Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

MadYaker

We’ll all have to start lobbying our TDs to block the next extension request in 3 months!

Seriously though how will an election solve anything? They could easily end up with another hung parliament and then were back to square one.

Robert McGrath

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

10 million wasted on coins

That coin thing is Roman bread and circuses stuff. How can they propose this to their electorate with a straight face

gooch2k9

I heard both SNP and Labour MPs last night stating an election would risk Johnson getting a majority and pushing through his harmful Brexit. This is true but presenting it like that just says to voters they're scared of an election and are against the "will of the people". If they highlighted that this majority could be achieved with only 35-40% of the vote it would at least highlight a genuine democratic concern to voters.

seamus

seamus wrote: »

The collapse of every empire has been overseen by a string of awful emperors. It's par for the course that only the foolish will allow themselves to be put in charge of a sinking ship.

The Empire finished over sixty years ago, but it is clearly a choice of leader when every one else stepped back and let one member take the hit.
Brian Cowen and Boris Yeltsin being two recent examples.

FrancieBrady

So, is he going to get his election today?

Robert McGrath

gooch2k9 wrote: »

I heard both SNP and Labour MPs last night stating an election would risk Johnson getting a majority and pushing through his harmful Brexit. This is true but presenting it like that just says to voters they're scared of an election and are against the "will of the people". If they highlighted that this majority could be achieved with only 35-40% of the vote it would at least highlight a genuine democratic concern to voters.

Yes, but if they highlight the unfairness of the FPTP system, they risk undermining their own authority if they form a government themselves in the future

Akrasia

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-28/u-k-to-destroy-commemorative-50p-coins-in-brexit-meltdown

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50181485

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-gives-up-7bn-windfall-from-european-investment-bank-tq0qskgfc


So between 10 million wasted on coins, 100 million wasted on brexit ads there might be enough to put a slogan on side of a bus and drive it around.
Oh and the GBP7 billion in assets with EIB being given up is interesting, thats one figure we have not seen before in all the brexit accounting

That £7 billion EIB writeoff needs to be on the front of every election leaflet from Labour Lib dems and the SNP

Sam Russell

Deleted User wrote: »

The Empire finished over sixty years ago, but it is clearly a choice of leader when every one else stepped back and let one member take the hit.
Brian Cowen and Boris Yeltsin being two recent examples.

The British Empire had a century of preeminence - from 1815 till 1914. WW I was a watershed for them. It turned out to be an unwise venture.

Well, the decline of the empire started when the USA entered WW I in 1917, as up to that point the USA had no interest in universal hegemony, but has made up for their late start ever since. They began their influence with respect to China (oh the irony) by preventing the break up by competing colonial powers.

The real end came in 1948, when India got independence. Since then, they have had a full scale withdrawal, with the last throw being Brexit. Outside of GB & NI are just a smattering of tax havens. Those tax havens are under severe threat from the onslaught from global tax reforms.

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

The British Empire had a century of preeminence - from 1815 till 1914. WW I was a watershed for them. It turned out to be an unwise venture.

Well, the decline of the empire started when the USA entered WW I in 1917, as up to that point the USA had no interest in universal hegemony, but has made up for their late start ever since. They began their influence with respect to China (oh the irony) by preventing the break up by competing colonial powers.

The real end came in 1948, when India got independence. Since then, they have had a full scale withdrawal, with the last throw being Brexit. Outside of GB & NI are just a smattering of tax havens. Those tax havens are under severe threat from the onslaught from global tax reforms.

Yep. And the Suez Crisis snuffed out any remaining cinders of Imperialism.

LuckyLloyd

Tell me how wrote: »

Who wrote the book do you know? Given the proximity to her holding the office, I think it is unlikely that it was someone who could be said to be entirely impartial.

I'm not really trying to fly a flag for her but I think she was PM during what was going to be, and has proven to be, a very contentious period.

She bowed to the invoking of A50 too quickly, she was too adamant on the red lines, she used language which made it easy for her detractors to target her (no deal is better than a bad deal) and she didn't manage vocal party or government members well.

But, was this all because of her, or because of the circumstance?
I'm not suggesting she is to be lauded, but, she was handed a poisoned chalice.

