Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

ArmaniJeanss

Some speech saying he loves the Labour Party but can no longer support them, whilst urging the members/MPs to push out Corbyn. And suggesting in the meantime that he would vote for Lib Dem/Green/Indo.
That would have been fine from Ian Austin, even though many would disagree with the sentiments.

But urging people to vote Conservative is just terrible, especially the current incarnation of that party. The Tories are currently miles away from the politics of anyone who consider themselves to be Labour.

CelticRambler

Deleted User wrote: »

As Scotland is part of the UK, and its the UK parliament that decides whether to implement a referendum that involves its potential break-up, I think Prime Minister Johnson would be right to jettison a new referendum.

Yesterday you were arguing in favour of small nations repatriating economic and legislative sovereignty to themselves, especially and particularly in the context of their country being ruled by a union headed by undemocratic, unelected officials.

The day before, you were arguing that it was undemocratic for the duly elected representatives of this same country to be blocking a constitutional change being forced upon them by the leader of a different country, someone over whose appointment they had no control.

What's changed overnight? And does that mean you've now re-considered whether leaving the EU is right for England after all?

Rjd2

Joe_ Public wrote: »

In fairness i think on the basis of what he said ken clarke could not in all conscience vote for a johnson led tory party. They are clearly taking a very hard brexit position, refusing to rule out no deal. Can't see how he coukd be on board with that.

Not exactly an endorsement for sure, but definitely does not rule out voting for the party. I like many including Ken don't know if Boris will dial Brexit up to 11 next few weeks so we will have to wait and see.

Clarke is another experienced media hand Boris could do with atm, people like him, Rudd etc going means the ERG are horribly over exposed.

Letwin_Larry

robinph wrote: »

Not odd in the slightest. A vote was held about group A leaving club B which was itself a member of club C. Group A was told that would mean they would also leave club C if they left club B, so they decided not to leave after all.

Since then club B have said they are leaving club C and taking group A with them whatever they think, so it's perfectly reasonable for group A to want to leave club B and rejoin club C which was far bigger and friendlier and didn't park their nuclear submarines in their back yard.

the SNP accuse the Brexiters of being English Nationalists, the words pot & kettle spring to mind.

BonnieSituation

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

the SNP are keen to break away from the Union, so that they can join another which seems odd.

They are keen to replicate Ireland's current situation without a civil war.

Do you think Ireland's independence or membership of the EU are incompatible with each other?

robinph

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

the SNP accuse the Brexiters of being English Nationalists, the words pot & kettle spring to mind.

Hang on, are you saying that the SNP are not Scottish Nationalists?

Nate--IRL--

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

the SNP accuse the Brexiters of being English Nationalists, the words pot & kettle spring to mind.

The SNP are upfront about where their focus of Nationalism lies. Unlike the Brexiters.


Nate

Joe_ Public

Rjd2 wrote: »

Not exactly an endorsement for sure, but definitely does not rule out voting for the party. I like many including Ken don't know if Boris will dial Brexit up to 11 next few weeks so we will have to wait and see.

Clarke is another experienced media hand Boris could do with atm, people like him, Rudd etc going means the ERG are horribly over exposed.

True. I hadnt realised there were labour politicians (diane abbott, John mcdonnell) actually suggesting he had said it. That's wrong. I think his biggest problem will be the issue of johnson refusing to rule out a no deal brexit. Certainly dont see him ever been an enthusiastic backer anyway!

Letwin_Larry

robinph wrote: »

Hang on, are you saying that the SNP are not Scottish Nationalists?

i really cannot for the life of me understand where i said that, or how you got that impression.

btw Alastair Campbell just on SkyNews. and to say he wasn't exactly effusive in his praise/support of Mr. Corbyn is an understatement.

BonnieSituation

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

the SNP accuse the Brexiters of being English Nationalists, the words pot & kettle spring to mind.

The SNP espouse Civic Nationalism this is a far cry from what Brexit is unleashing south of the Border.

Joe_ Public

Enzokk wrote: »

UK debt in 2010 when the Tories took over, £1,200 billion and 75% of GDP. UK debt in 2018 £1,800 billion and 85% of GDP.

