Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

briany

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Would that be the arch brexiteer who now wants a second referendum?

I don't believe that Corbyn wants the UK to crash out, but I'm not convinced that he really wants a second referendum either. He's hummed and hawed on the idea so long that support of it now smacks of him and his team having crunched the numbers on what course of action would mitigate the electoral cost to Labour rather than what his principles re:Europe are. It's a big problem for him and Labour considering his traditional voter base in the North of England is staunchly pro-Leave.

McGiver

prawnsambo wrote: »

BarryD2 wrote: »

What game world are you living in? This is a lose situation for us if Brexit does go ahead. There is an imbalance alright between the economies of the UK and the Republic - their's is much larger

As has been pointed out again and again from the outset, the best result for us is either no Brexit or a very soft one, which latter does not really suit the EU.

It does actually. A very soft brexit will maintain the UK's membership of the SM, CU or both. Either like Norway or Switzerland or a combination of both. That means that goods flows will be much smoother and seamless than what a hard brexit would cause. And of course would include FoM. And even membership subs. But without Nigel Farage in the EP.

Tech note - neither CH nor NO are in the CU. That's why EFTA have somewhat independent trade policy and their own FTAs.
NI Backstop would be needed even if they went the Norway route.

Staying in CU and SM is a nonsense, it would make zero sense for UK (no independent trade policy, limited regulatory power, no representation in EU legislative, SM access payments, adherence to 4 freedoms).

Edit - forgot to mention that staying in the SM and the CU basically equals the EU membership, hence no country outside the EU is in the SM as well as the CU.

prawnsambo

McGiver wrote: »

Tech note - neither CH nor NO are in the CU. That's why EFTA have somewhat independent trade policy and their own FTAs.
NI Backstop would be needed even if they went the Norway route.

Staying in CU and SM is a nonsense, it would make zero sense for UK (no independent trade policy, limited regulatory power, no representation in EU legislative, SM access payments, adherence to 4 freedoms).

Ah yeah, I should have given Turkey as an example for being in the CU. But technically speaking, leaving the EU is anything from just leaving the institutions to all the way to full crash out. I wasn't suggesting it would make sense, just how simplistic the referendum question was or how broad a mandate it gave the government.

BorneTobyWilde

Pointless speech.
Looked a bit like '' I want to be seen, I want to be heard '' speech.

Attention seeker got his fix.

GM228

Sounds accurate:-

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1168603978063581186?s=19

"The Prime Minister seems to be doing everything he can to bring about an election, while claiming it's the last thing he wants"

FrancieBrady

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Pointless speech.
Looked a bit like '' I want to be seen, I want to be heard '' speech.

Attention seeker got his fix.

How many times did we gather round waiting for May to make a significant speech?

Seems to be the new way to communicate to members of your party rather than anything else.

careless sherpa

Water John wrote: »

They could call themselves, 'true conservatives'.

Maybe the provisional conservatives

Stop moaning ffs

How many times did change uk change their names?

Probably not a good idea to brand it as a separate party. Wait for the outcome. Tory party is definitely split though. Can they come back from it?
Doubtful right now

Water John

They would be classed as Ind on the ballot paper, wouldn't have time to register as a political party.

fash

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Would that be the arch brexiteer who now wants a second referendum?

If by "Want" you mean "forced by his party but trying to wriggle out of and sabotage" - then yes. Otherwise no, we must be discussing 2 different people.

briany

The letter that John Redwood wrote to Geoffrey Cox last year, detailing his issues with the negotiated withdrawal agreement. Was this a cogent breakdown of a draconian deal or fussing over points that underpinned an orderly transition period?

ancapailldorcha

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

How many times did change uk change their names?

Probably not a good idea to brand it as a separate party. Wait for the outcome. Tory party is definitely split though. Can they come back from it?
Doubtful right now

The Conservative party as an entity will only survive with several of its organs being removed and it'll take electoral catastrophe at the very least to trigger this process.

Like, I can't fathom what Johnson is really gunning for here. His sole ideology seems to be Boris Johnson. The only things I think he cares for are his legacy and people's opinions of him hence the various stunts he pulled as Mayor of London.

I had thought that he was hoping to goad Parliament into forcing him into seeking another extension so that he could avoid a catastrophic no deal for the sake of him and his party. Proroguing Parliament runs contradictory to that as does looking to force an election.