She was handed a poisoned chalice and gulped it all down greedily, then staggered around the place engulfed in slow and painful public political death throes. She made no good strategic moves in her first couple of months, then spent the rest of her time desperately fire fighting and reacting to ever more intractable tactical issues. She was completely terrible and achieved nothing that she was tasked with.

Akrasia

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

She was handed a poisoned chalice and gulped it all down greedily, then staggered around the place engulfed in slow and painful public political death throes. She made no good strategic moves in her first couple of months, then spent the rest of her time desperately fire fighting and reacting to ever more intractable tactical issues. She was completely terrible and achieved nothing that she was tasked with.

Yep

When May took over, the debate in the UK was about whether there should be a hard brexit or a soft brexit. Norway, Canada, Canada plus etc
Retaining freedom of movement, staying in the Customs union...

She took charge and pursued the hardest possible brexit and opened the door to the possibility of a 'No Deal' as the alternative to her Hard brexit.

She began her negotiations on a platform that she knew didn't have the support of parliament and her strategy was to create a situation where there was no choice but to accept her deal or fall off a cliff, all because she decided to pander to the extremists in her own party and the DUP rather than reach across the Aisle and get a workable long term solution to the brexit problem

She took the overton window and rammed it so far to the right, that she gave the DUP the balance of power during the most crucial period in UK politics for a generation.

Tea Shock

gooch2k9 wrote: »

Can't see that happening. He told Ian Og yesterday that the deal was what he was going with. Also the extension terms state no negotiation of the deal. I know the previous extension had that term too but he hasn't much left to concede without losing support elsewhere this time.

I know the Tory spin keeps saying the WA was renegotiated. But was it really?

They changed the backstop/customs union protocols to alternative arrangements which the original WA always allowed for at any time. The rest were changes to the Political Declaration!

Indestructable

Labour supporting the election, only thing left is to decide the date. It's about time.

Enzokk

Seems like Labour is biting the bullet and will back an election.

https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1189129826357129216?s=20

So now it will be when they hold the election and the fight over the date. Labour should stick to their guns on the 9th December, don't give Johnson what he wants as much as possible, even with the date of the election.

Professor Moriarty

Enzokk wrote: »

Seems like Labour is biting the bullet and will back an election.

https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1189129826357129216?s=20

So now it will be when they hold the election and the fight over the date. Labour should stick to their guns on the 9th December, don't give Johnson what he wants as much as possible, even with the date of the election.

It will be interesting to see what amendments they put forward.

Russman

Enzokk wrote: »

Seems like Labour is biting the bullet and will back an election.

https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1189129826357129216?s=20

So now it will be when they hold the election and the fight over the date. Labour should stick to their guns on the 9th December, don't give Johnson what he wants as much as possible, even with the date of the election.

Can the opposition, given the government is in a minority, simply push through a GE for 9th Dec anyway, now that Labour are on board ?

Imreoir2

Russman wrote: »

Can the opposition, given the government is in a minority, simply push through a GE for 9th Dec anyway, now that Labour are on board ?

They could, if they all agreed on it, but that is something they have not done too often on anything. The government could pull their motion if an ammendment was passed that they really did not like. As for the date, given that they want an election, I doubt an ammendment of a few days difference either side will really make or break the motion for the Government when it comes to it.

An ammendment requiring a Brexit referendum, or including 16 year olds in the electorate, on the other hand would probably see the government pull the plug on the whole thing.

gooch2k9

Imreoir2 wrote: »

They could, if they all agreed on it, but that is something they have not done too often on anything. The government could pull their motion if an ammendment was passed that they really did not like. As for the date, given that they want an election, I doubt an ammendment of a few days difference either side will really make or break the motion for the Government when it comes to it.

An ammendment requiring a Brexit referendum, or including 16 year olds in the electorate, on the other hand would probably see the government pull the plug on the whole thing.

Funnily enough that's what Richard Burgon says they'll look for, along with voting rights for EU citizens. They'll support election without these though.

