Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

A Dub in Glasgo

brickster69 wrote: »

All the remainers running around like headless chickens now because they know Boris won't resign and the Benn - Dover bill has more holes in it than a block of gouda.

They know that if the Govt loses that vote, it could, under the FTPA, remain in office for 14 days, propose a vote of confidence, and, if it loses, a GE is automatically triggered. the speaker this week confirmed that an election could not be held before 31/10.

25 working days (5 weeks) needed between dissolution of parliament and the actual election which takes any election into November anyway

There is a court case being heard in the next couple of week which could legally mean the Clerk of the Court could sign the letter should the PM decide to break the law

Enzokk

A Shropshire Lad wrote: »

Hearing today a few Brexiteers mention that 'all 27 members have to agree to the extension beyond October 31st'

Is there a possibility theres some pressure being put on individual countries behind the scenes to veto ?

It would take a very brave or stupid EU leader to veto the extension, especially when one of the EU will take a bad hit and a bunch more will be quite hard hit in a no-deal Brexit. How would they justify it to the other 26 nations and you can bet once it comes back to their country there will be people with long memories who will remember if one does something so stupid.

Leroy42

brickster69 wrote: »

All the remainers running around like headless chickens now because they know Boris won't resign and the Benn - Dover bill has more holes in it than a block of gouda.

They know that if the Govt loses that vote, it could, under the FTPA, remain in office for 14 days, propose a vote of confidence, and, if it loses, a GE is automatically triggered. the speaker this week confirmed that an election could not be held before 31/10.

Its Johnson and the Brexiteers running around trying to trash the rule of law. The remainers have boxed Johnson in, so much so that all he has left is to beg Corbyn for an election, and having to do so because of a law they voted for.

Johnson was desperate to get an election before No Deal hits and thus keep up the line that a deal is possible or No Deal is no problem.

Massive risk to run an election campaign in mid November if anything like the expected problems arise. And HMG totally expects them, hence the recent plea letter to Barnier looking for mini deals.

The real issue with remainers now is they have nothing to do except wait. They simply have to wait until Johnson makes a move, and then crush it like they have done with everything else he has tried.

J Mysterio

Just in case anyone didnt watch the doc on Channel 4 last week, this is probably the most significant part - Johnson's backers and their motivation:

https://twitter.com/zefrog/status/1177959061331042305

Cameo from Gina Miller

josip

Enzokk wrote: »

It would take a very brave or stupid EU leader to veto the extension, especially when one of the EU will take a bad hit and a bunch more will be quite hard hit in a no-deal Brexit. How would they justify it to the other 26 nations and you can bet once it comes back to their country there will be people with long memories who will remember if one does something so stupid.

Is there any possibility France might say that the UK can have an extension but it has to be 12 months?
That would allow the rest of us to get on with life while the UK can continue to infight and remain toxic for inward investment.
Rolling 3 month extensions are too short.

CelticRambler

Bannasidhe wrote: »

That is the system in the UK. It is the system everyone is expected to work within. The LibDems have been trying for decades to get PR introduced. There was even a referendum in 2011 and 67% chose to stay with the current system.
It favoured their Whig forerunners - whom the LibDems are eager to use to demonstrate their place at the heart of British politics - and they never sought to change the voting system until they lost ground to Labour.
So, it's fair to say that the Liberal Party had no issue with FPTP while it worked in their favour but now it's an issue.

The Whigs? Are you really suggesting that Swinson should be applying the values and practices of the Whigs coming up to the end of 2019? :eek:

They had a referendum? Yes. And we all know how great the Brits are at making rational decisions through the use of referendums. And alas, we know from recent utterances that the result of a referendum, once held (even if not binding) cannot be challenged ... :rolleyes:

You argue that "everyone is expected to work within" the system ... while the party in government flout the rules day after day after day? And yet you complain that one of the parties holds a position that might allow it to be come the Official Opposition within that same system after the next election?