Speaking of an election, what exactly does he run on? May ran against Corbyn and managed to destroy her majority altogether and this was before the term "backstop" entered the public sphere. He can't run on the economy given what he's about to do to it and he can't run on the NHS, public services, education or any of the other things which pale in comparison to Brexit. Maybe international trade but that's a stretch. Nobody cares about trade unless they can use it to trigger liberals. I just don't think that there are anywhere near enough angry Brexiters to hand him the 400-odd seats he really needs to be free of the DUP, ERG and the moderate rebels.

And Corbyn? His rhetoric seems to be centred exclusively on averting no deal rather than stopping Brexit. This won't be enough to convince either Brexiter Labour voters or metropolitan student types that they should vote for him.

I don't think I can call this one.

Headshot

Personally what I would love to see Brexit voted to be delayed tomorrow, Boris calls for an election but Corbyn's labour votes it down and letting Boris stew in the **** he has created

Unfortunately Corbyn wants the election badly but he needs to think of the bigger picture here and he has the opportunity to really destroy the Tories

sondagefaux

McGiver wrote: »

Tech note - neither CH nor NO are in the CU. That's why EFTA have somewhat independent trade policy and their own FTAs.
NI Backstop would be needed even if they went the Norway route.

Staying in CU and SM is a nonsense, it would make zero sense for UK (no independent trade policy, limited regulatory power, no representation in EU legislative, SM access payments, adherence to 4 freedoms).

Switzerland isn't in the Single Market either, it has a set of bilateral agreements with the EU that largely contain much of the same rules as the Single Market, but financial services, for example, are excluded from these agreements.

Switzerland has been granted equivalency for many of its financial services, but the EU can withdraw this with just 30 days notice.

Equivalency confers nowhere near the benefits of being in the Single Market, which fully covers services, and which allows the City of London to act as the primary place of business for financial services sector companies (and related services such as legal businesses, insurance etc) to serve the entire Single Market from, due to the passporting rights granted under the Single Market.

The loss of these rights, and the loss of the right to legally transfer data from the EU to the UK, will have a hugely negative impact on the UK's services sector which makes up 80% of its economy.

I don't know why the majority of the UK's population thinks that losing the treaty rights which form the basis for much of the UK's economy and jobs is going to be good for the UK.

Perhaps they're unaware just how much of their services sector relies on the Single Market and are far too focused on trying to secure free trade in goods.

sondagefaux

prawnsambo wrote: »

The risk of deselection is that the incumbent could stand as an independent. Of course they are not guaranteed to be successful, but they could still possibly garner considerable personal support. Depending of course on who they are. The likes of Rory Stewart, David Gauke, Philip Hammond etc. spring to mind.

Deselection means there isn't any further way of enforcing party discipline on them in the House of Commons.

They can vote as they please if they know they're not going to be Conservative candidates ever again.

sondagefaux

Deleted User wrote: »

IF he gets voted out on 14th Oct (the mooted election date) would he be Britain's shortest serving PM?

I've seen that he has the power to call an election for Oct 14th, then change the date to November so Britain still exits without a deal. Is that true?

No, it's not true.

He has no power to call an election before the next scheduled one. The Fixed Term Parliaments Act means that a motion to call an early general election requires a two-thirds majority of MPs to vote in favour of it. Even if he gets 65% of MPs to vote for an early general election, it still wouldn't be good enough.

prawnsambo

sondagefaux wrote: »

Deselection means there isn't any further way of enforcing party discipline on them in the House of Commons.

They can vote as they please if they know they're not going to be Conservative candidates ever again.

If the end goal is a GE, party discipline in the HoC is of finite value. In fact it could be useful to have dissidents voting against you in a VoNC. For reasons of being able to scream 'betrayal' at them whilst silently thanking them for their service. But perhaps I'm being too Machiavellian.

briany

Headshot wrote: »

Personally what I would love to see Brexit voted to be delayed tomorrow, Boris calls for an election but Corbyn's labour votes it down and letting Boris stew in the **** he has created

Unfortunately Corbyn wants the election badly but he needs to think of the bigger picture here and he has the opportunity to really destroy the Tories

If Labour vote against a GE, and leave Boris in charge, what happens if Boris just folds his arms and says, "I don't care what you voted for, I'm not going to Brussels, I'm not going to ask for an extension. I don't care what legal term you cite. I. AIN'T. GOING!"?