So in 9 years it it has gone up by £600 billion and gone from 75% of GDP to 85% of GDP. What has the UK have to show for it during the Tory governments? How many new hospitals? How is the Judiciary doing? Are schools any better than before? All this time of austerity and the debt has grown but services has been cut while Labour has said they would do the same but at least the country would have something to show for it.

But its Labour that is living in denial.

UK government debt and deficit: March 2019

Table 1: General government gross debt
UK, financial year ending March 2011 to financial year ending March 2019 and calendar years 2010 to 2018
£ billion3
Financial Years 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/191
Debt2 1,214.5 1,349.7 1,425.6 1,522.5 1,604.0 1,652.0 1,720.0 1,763.8 1,821.3
as % GDP 75.6 81.8 83.3 85.5 86.5 86.4 86.5 85.3 85.2
Calendar Years 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Debt2 1,194.3 1,328.8 1,424.8 1,499.8 1,604.8 1,666.0 1,731.4 1,786.1 1837.5
as % GDP 75.2 80.8 84.1 85.2 87.0 87.9 87.9 87.1 86.8
Source: Office for National Statistics
Notes:
1. 2018/19 refers to the financial year ending March 2019.
2. Consolidated and at nominal values.
3. Unless otherwise stated.

Great watching Andrew Neil take apart Nadeem zahawi on this very topic on bbc this morning. Zahawi kept insisting they could open the spending tap because they had the defecit down to 1.2%. No you haven't, neil stopped him, its 2.3% and rising well beyond your fiscal rules. "You cannot get away with giving falsehoods on television".

So Zahawi changed tack and started waffling on about a four fifth reduction which turned out to be from 2010.When will these guys learn you cant spout garbage in front of Neil and expect to get away with it?

hometruths

Joe_ Public wrote: »

True. I hadnt realised there were labour politicians (diane abbott, John mcdonnell) actually suggesting he had said it. That's wrong. I think his biggest problem will be the issue of johnson refusing to rule out a no deal brexit. Certainly dont see him ever been an enthusiastic backer anyway!

Re Ken Clarke, Amber Rudd, Philipp Hammond and the rest of the Tories who are retiring at the election as far as I can see they are leaving largely because they disagree with with party policy. It can be summarised as a move to the right. Whilst the number is high, this sort of stance and outcome is fairly normal I would have thought.

As you discussed earlier, there has been a move to the left in the Labour party. For me the difference with the Labour party is that not only are they losing politicians because of a disagreement with this move but because some MPs feel the party is institutionally anti-semitic.

Personally, I think it is a fairly significant difference.

hometruths

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

btw Alastair Campbell just on SkyNews. and to say he wasn't exactly effusive in his praise/support of Mr. Corbyn is an understatement.

did he go as far as to say back Johnson instead?!

Akrasia

robinph wrote: »

How about the Tories respecting the clearly undecisiveness of the most recent votes in the UK where there was a 50/50 result in a referendum with no clear question being asked, followed by an election where there was no majority of MP's elected from a single party.

Yet apparently it is the will of the people for a hard Brexit to be just got on with?

Surely if all the MP's in Scotland being from the SNP would be the clearest show of a definite opinion of the population going at the moment?

It’s not about democracy or the will of the people or any noble pursuit at all, it’s about winning.
And some people are happy to take a victory any way they can get it, even if it’s by cheating

And anyone who loses to a cheater is still a loser who should just respect the result and attend the ticker tape parade to glorify the victors

Whether they like it or not

LuckyLloyd

schmittel wrote: »

It is widely reported that Austin left because of the antisemitism row.

If antisemitism is "too Labour" then I think that would be surprising and significant!

That’s the anti semitism row that will disappear like magic the moment Corbyn steps down? Ah yeah, genuine stuff no doubt.

Ultimately his comments mean nothing - they’re not new or news.

Joe_ Public

schmittel wrote: »

Re Ken Clarke, Amber Rudd, Philipp Hammond and the rest of the Tories who are retiring at the election as far as I can see they are leaving largely because they disagree with with party policy. It can be summarised as a move to the right. Whilst the number is high, this sort of stance and outcome is fairly normal I would have thought.