Joe_ Public

As things stand, only cabinet can table amendments. They have to win a stella creasy motion first in order to change that.

https://twitter.com/dodd_lisaadodd/status/1189112725496123392?s=20

liamtech

theological wrote: »

(1) A referendum wouldn't solve anything here. The people already decided for Brexit in 2016 and it hasn't been honoured. If it was a Brexit vote again it wouldn't be honoured by this dysfunctional parliament. The Lib Dems are starting to see that this parliament won't vote for a second referendum either so an election seems more plausible.

(2) What is needed now is an election in a clear policy platform to do with Brexit. If the Lib Dems won that could mean revoking Article 50. If the Labour party won then who knows. They have this bizarre policy of negotiating a deal and then campaigning against it. Then you have the Conservatives under Johnson who actually want to leave and get on with other priorities.

1. I know this has been said before but you really ought realize how ridiculous it sounds when someone says this.
'A referendum wouldn't solve anything here. The people already decided for Brexit in 2016 and it hasn't been honoured.'

The 2016 Referendum was an arrogant attempt by David Cameron to 'Lance the Growing Boil' of Euroscepticism in the Tory Party, by having the electorate kill it for him. It back fired and the infection spread to the British electorate creating a dangerous cult like mentality.

https://www.indy100.com/article/brexit-party-eu-elections-lucy-harris-economy-30-years-8919786

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/boris-johnson-350-million-a-week-nhs-claim-1-6264572

It is widely accepted now that the referendum was a farce. And we are in the worst possible situation now that BoJo is PM. David Cameron was a party first politician, while BoJo is in fact a BoJo First careerist. This is BoJos ticket to getting a majority and remaining in power for 5, possibly 10 years. With Labor losing credibility by the day, and the Lib Dems unlikely to win sufficient seats to change the outcome, BoJo can sail in and take power.

A 2nd Referendum would lance the boil of both BoJo and Euroscepticism. Thats why he doesnt want one. Remain would win, Tory Euroscepticism would be placed back where it belongs and the Tory Party could return to normal.

2. As stated above, and by many on this forum, the british election system is First Past the Post. I am going to spell it out so we are in no uncertain terms, and for this hypothetical seat lets assume labor is remain.

-35% Tory [Leave]
-10% Brexit Party [Leave]
-30% Labor [Remain]
-15% Lib Dem [Remain]
-5% Green [Remain]
-5% Indy Group [Remain]

Result : Popular Vote Remain 55% - Leave 45%

ACTUAL RESULT: Tory Take the seat - Leave wins

And this is in a seat where the only parties are the main stream ones - you will get many seats where there are other smaller groups, and independents - and nationalists in Scotland and Wales - not to mention Northern Ireland

In all honesty, i would advise you to be more straight forward in what you are arguing for - Either you are

-for Brexit on Genuine Eurosceptic Grounds (You hate the EU)
-for Brexit on Principle/Pride (its not fair to ask the people again)
-or-
-You really don't understand what you are talking about, and are merely point scoring

Im sorry but there it is. You can of course report my post if you feel i am being insulting, but it is an offense to my eyes to have to read Tory Pro Brexit Nonsensical Arguments Against a 2nd Ref, without a shred of evidence in support of it. We get enough of that on Sky News, and the BBC, with them having to have Leaver and a Remainer on every discussion. The fact that Brexit is even being discussed as being a positive, after all we have seen, and learned, is quite frankly a disgrace, and a manipulation of the British Electorate -

I hope for a sane outcome, but i am rapidly losing hope - lets just wait and see. But arguments that a 2nd Referendum would be Undemocratic - Ludicrous

Note: If you are worried about what type of Brexit that should be put to the referendum - its simple - ask two questions, two separate ballot papers

Ballot 1

Do you still wish to Leave the EU
Yes []
No []

Ballot 2

If Ballot One passes for leave, would you prefer BoJo's Deal of october 2019, or a clean Break brexit

Bojos Deal []
No Deal Clean Break []

Indestructable

Indestructable wrote: »

Labour supporting the election, only thing left is to decide the date. It's about time.

They really have to as they have had their demands met, they just simply can't delay any more in the hope of getting a more favourable (for them date.

Joe_ Public

As regards votes for eu citizens or 16 year olds, would there be time to get them on the electoral register? It shuts down for november so not even sure they could make an application right now, unless they can make some provision for it.