As Charles Babbage remarks above, the objective for all opposition parties at the moment is to prevent a crash-out Brexit, if necessary through a short-term government of national unity. There is no convention in the UK for that, so the Lib Dems are legitimately playing by rules that have yet to be made up.

An Ciarraioch

The more optimistic trend in recent European elections continues, as the Freedom Party slump in Austria:

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1178353464751067138

A Dub in Glasgo

CelticRambler wrote: »

the objective for all opposition parties at the moment is to prevent a crash-out Brexit, if necessary through a short-term government of national unity.

Actually if that is the case for Swinson, she should not be putting pre-conditions on it

prawnsambo

If i remember correctly, the type of PR suggested was a STV type which was damaged by misinformation claiming that it would allow people have more than one vote. Yep, having your vote live through a first count meant you had more than one vote.

ZX7R

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Polish born Tory MP Daniel Kawczynski has repeatedly asked Poland to veto an extension.

Polish government won't it would be political suiside for them , the main government group called law and order I believe did well in resent elections only because they back off trying to put to the eu.
Plus national government polls show a whopping 90% support for the eu from there electoral public.

Surprisingly there seems to be big support from all government party's for a European army/ security force

Bannasidhe

brickster69 wrote: »

All the remainers running around like headless chickens now because they know Boris won't resign and the Benn - Dover bill has more holes in it than a block of gouda.

.

Gouda generally doesn't have holes in it unless the citric acid has done what it oughtn't to have done. .
You are thinking of a different European cheese.
Not even an EU cheese in fact..A Swiss cheese (a bilateral agreement single market but not a member cheese as it were).

This is such an emmental mistake that it calls into question your block of knowledge when it comes to of the rest of your post.

A Dub in Glasgo

prawnsambo wrote: »

If i remember correctly, the type of PR suggested was a STV type which was damaged by misinformation claiming that it would allow people have more than one vote. Yep, having your vote live through a first count meant you had more than one vote.

It was an instant run off system

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting

devnull

ZX7R wrote: »

Polish government won't it would be political suiside for them , the main government group called law and order I believe did well in resent elections only because they back off trying to put to the eu.
Plus national government polls show a whopping 90% support for the eu from there electoral public.

Surprisingly there seems to be big support from all government party's for a European army/ security force

Law and Justice they are and they are quite right wing, certainly could see many similarities with the Conservative Party and them, hate the judiciary and trying to turn the courts political, trying to control media and spreading propaganda. They are not quite so anti EU as the Tories but really don't like LGBTQ+ rights.

Bannasidhe

prawnsambo wrote: »

If Corbyn can get the support of all the MPs; who currently align against the government, then well and good. But if not, all this posturing about who's the big boy with the 'right' to head a GNU is just so much dust in the wind. And that's his job according to you and 'convention'. So let's see him do what's necessary to get that support...

And again when trying to find out why is it apparently ok for Swinson to flout the conventions I am told about about Corbyn.

It's quite a remarkable phenomimom.

prawnsambo

ZX7R wrote: »

Surprisingly there seems to be big support from all government party's for a European army/ security force

That's not a surprise for countries bordering on Russia. Ukraine is an example to all of them.

eire4

prawnsambo wrote: »

That's not a surprise for countries bordering on Russia. Ukraine is an example to all of them.

Plus you have the fact that the US cannot be trusted and or relied on any more so makes sense really given the very real threat that Putin's authoritarian Russian state pose to all of Europe to a greater or lesser extent.

prawnsambo

Bannasidhe wrote: »

And again when trying to find out why is it apparently ok for Swinson to flout the conventions I am told about about Corbyn.

It's quite a remarkable phenomimom.

You seem to be stuck in some kind of procedural wrangle instead of looking at the objective. It's to get a GNU running to stop the Tories getting their hard brexit. There seems to be an unhealthy obsession about Jo Swinson amongst Labour supporters. As phenomenon's go.

ZX7R

devnull wrote: »

Law and Justice they are and they are quite right wing, certainly could see many similarities with the Conservative Party and them, hate the judiciary and trying to turn the courts political, trying to control media and spreading propaganda. They are not quite so anti EU as the Tories but really don't like LGBTQ+ rights.