As you discussed earlier, there has been a move to the left in the Labour party. For me the difference with the Labour party is that not only are they losing politicians because of a disagreement with this move but because some MPs feel the party is institutionally anti-semitic.

Personally, I think it is a fairly significant difference.

Yes, AS is a major headache for the party, its a bit disheartening to see it go as far as it has, not enough was done soon enough and they are paying for it. I have read a lot seeking to understand it and i cant say i have encountered much compelling evidence of institutional AS within the party itself. To date i think 10 mps have resigned citing AS as at least part of the reason. Thats not good, but back in March when the change uk party was being established there was much speculation of upwards of 70-80 defections from labour due to AS. Hasnt materialised as of yet anyway.

hometruths

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

That’s the anti semitism row that will disappear like magic the moment Corbyn steps down? Ah yeah, genuine stuff no doubt.

Ultimately his comments mean nothing - they’re not new or news.

I am not too sure of what the root cause of the row is so have no idea if it would disappear the moment Corbyn stood down. I daresay the suspicion of antisemitism would reduce if he someone replaced him and made tackling the accusations a key platform.

As to Austin's comments, yes they're not new, but definitely newsworthy in an election campaign on the same day the Jewish Chronicle publishes a front page editorial pleading to non Jewish people:

The vast majority of British Jews consider Jeremy Corbyn to be an antisemite. In the most recent poll, last month, the figure was 87 per cent.

Putting oneself in the shoes of another person, or another group, can be difficult. But we believe it is important — and urgent — that you do that. Perhaps the fact that nearly half (47 per cent) of the Jewish community said in that same poll that they would “seriously consider” emigrating if Mr Corbyn wins on December 12 will give you an indication of what it feels like to be a British Jew at a time when the official opposition is led by a man widely held to be an antisemite.

https://www.thejc.com/comment/leaders/to-all-our-fellow-british-citizens-1.491812

Capt'n Midnight

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

my understanding is the Tories will borrow 10s of £billions (which is small change in the scheme of things), but Mr. McDonnell said in his speech he wanted to borrow 100s of £billions.

that's a hell of a difference imo. socialism doesn't come cheap it seems.

as for Brexit i agree there will be a short to mid-term hit, but we really have no way of knowing exactly how it will effect the UK economy in the long-term.

Even if Labour do a sneaky Brexit but stay in the Customs Union spending hundreds of billions would still be cheaper than leave.


Brexit is already a £40Bn a year hit.

If by short term you mean 10 years then it'll be a £70Bn a year hit with Boris's deal. But Brexiteers with a life expectancy of less than 50 years have said it will take 50 years for things to get better.

Also nationalising means buying assets, so even with an insane 30% over current market value (the high end) it still means the govt would have assets. It's not like all the money would be spaffed up a wall.

Danzy

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

That’s the anti semitism row that will disappear like magic the moment Corbyn steps down? Ah yeah, genuine stuff no doubt.

Ultimately his comments mean nothing - they’re not new or news.

Corbyns opponents have used the antisemitism issue to attack him.

He has provided copious ammunition to then, his supporters have, the controlling body has.

It is not institutionally antisemitic but Labour has a significant antisemitism problem in it and what is worse the leadership and higher ranks did little about it.

A Dub in Glasgo

Deleted User wrote: »

The Scottish referendum was settled in 2016.

Actually, the referendum was in 2014 and is far from settled

https://twitter.com/uk_together/status/506899714923843584?lang=en

As Scotland is part of the UK, and its the UK parliament that decides whether to implement a referendum that involves its potential break-up, I think Prime Minister Johnson would be right to jettison a new referendum.

So you think it is right for the UK parliament to ignore the people of Scotland?

robinph

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

i really cannot for the life of me understand where i said that, or how you got that impression.

Incorrect use of the pot kettle black line in a way that suggested you were accusing the SNP of being nationalists while they claimed they were not.

hometruths

that front page in full:

BorneTobyWilde

Jo Swinson has arranged a threesome with Green Party and Plaid Cymru

quokula

schmittel wrote: »

I am not too sure of what the root cause of the row is so have no idea if it would disappear the moment Corbyn stood down. I daresay the suspicion of antisemitism would reduce if he someone replaced him and made tackling the accusations a key platform.

