Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

J Mysterio

Shelga wrote: »

How can they have an amendment to have a customs union when this is a non-negotiable, finalised deal with a third party? (Ie outside the UK)

Seems.HOC have this funny idea that their parliament is the most important in the world, and that all others should accede to their will.

Hurrache

Finally a story coming out of the UK as to how some members of the media over there are complicit, and allow themselves to be, in smearing and lying on behalf of Johnson's government. Of course Kuenssberg get's her own section, as to does Peston. Unfortunately it won't be seen widely.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/british-journalists-have-become-part-of-johnsons-fake-news-machine/

Kuenssberg is therefore open to the criticism that she was being manipulated by Downing Street. Her tweets to her 1.1 million followers meant there were two government positions. One for the courts: that the government would obey the law. One passed on uncritically by the BBC political editor: that it would find a way to get round it. Kuenssberg’s tweets carried with them the implication that Johnson was deliberately deceiving a British court.

This compliance is part of a pattern. Political editors are so pleased to be given ‘insider’ or ‘exclusive’ information that they report it without challenge or question

Not sure how the BBC could provide this defence with a straight face

“It should go without saying that reporting comments from anyone, be they source or named individual, is not the same as endorsing those comments. Similarly, taking a single Twitter thread out of context to try to prove a point is disingenuous and does a disservice to your readers.

“Laura Kuenssberg is a fantastic journalist who helps audiences make sense of the Brexit story with her in-depth analysis and expertise.”

Joe_ Public

"Fundamental issue of trust in his word", Melanie Onn just tells PM in the house. One of the 6 rebel lab voters on saturday, doesnt sound like she's on board the boris bus today.

Joe_ Public

Johnson is telling the house that, far from being downgraded, workers rights will actually be enhanced by leaving the eu. Does he really expect any mp outside the ranks of his own deluded followers to swallow such obvious garbage?

Edit: and now hes telling nigel dodds that there will in fact be no checks between gb and n ire. Just some vague light touch stuff, you'd hardly notice its there.

He's unstoppable today!

Akrasia

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

the longer this nonsense goes on the more it comes back to the fundamental question,

are MPs prepared to honour the decision of the Referendum or not?

regardless of what you think about the result of the referendum, the wisdom of calling it, or how it was fought and argued, how informed or not the voter were, how intelligent, educated, rich or poor they were, how much you like, trust or detest the protagonists, that is the real question, that is the bottom line.

and that will be the basis of the GE when it is fought.

Article 50 was invoked. The referendum was honoured

The fact that the brexiters can't agree on how to leave is because the referendum was so poorly thought out that the side that won don't share the same objectives and cannot agree on how to deliver it.


Referendums are not some kind of divine gospel that can never be questioned or changed. If there is a vote, and the outcome of that vote leads to political instability and paralasis, then it is stupid to keep trying to implement that vote for years and years regardless of the consequences

PropJoe10

Joe_ Public wrote: »

"Fundamental issue of trust in his word", Melanie Onn just tells PM in the house. One of the 6 rebel lab voters on saturday, doesnt sound like she's on board the boris bus today.

I saw she was wearing a top with the stars of the EU on it so maybe that's an indication of her thinking today

Zubeneschamali

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The remainers don't mind because they never accepted the vote.

It is not disgraceful, it is what they are elected to do - act in their constituents best interests.

If their constituents don't like the way they do it, the remedy is that they have to face them at the next election. That's the system, always has been.

Joe_ Public

PropJoe10 wrote: »

I saw she was wearing a top with the stars of the EU on it so maybe that's an indication of her thinking today

Good spot! But did she buy a matching pair for Caroline Flint?

GM228

Enzokk wrote: »

I don't know if this has been highlighted but if MPs vote through the WAB then the next deadline isn't in 8 months time to decide on an extension, it will be in 14 months time when the next cliff edge approaches and that time there will be no parliament intervention to decide on a extension or force one it seems.

I noted this yesterday, and don't worry it has been spotted by the right people:-

https://twitter.com/hilarybennmp/status/1186373549025615878?s=19

Letwin_Larry

if this doesn't go through then it looks like there will be a GE before Xmas, that's if the EU grant an extension and if Corbie is up for it.

VinLieger

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Spot on. The remainers have tried every trick in the book to overturn the result of a democratic vote in which the majority voted to leave.

It's disgraceful really. The biased refuse to see it. The remainers don't mind because they never accepted the vote.

A non binding referendum that if it had been legally binding the result of which undoubtedly would have been struck down in court due to the multiple illegal activities of people on the leave side.


What were you saying about the biased refuse to see?

Strazdas

Akrasia wrote: »

Article 50 was invoked. The referendum was honoured

The fact that the brexiters can't agree on how to leave is because the referendum was so poorly thought out that the side that won don't share the same objectives and cannot agree on how to deliver it.


Referendums are not some kind of divine gospel that can never be questioned or changed. If there is a vote, and the outcome of that vote leads to political instability and paralasis, then it is stupid to keep trying to implement that vote for years and years regardless of the consequences

In any normal democracy, a referendum would be a mere tool of the political process and a not particularly important one.

There's nothing normal about the UK though. It's more akin to a semi autocratic dictatorship these days, supported as such by its media and a fair swathe of the electorate.

Kermit.de.frog

Boris Johnson just told the DUP - "if you don't like the arrangements then gather a majority in the assembley to change them".

Spot on.

The DUP don't like democracy either when it does not suit them it seems.