Yes I am aware of there dislike of lgbtq + rights this stems from close links to the Catholic Church ,but that's a different discussion
Yes true also about courts and media , but in the last 6 months there has been plenty of back tracking on these fronts , this is purely down to what happening with brtix

Plus if they leave the eu ,the next biggest power to deal with is Russia.
Law and order like to rock the boat but will never leave the eu

Bannasidhe

CelticRambler wrote: »

The Whigs? Are you really suggesting that Swinson should be applying the values and practices of the Whigs coming up to the end of 2019? :eek:

They had a referendum? Yes. And we all know how great the Brits are at making rational decisions through the use of referendums. And alas, we know from recent utterances that the result of a referendum, once held (even if not binding) cannot be challenged ... :rolleyes:

You argue that "everyone is expected to work within" the system ... while the party in government flout the rules day after day after day? And yet you complain that one of the parties holds a position that might allow it to be come the Official Opposition within that same system after the next election?

As Charles Babbage remarks above, the objective for all opposition parties at the moment is to prevent a crash-out Brexit, if necessary through a short-term government of national unity. There is no convention in the UK for that, so the Lib Dems are legitimately playing by rules that have yet to be made up.

I am saying their official website, which I bothered to go and look at in an effort to find out about their actual policies, goes to a great deal of effort to demonstrate their political family tree and features the Whigs prominently.

Perhaps you should ask the LibDems if they "should be applying the values and practices of the Whigs coming up to the end of 2019" given they are the ones who are making the who do they think they are link.

Well, the LibDems were in government during that referendum so if it wasn't run properly they have only themselves to blame ... unless it was all Corbyn's fault...!!

I honestly have no idea what this means :" You argue that "everyone is expected to work within" the system ... while the party in government flout the rules day after day after day? And yet you complain that one of the parties holds a position that might allow it to be come the Official Opposition within that same system after the next election? " so we are both confused.

There has never been a Brexit before so of course there has never been a call of a Government of National Unity to deal with Brexit.

There have been governments of national unity before where the participants really really didn't like each other one little bit but got one with it for the sake of, well, national unity and little things like the Napoleonic Wars, Great Depression, World Wars and the like.

Bannasidhe

prawnsambo wrote: »

You seem to be stuck in some kind of procedural wrangle instead of looking at the objective. It's to get a GNU running to stop the Tories getting their hard brexit. There seems to be an unhealthy obsession about Jo Swinson amongst Labour supporters. As phenomenon's go.

No.

I am stuck in perplexed as to why nobody wants to discuss the policies of the LibDems in any depth or why mention of Swinson morphs into 'but Corbyn'.

How could I be a Labour supporter when I don't even live in the UK, haven't lived in the UK for over 25 years, and will never again live in the UK?


I am also very underwhelmed by Corbyn as leader of the British LP but he's still batter that Blair but as I literally have zero skin in the game it makes no difference to my life whatsoever.

ZX7R

eire4 wrote: »

Plus you have the fact that the US cannot be trusted and or relied on any more so makes sense really given the very real threat that Putin's authoritarian Russian state pose to all of Europe to a greater or lesser extent.

Was going to point that out also,as long as Trump is in power eastern countries just don't have full trust in America or NATO
That's why It's surprising for Poland to go from anti EU army to a man supporter

prawnsambo

Bannasidhe wrote: »

No.

I am stuck in perplexed as to why nobody wants to discuss the policies of the LibDems in any depth or why mention of Swinson morphs into 'but Corbyn'.

How could I be a Labour supporter when I don't even live in the UK, haven't lived in the UK for over 25 years, and will never again live in the UK?

I literally have zero skin in the game.

Here's the thing. I couldn't give a flying fiddlestick about either party. I have no interest in them. But I have observed Corbyn and Labour tearing themselves apart trying to maintain as ambiguous a position as possible over brexit (that which I am concerned about). 'But Corbyn' is what we say when somebody tries to suggest that he's the answer. He never has been. I doubt he ever will be.