As to Austin's comments, yes they're not new, but definitely newsworthy in an election campaign on the same day the Jewish Chronicle publishes a front page editorial pleading to non Jewish people:



https://www.thejc.com/comment/leaders/to-all-our-fellow-british-citizens-1.491812

It's worth noting that the JC represents all Jews in the way that the Daily Mail represents all white people. A poll of their readers is not going to give an accurate result.

Plenty of Jewish people see it very differently, for example the open letters published by Noam Chomsky and others here or another open letter signed by 200 Jewish peoplehere

There are no doubt a number of Labour members who have shown anti-semitic behaviour out of the hundreds of thousands that make up the party, but if you're going to be calling it institutionally antisemitic, you should probably provide some evidence rather than just quoting a newspaper with a history of being found guilty of making false claims against Labour MPs.

hometruths

quokula wrote: »

It's worth noting that the JC represents all Jews in the way that the Daily Mail represents all white people. A poll of their readers is not going to give an accurate result.

Plenty of Jewish people see it very differently, for example the open letters published by Noam Chomsky and others here or another open letter signed by 200 Jewish peoplehere

There are no doubt a number of Labour members who have shown anti-semitic behaviour out of the hundreds of thousands that make up the party, but if you're going to be calling it institutionally antisemitic, you should probably provide some evidence rather than just quoting a newspaper with a history of being found guilty of making false claims against Labour MPs.

I think it is also worth noting that the poll they referenced that found 87% of British Jews believe Jeremy Corbyn is anti-semitic aimed to sample the views of all British Jews not just JC readers.

I personally did not call Labour institutionally antisemitic, and if I was minded to do so I would not quote the Jewish Chronicle.

I would wait and see if the ongoing Equality and Human Rights Commission investigation found any evidence, and I would quote them instead.

Dyr

schmittel wrote: »

I am not too sure of what the root cause of the row is so have no idea if it would disappear the moment Corbyn stood down. I daresay the suspicion of antisemitism would reduce if he someone replaced him and made tackling the accusations a key platform.

Well it only appeared the moment he was elected, unusual for an "institutional problem"


Make no mistake there are wing nuts in and around the Labour party who believe in Zionist conspiracies but that's not the issue. The issue is that Corbyn is critical of Israel and that's what these lads are after him for. People whose loyalty to their ethnicity trumps loyalty to their own country and party.

boring accountant

I'm no supporter of Labour, but if Jeremy Corbyn is a racist then Margaret Thatcher was a socialist.

lawred2

boring accountant wrote: »

I'm no supporter of Labour, but if Jeremy Corbyn is a racist then Margaret Thatcher was a socialist.

I might be wrong but almost every time I hear that accusation, I go "really!? He's an anti semitic racist!? Really!?"

No matter how many times I hear it, it just doesn't stick with me.

quokula

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/26/lord-buckethead-double-trouble-theresa-may


Can't even trust Lord Buckethead anymore

boring accountant

Deleted User wrote: »

Not enough.

Diane Abbott is the prospective future Home Secretary.



John McDonnell is the prospective future Chancellor of the Exchequer.




Jeremy Corbyn is the prospective future Prime Minister.



Is this the future government we wish to see?

I think not.

Others have argued here that this issue was "done to death" in 2017. What was "done to death" was the victims of terrorist organizations that Corbyn, Abbot, and McDonnell quite openly endorsed or, at minimum, had sympathies with.

We cannot let this issue be swept under the carpet of the forthcoming election. It says an awful lot about the potential future government. I understand that all politicians have personal flaws. The difference here is clear - these politicians are anti-UK in their past actions. That is unprecedented in UK history.

To be honest the thing that most scares me is Diane Abbot as Home Secretary. Not just her past tolerance of extremism and her anti-British state comments, but also her more recent gaffes and brain fades which are a sign that she lacks the mental ability to hold an Office of State.