexit would be deferred until the FTA was concluded. Other considerations aside, the EU position is that they won't start negotiating an FTA with a current member state.

Zubeneschamali

Enzokk wrote: »

The best we can hope for is a hard Brexit with some serious unicorns and cherry picking, Theresa May mark 2, as a plan.

Not at all - if the Tories are determined to go for Hard Brexit, the best we can hope for is that they fail to get it through Parliament, there is an election, and they get annihilated.


Then a Labour/LibDem coalition, or a minority Labour Government propped up by SNP/LibDems, goes for a much softer Brexit, or holds another referendum and calls Brexit off entirely.

Peregrinus

First Up wrote: »

The two systems are comparable inasmuch as it is the MPs elected by commoners who ultimately decide who will be PM. If there is no overall majority then the parties (as represented by their elected MPs) negotiate. The Queen's role is constitutional - she can't just pick the one she likes.

But nor does she pick the one chosen by parliament, because parliament doesn't get to choose. Parliament can throw out a PM, but it can't install one.

The Queen picks the one that the outgoing PM recommends to her.

Cryptopagan

jacool wrote: »

1/6 Johnson
12/1 Stewart
20/1 Hunt
55/1 Gove
95/1 Raab
290/1 Javid

looks over alright

Stewart worth a flutter at that price!

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

Perhaps I should have been clearer. If you approve the existing WA you leave pretty well immediately, and enter the transition period - that's what the WA itself provides will happen. You then start negotiating a Canada-style FTA. That may well take 7 years, but you're out of the EU before the negotiations start, not after they end.

I didn't intend to suggest that Brexit would be deferred until the FTA was concluded. Other considerations aside, the EU position is that they won't start negotiating an FTA with a current member state.

Let's not forget that pesky backstop though. While it is in place, the single market and CU remain in operation right up until the FTA is agreed and implemented. So a Canada style Brexit would see Britain in the SM and CU until 2028.

First Up

Peregrinus wrote: »

But nor does she pick the one chosen by parliament, because parliament doesn't get to choose. Parliament can throw out a PM, but it can't install one.

The Queen picks the one that the outgoing PM recommends to her.

She (first) picks the one that the parliamentary arithmetic show as having the best chance of commanding a majority. It isn't an exact science but the monarch's role is to listen to what the party leaders tell her, assess the situation and go from there.

What makes this time different is that the party whip system is effectively redundant. Neither the Tories or Labour can guarantee the support of all their MPs for anything Brexit related. The Tories might row in behind Boris to preserve power but that isn't certain.

Stop moaning ffs

Still trying to process that they’d be happy to see the break up of the Union if it meant brexit.
Can only imagine they’ll change their tune post brexit and Scotland moves to leave.

54and56

First Up wrote: »

Part of me looks forward to watching the faces as Boris comes back from Brussels with the same result and I'll be interested to see the next act in the farce.

It may just be the case that the ERG type votes needed to get the WA through the HoC won't fall into line until they see one of their own coming back and saying that they gave it a good push but whilst the EU won't re-open the WA look at the nice shiny new language I got in the Political Declaration so let's just get on with passing the WA so we can "take back control" blah blah blah whilst at the same time either buttering up the Deeeeeee Yoouuuu Peeeeeee with a load of promises and/or cash or just ignoring them all together in favour of peeling off 10-12 Labour Leavers who feel they'll lose their seat (there's that self preservation priority again) at the next election unless they vote through Brexit.

Remember Paisley and Co being totally and utterly against the Good Friday agreement and power sharing with IRA Sinn Fein until they got a sniff of power and then it was chuckles with Martin McGuinness.

Never say Never when it comes to politics.

54and56

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Whisper it, maybe the shiny new Rory is playing to the middle ground (relatively speaking) within the Tory party membership. He's a remainer at heart though. No more than Boris has managed to get Francois and Rudd to back him.

Rudd is backing Jeremy Hunt - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/amber-rudd-jeremy-hunt-tory-leadership-race-brexit-a8951531.html

First Up

54&56 wrote: »

It may just be the case that the ERG type votes needed to get the WA through the HoC won't fall into line until they see one of their own coming back and saying that they gave it a good push but whilst the EU won't re-open the WA look at the nice shiny new language I got in the Political Declaration so let's just get on with passing the WA so we can "take back control" blah blah blah whilst at the same time either buttering up the Deeeeeee Yoouuuu Peeeeeee with a load of promises and/or cash or just ignoring them all together in favour of peeling off 10-12 Labour Leavers who feel they'll lose their seat (there's that self preservation priority again) at the next election unless they vote through Brexit.

Remember Paisley and Co being totally and utterly against the Good Friday agreement and power sharing with IRA Sinn Fein until they got a sniff of power and then it was chuckles with Martin McGuinness.

Never say Never when it comes to politics.

Yes, its obvious that self preservation is the over-riding motivation around Westminster but a lot of Tories are worried about losing out to Farage's crowd. When Boris comes back with his head under his arm he'll probably make a better fist of explaining/justifying it than May did. But that doesn't guarantee the ERG will accept it and if Labour smell blood......

Quin_Dub

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The acceptable price of Brexit for a majority of Tories party members

They might as well tie a union jack St George scarf around their collective head and go out blazing in a divine wind.



https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1140885358231609345

Although not really surprising , those results are possibly the most depressing thing I've seen in relation to Brexit.

20silkcut

Peregrinus wrote: »

Perhaps I should have been clearer. If you approve the existing WA you leave pretty well immediately, and enter the transition period - that's what the WA itself provides will happen. You then start negotiating a Canada-style FTA. That may well take 7 years, but you're out of the EU before the negotiations start, not after they end.

I didn't intend to suggest that Brexit would be deferred until the FTA was concluded. Other considerations aside, the EU position is that they won't start negotiating an FTA with a current member state.

In my own personal opinion this would be a good outcome.
To have Britain away from the Eu decision making process as quickly as possible and the likes of farage etc out of the European Parliament.
While at the same time in a non chaotic transition period and FTA negotiations where their real standing in the world is being made patently clear.

First Up

20silkcut wrote:

In my own personal opinion this would be a good outcome. To have Britain away from the Eu decision making process as quickly as possible and the likes of farage etc out of the European Parliament.

Farage has as much of an impact on the EP as a fly on the bridge of a ship. He might be annoying the captain but he doesn't affect the ship's course. Pretty soon they'll open a window and off he'll go, to do what nobody much cares.