Edit: just heard norman smith saying it would take a year to organise it, so not exactly relevant to the actual poll. Still doesn't stop the possibility of an amendment of course.

jimmycrackcorm

liamtech wrote: »

Just Reading that the new UUP leader Steve Aiken is refusing pacts with the DUP, and the DUP are going ballistic about it

Worth noting that this could have a serious effect in the NI election - as Aiken is a staunch remainer - could be a big coup for northern ireland unionist MPs shouting for a peoples vote - although could also mean SF take extra seats

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/10/does-ulster-unionist-party-have-arlene-foster-rattled

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/uup-leader-in-waiting-steve-aiken-rules-out-pact-and-slams-dup-for-tarnishing-unionism-38631900.html

The UUP could be onto a blinder by pointing out that the DUP stance of saying no and in particular their brexit approach means they have been and are endangering the union. Its a great opportunity for them to distingush themselves as union saviours against the backdrop also of the RHI scandal

Its funny to see Arlene criticism of them not going into a pact for Nigel Dodds seat, as if the DUP are the rightfull heirs.

Kermit.de.frog

I predict Tories to take clear majority of seats needed to pass legislation.

WA to go through early January.

I wonder what will happen to the DUP? Can see them losing some seats.

Professor Moriarty

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The UUP could be onto a blinder by pointing out that the DUP stance of saying no and in particular their brexit approach means they have been and are endangering the union. Its a great opportunity for them to distingush themselves as union saviours against the backdrop also of the RHI scandal

Its funny to see Arlene criticism of them not going into a pact for Nigel Dodds seat, as if the DUP are the rightfull heirs.

Ideal opportunity to bring farmers and business on board too.

lawred2

liamtech wrote: »

1. I know this has been said before but you really ought realize how ridiculous it sounds when someone says this.
'A referendum wouldn't solve anything here. The people already decided for Brexit in 2016 and it hasn't been honoured.'

The 2016 Referendum was an arrogant attempt by David Cameron to 'Lance the Growing Boil' of Euroscepticism in the Tory Party, by having the electorate kill it for him. It back fired and the infection spread to the British electorate creating a dangerous cult like mentality.

https://www.indy100.com/article/brexit-party-eu-elections-lucy-harris-economy-30-years-8919786

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/boris-johnson-350-million-a-week-nhs-claim-1-6264572

It is widely accepted now that the referendum was a farce. And we are in the worst possible situation now that BoJo is PM. David Cameron was a party first politician, while BoJo is in fact a BoJo First careerist. This is BoJos ticket to getting a majority and remaining in power for 5, possibly 10 years. With Labor losing credibility by the day, and the Lib Dems unlikely to win sufficient seats to change the outcome, BoJo can sail in and take power.

A 2nd Referendum would lance the boil of both BoJo and Euroscepticism. Thats why he doesnt want one. Remain would win, Tory Euroscepticism would be placed back where it belongs and the Tory Party could return to normal.

2. As stated above, and by many on this forum, the british election system is First Past the Post. I am going to spell it out so we are in no uncertain terms, and for this hypothetical seat lets assume labor is remain.

-35% Tory [Leave]
-10% Brexit Party [Leave]
-30% Labor [Remain]
-15% Lib Dem [Remain]
-5% Green [Remain]
-5% Indy Group [Remain]

Result : Popular Vote Remain 55% - Leave 45%

ACTUAL RESULT: Tory Take the seat - Leave wins

And this is in a seat where the only parties are the main stream ones - you will get many seats where there are other smaller groups, and independents - and nationalists in Scotland and Wales - not to mention Northern Ireland

In all honesty, i would advise you to be more straight forward in what you are arguing for - Either you are

-for Brexit on Genuine Eurosceptic Grounds (You hate the EU)
-for Brexit on Principle/Pride (its not fair to ask the people again)
-or-
-You really don't understand what you are talking about, and are merely point scoring