Letwin_Larry

it looks like Corbyn is now championing the Union and the stance of the DUP.
the poor guy is all over the shop.

GM228

Enzokk wrote: »

The Wild Animals in Circuses Act were given a longer time in the House of Commons than this bill. Anyone saying there is enough time for scrutiny is lying to themselves about what is happening here.

https://twitter.com/jl_owen/status/1186336047975809030?s=20

+1, that Bill had 5 days in the HoC alone, and 5 days in the HoL, the WA Bill dosn't even have that time in total. Note my post yesterday on the point:-

GM228 wrote: »

3 days have been allocated.

In total there are only 8 sitting days to allow the readings, the committee stage and the report stage in the Commons, then the same in the Lords and then the Parliamentary Ping-Pong session.

For comparison:-

The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 which was only 62 pages of a Bill had 36 days for the above (allocated 12 days in the Commons).

The European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 had 11 days (allocated 5 days in the Commons) for the process - it contained the grand of of 5 sentences in the Bill and still had greater debate.

Even the 2017 Act had 11 days and it only contained 5 sentences, yes sentences in the Bill.

Zubeneschamali

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Boris Johnson just told the DUP - "if you don't like the arrangements then gather a majority in the assembley to change them".

So, that'll be the DUP voting against his deal, then.

Zubeneschamali

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

it looks like Corbyn is now championing the Union and the stance of the DUP.
the poor guy is all over the shop.

No, that is consistent with Labour policy, if Brexit is happening the whole UK should stay in a CU, no difference between NI and Britain.

Letwin_Larry

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

So, that'll be the DUP voting against his deal, then.

i dont think that was ever in doubt.

prawnsambo

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Boris Johnson just told the DUP - "if you don't like the arrangements then gather a majority in the assembley to change them".

Spot on.

The DUP don't like democracy either when it does not suit them it seems.

Quoting the GFA to make their argument is the ultimate irony. "But it says here in this treaty that we didn't sign and are virulently opposed to..."

PropJoe10

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

So, that'll be the DUP voting against his deal, then.

I think he's taking the risk of ignoring the DUP on the basis that the ERG will vote for the deal. Most of the ERG seem to be on board (going by what they've said over the last few days) but time will tell!

Kermit.de.frog

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

So, that'll be the DUP voting against his deal, then.

I actually predict they will abstain.

For the simple reason they won't want to make themselves persona non grata with a Tory party heading for a majority after the next election having sabotaged their Brexit timetable.

They can't work with Labour after the election after all.

Letwin_Larry

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I actually predict they will abstain.

For the simple reason they won't want to make themselves persona non grata with a Tory party heading for a majority after the next election having sabotaged their Brexit timetable.

They can't work with Labour after the election after all.

i'm betting they'll vote against.
they are a one trick pony of a party, and anything that impinges/undermines that trick is to be vehemently opposed in their view.

still will be interesting to see.

Joe_ Public

GM228 wrote: »

+1, that Bill had 5 days in the HoC alone, and 5 days in the HoL, the WA Bill dosn't even have that time in total. Note my post yesterday on the point:-

The wild animals and circuses act was in relation to 19 animals. Na na na na na 19!

briany

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

it looks like Corbyn is now championing the Union and the stance of the DUP.
the poor guy is all over the shop.

"We can't support a Brexit that would put a hard border on the island of Ireland"

"We can't support a Brexit that would put a hard border in the Irish sea"

Looks like you can't support Brexit, then.

Tea Shock

I don't know how I've missed him but I never seen that Michael Fabricant before.

I initially thought he was someone wearing a joke Boris wig!



Most of the time Johnson is talking while looking around for someone to "give way" to. He clearly would rather be anywhere else!

farmchoice

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I actually predict they will abstain.

For the simple reason they won't want to make themselves persona non grata with a Tory party heading for a majority after the next election having sabotaged their Brexit timetable.

They can't work with Labour after the election after all.

ah come on!! they voted against government on Saturday, they have said the present deal is an existential threat to the union!! not only will they vote against it they are in such a bind they could very well vote for a second ref!!

ancapailldorcha

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I actually predict they will abstain.

For the simple reason they won't want to make themselves persona non grata with a Tory party heading for a majority after the next election having sabotaged their Brexit timetable.

They can't work with Labour after the election after all.

The DUP couldn't care less about the Tories. For them the union is sacrosanct and they'll be voting on that basis.

Joe_ Public

briany wrote: »

"We can't support a Brexit that would put a hard border on the island of Ireland"

"We can't support a Brexit that would put a hard border in the Irish sea"

Looks like you can't support Brexit, then.

You can support a brexit with a uk wide CU. Maybe just remaining might be the prudent option but you can support it.

Letwin_Larry

briany wrote: »

"We can't support a Brexit that would put a hard border on the island of Ireland"

"We can't support a Brexit that would put a hard border in the Irish sea"

Looks like you can't support Brexit, then.

and yet they accuse the Leavers of not knowing what they want!

pot, kettle ..........

liamtech

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, that is consistent with Labour policy, if Brexit is happening the whole UK should stay in a CU, no difference between NI and Britain.

I think the UK remaining in the SM/CU is the only practical way to do brexit

GFA is fine - neither nationalists or unionists priorities have been violated - No Brexit Border in the Irish sea of the 6 counties (of course Unionists dont want it, cause for them it is a tacit admission of the UK not being able to leave the EU fully, because of the nationalists/GFA)

The objections to this are obviously that its a weak remainer brexit - which lets be honest, it would be - but this is the situation we find ourselves in Brexit is Pointless