Headshot

briany wrote: »

If Labour vote against a GE, and leave Boris in charge, what happens if Boris just folds his arms and says, "I don't care what you voted for, I'm not going to Brussels, I'm not going to ask for an extension. I don't care what legal term you cite. I. AIN'T. GOING!"?

afaik legally he'll have to do it or go to jail

sondagefaux

briany wrote: »

If Labour vote against a GE, and leave Boris in charge, what happens if Boris just folds his arms and says, "I don't care what you voted for, I'm not going to Brussels, I'm not going to ask for an extension. I don't care what legal term you cite. I. AIN'T. GOING!"?

Parliament can fire him and the entire government by holding a Vote of No Confidence in the government. There doesn't have to be a general election to fire Johnson.

A Vote of No Confidence in the government doesn't automatically lead to a general election.

Under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, MPs have 14 days after the government loses a Vote of No Confidence to propose a new prime minister .

If they can do so before the 14 day deadline expires, the FTPA says that a general election does not have to be held.

Shelga

What do Labour and the Tories actually want to happen tomorrow??

What did Tony Blair mean in his warning to Labour today?- that if they get an early GE before October 31st, it could backfire and they could be wiped out while the Tories get a majority? Isn’t that a major risk at all times while Corbyn is leader anyway??

sondagefaux

Shelga wrote: »

What do Labour and the Tories actually want to happen tomorrow??

What did Tony Blair mean in his warning to Labour today?- that if they get an early GE before October 31st, it could backfire and they could be wiped out while the Tories get a majority? Isn’t that a major risk at all times while Corbyn is leader anyway??

I presume he means that even Corbyn might look like a better alternative Prime Minister if there's an election after the UK leaves without a deal on October 31st.

If even a fraction of the disruption that a No Deal Brexit is predicted to cause materialises, the reputation of Johnson and the Conservatives will be ruined: Johnson's 'Fúck Business' remark is going to come back to haunt him.

Stop moaning ffs

Hard to believe sources from number ten at this stage. But this is interesting

https://twitter.com/sebastianepayne/status/1168600129819086848?s=21

briany

Headshot wrote: »

afaik legally he'll have to do it or go to jail

Really? For someone in Boris's social position I just can't see anything he does (in a political context) being so egregious that it's an open and shut job. More akin to the legal proceedings against him for lying during the Brexit campaign is what I envisioned.

sondagefaux

briany wrote: »

Really? For someone in Boris's social position I just can't see anything he does (in a political context) being so egregious that it's an open and shut job. More akin to the legal proceedings against him for lying during the Brexit campaign is what I envisioned.

The attempt to have him prosecuted for lying during the referendum campaign failed.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-brexit-bus-supreme-court-vote-leave-appeal-latest-a9056871.html

gooch2k9

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Hard to believe sources from number ten at this stage. But this is interesting

https://twitter.com/sebastianepayne/status/1168600129819086848?s=21

It's all just about being in power. The good of the country matters not a jot to these people.

Infini

sondagefaux wrote: »

Deselection means there isn't any further way of enforcing party discipline on them in the House of Commons.

They can vote as they please if they know they're not going to be Conservative candidates ever again.

It's also a collossal own goal, I mean so what if they're deselected when parliment holds all power in the end I mean if they truly want to stop Brexit all they need is for a Majority of MP's to rally behind who can act as a caretaker PM and basically refuse to endorse a GE because then Boris and the Brexiteer loons end up boxed in and unable to act. By deselecting them instead of rebels you lose all control entirely. It's a pity Jeremy is so impotent if Labour stopped following him and just sidelined him instead there's a chance they could end this.

bilston

Talk of an election on 14th October.

That's a Monday. Is that not unusual. Surely it would be the 17th October, a Thursday, which is when every other UK election in recent times have occurred to the best of my knowledge.

Infini

bilston wrote: »

Talk of an election on 14th October.

That's a Monday. Is that not unusual. Surely it would be the 17th October, a Thursday, which is when every other UK election in recent times have occurred to the best of my knowledge.

17th is the sheduled Date of the EU summit if im not mistaken that's probably why. Likely want's clarity of what kind of parlimentary makeup to expect.

bilston

Infini wrote: »

17th is the sheduled Date of the EU summit if im not mistaken that's probably why. Likely want's clarity of what kind of parlimentary makeup to expect.

Makes sense.

Still a few hoops to go through but an election looks pretty likely to me.

Johnson will likely win a majority and an Irish Sea Border will be created in short order.