Im sorry but there it is. You can of course report my post if you feel i am being insulting, but it is an offense to my eyes to have to read Tory Pro Brexit Nonsensical Arguments Against a 2nd Ref, without a shred of evidence in support of it. We get enough of that on Sky News, and the BBC, with them having to have Leaver and a Remainer on every discussion. The fact that Brexit is even being discussed as being a positive, after all we have seen, and learned, is quite frankly a disgrace, and a manipulation of the British Electorate -

I hope for a sane outcome, but i am rapidly losing hope - lets just wait and see. But arguments that a 2nd Referendum would be Undemocratic - Ludicrous

Note: If you are worried about what type of Brexit that should be put to the referendum - its simple - ask two questions, two separate ballot papers

Ballot 1

Do you still wish to Leave the EU
Yes []
No []

Ballot 2

If Ballot One passes for leave, would you prefer BoJo's Deal of october 2019, or a clean Break brexit

Bojos Deal []
No Deal Clean Break []

I wouldn't agree with the 'Clean Break' wording at all..

Words have meanings and 'Clean Break' quite clearly does not quite convey the magnitude of how unclean a break a no deal Brexit would be.

"A disorderly and complete breakdown of relations and agreements []" is what should be on the ballot

liamtech

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The UUP could be onto a blinder by pointing out that the DUP stance of saying no and in particular their brexit approach means they have been and are endangering the union. Its a great opportunity for them to distingush themselves as union saviours against the backdrop also of the RHI scandal

Its funny to see Arlene criticism of them not going into a pact for Nigel Dodds seat, as if the DUP are the rightfull heirs.

Oh its complete arrogant presumption - 'UUP please dont run against us, we might lose'!!! - isnt that an election????

Of course Arlene can count on some celebrity support too!!

https://twitter.com/JamieBrysonCPNI/status/1188744380171067393

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Now, more than ever, unionism needs to unite. I am no fan of sections of the DUP, but they are the only party capable of standing up for the union. Absolutely appalling that the UUP would put in jeopardy unionist seats they could never win simply as a vanity project.</p>— Jamie Bryson (@JamieBrysonCPNI) <a href="

https://twitter.com/JamieBrysonCPNI/status/1188744380171067393?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&quot;&gt;October

28, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js&quot; charset="utf-8"></script>

https://twitter.com/JamieBrysonCPNI/status/1188891833033723906

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Saw this extract from an article I had written 2 years ago posted on Facebook today. I still stand over it’s accuracy- especially as we continually see more and more ‘liberal’ unionists being used as republicanism’s useful idiots. <a href="https://t.co/qG2iM9FyCR">pic.twitter.com/qG2iM9FyCR</a></p>&mdash; Jamie Bryson (@JamieBrysonCPNI) <a href="

https://twitter.com/JamieBrysonCPNI/status/1188891833033723906?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&quot;&gt;October

28, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js&quot; charset="utf-8"></script>

hometruths

I predict the Lib Dems to do very well and hold the balance of power.

I think Tories will fall just short of a majority, without any options for partners to make up seats.

Lib Dems will refuse to work with Tories and a Labour led Corbyn. Gridlock unless Corbyn replaced. Though presumably he would be anyway if he has a bad election.

Starmer for PM in Lab/Lib Dem coalition > second referendum > both Lab/Lib Dem campaign for Remain > Remain wins > No Brexit is the will of the people.

Woo hoo!

liamtech

lawred2 wrote: »

I wouldn't agree with the 'Clean Break' wording at all..

Words have meanings and 'Clean Break' quite clearly does not quite convey the magnitude of how unclean a break a no deal Brexit would be.

"A disorderly and complete breakdown of relations and agreements []" is what should be on the ballot

I agree i wasnt suggesting that this be the wording - obviously it would need to be ironed out but thats roughly the jist

FrancieBrady

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The UUP could be onto a blinder by pointing out that the DUP stance of saying no and in particular their brexit approach means they have been and are endangering the union. Its a great opportunity for them to distingush themselves as union saviours against the backdrop also of the RHI scandal

Its funny to see Arlene criticism of them not going into a pact for Nigel Dodds seat, as if the DUP are the rightfull heirs.

Will Unionism go the way of the Tories and fracture and paralyze itself?

I doubt it will, something will be sorted to thwart 'themuns', but then these are fascinating times and at least the blame will shift from Dublin for a while.