For a non Labour supporter, you seem to be very quick to 'But Jo Swinson' (which is something I am very familiar with when I see Labour supporters on twitter) every time Corbyn's stance is criticised here. My discussion with you on this has been purely about the leadership of a GNU. My point has always been that it requires all those opposed to the government policy to support it. Corbyn (whether you or anyone else likes it or not) is Kryptonite to a lot of them. So the question remains. Which is more important, stopping a hard brexit or pandering to Corbyn's ego? And it seems from your posts that it's Corbyn's ego that matters more.



That clear enough for you?

A Shropshire Lad

josip wrote: »

Is there any possibility France might say that the UK can have an extension but it has to be 12 months?
That would allow the rest of us to get on with life while the UK can continue to infight and remain toxic for inward investment.
Rolling 3 month extensions are too short.

Why dont they just say 5 or 10 years. Effectively ending the current notion of Brexit altogether.

An Ciarraioch

Rather than the VONC, new plan appears to be bringing the extension request date forward to this Saturday:

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1178411951518560258

Water John

That would allow the EU council to discuss that on October 17th. Then the GE could go ahead and the 31st would pass, without leaving in the middle of the GE.

briany

Telegraph again with the language. Always with the language. Forcing the PM to do something. Sorry, but parliament is what holds the power at the end of the day. The Prime Minister bends to its will.

prawnsambo

I love that they're 'plots' when everyone else does them and 'plans' when it's Boris. I heard the end of a programme on Newstalk today, talking about Oswald Mosley and that particular time in the UK and Europe. One contemporaneous quote (and I can't remember who said it) said that The Daily Mail was for people unaccustomed to thinking. Back in the 1930s. Things haven't changed.

I know the above front page is from the Telegraph, but it reminded me of that quote.

quokula

prawnsambo wrote: »

You seem to be stuck in some kind of procedural wrangle instead of looking at the objective. It's to get a GNU running to stop the Tories getting their hard brexit. There seems to be an unhealthy obsession about Jo Swinson amongst Labour supporters. As phenomenon's go.

If the objective is an alternative government to stop no deal, the largest and second largest opposition party are already in agreement on this. As the third largest opposition party by quite a distant margin, it's on the Lib Dems to work with them rather than dictate to them. But they're refusing to and putting the whole concept at risk, instead trying to dictate who the leader should be despite only having a handful of MPs, and despite the goal of the GNU being completely aligned with their supposed goals.

I don't see how anyone other than the Lib Dems can be blamed when 90% of opposition MPs across the two largest parties have a plan of action that could be put in motion. It is true that they will need a number of the ex-Tory rebels to get on board, but Ken Clarke has already said that he would, and the Lib Dems are just making sure the rest of them don't have to make a decision.

Tell me how

Listened to a recent Eamon Dunphy, the stand podcast with former MEP Patricia MacKenna. She was very much suggesting Ireland have taken the wrong approach in all of this and should have and maybe even still should be talking to the UK bilaterally. She also defended Johnson in terms of proroguing parliament.

Found it a strange listen. In simple terms, I can understand her point of 'we should have held on to the Irish fisheries which is a huge market' but also. is it not the case, do we not gain more that we lost as being part of Europe?

Bannasidhe

prawnsambo wrote: »

So the question remains. Which is more important, stopping a hard brexit or pandering to Corbyn's ego? And it seems from your posts that it's Corbyn's ego that matters more.



That clear enough for you?

And my point is which is more important, stopping a hard brexit or pandering to Swinson's red lines. It seems from your posts that it's Swinson's agenda that matters more.

See - it goes both ways.

But the fact is that Labour have 246 seats. Add the SNP and it's 281 Vs the Tories 288.

Swinson should defecate or get off the pot. The maths are with Corbyn and she is the hold out.
And if the positions were reversed I would be saying the exact same thing.

If Labour can get the support of 9 more MPs (Plaid Crymu, Green, Ind for Change, Independents have a combined 45 seats) they have the majority and the LibDems could find themselves sidelined.