1,863 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 6, 2019 18:55:15 GMT
via mobile
Post by NeilVHughes on Sept 6, 2019 18:55:15 GMT
My gut feeling is a moderately tweaked Withdrawal Agreement (May Deal) is the likely outcome.
It is the only way that Johnson can achieve the 31st Oct promise and as part of the No-Deal Bill the original will be debated again.
Not sure what his paymasters will think and whether it is enough to pacify the Brexit Party but if we have left before the Election is there a reason for them to exist.
A Deal is in line with the current Democratic process and my only concern was that we would leave without a Deal and would accept this scenario.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2019 18:58:28 GMT
Leaving with no deal, it will take years and years to get a deal that will still be worse than at present. If we are desperate to get a deal with the US and others quickly we will be taken to the cleaners.
Leaving with May’s deal, all of that applies but (with the backstop) we will have a period so that things don’t get so bad, so quickly.
Leaving but remaining in the Customs Union and Single Market, will have us retain most of the benefits but without any say in them. This would be quick but make us politically weaker. Similar with the Norway style Single Market but not Customs Union option.
Remaining will happen overnight and, the next day, the government can start to govern properly again.
If people want this to stop then neither no deal or May’s deal will do that.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2019 21:48:02 GMT
Agree a deal is the best option, but have always thought we need to maintain the leverage of a no deal threat to get one. What leverage? It's no problem for the EU if we crash out with no deal - they will have us over a barrel for subsequent trade negotiations and they didn't have to back down - aside from some inconvenience in terms of process in the short term, it is win-win for them. I am genuinely interested to understand why you think No Deal is leverage, because I haven't seen anyone give a convincing explanation of that Boris argument yet.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2019 21:53:53 GMT
People didn't vote for Brexit in the spirit of wanting to leave the EU, come what may, at the expense of the economy, whatever it takes. All of the pro-Brexit campaigning was predicated on the idea that we'd have more money afterwards - more money for the NHS specifically. People voted for a deal - an advantageous deal, the easiest in history. It doesn't matter how often this is repeated, it isn't the case, it never was, and this relentless revisionism is embarrassing to witness.
As well as being factually inaccurate, it denies the basis of populism. After three years of ever-increasing evidence, it's unfortunate to still see this regurgitated.
What is embarassing to witness is people still trying to deny that Brexit will be an economic disaster at the very least in the short term, if not the long. The Leave campaign certainly did not explain that, so it isn't revisionism in the slightest to say they misled even if you don't agree that they lied (though they clearly did on the bus if nothing else). And that's beside the fact that anyone could have done their own research and easily discovered just how disastrous this was always going to be.
|
|
5,066 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Phantom of London on Sept 6, 2019 22:09:30 GMT
Brexit has gone Animal Farm.
We have had Corbyn the chicken for not bending to Boris’ will.
Then on the news today we see Johnson with a bull, which pretty sums up Boris Johnson, I allow you to add an expletive.
|
|
2,342 posts
Member is Online
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 8:13:43 GMT
sf likes this
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 7, 2019 8:13:43 GMT
People didn't vote for Brexit in the spirit of wanting to leave the EU, come what may, at the expense of the economy, whatever it takes. All of the pro-Brexit campaigning was predicated on the idea that we'd have more money afterwards - more money for the NHS specifically. People voted for a deal - an advantageous deal, the easiest in history. It doesn't matter how often this is repeated, it isn't the case, it never was, and this relentless revisionism is embarrassing to witness.
As well as being factually inaccurate, it denies the basis of populism. After three years of ever-increasing evidence, it's unfortunate to still see this regurgitated.
Bit revisionist that
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 11:10:06 GMT
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2019 11:10:06 GMT
It doesn't matter how often this is repeated, it isn't the case, it never was, and this relentless revisionism is embarrassing to witness.
As well as being factually inaccurate, it denies the basis of populism. After three years of ever-increasing evidence, it's unfortunate to still see this regurgitated.
Bit revisionist that There is a large degree of disagreement as to the basis and character of populism. It’s a somewhat simplistic shorthand term, which is somewhat ironic when it is used to describe those who deal in simplistic shorthand. Personally, I think we should embrace that irony, as the best way to defeat them is to turn their own methods back on them (well, apart from taking out the charismatic figurehead, seeing that relying on such individuals is a particular achilles heel of populism). Going right to the fundamental causes of populism, one aspect that I think is particularly important is that politicians are pushed, by the system they operate in, into making claims that they can do things when they are merely attempting to do something. There is no real discussion about the limitations that exist in having power. It’s part of the essential danger within democracy, whereby complex, interrelated issues are reduced to slogans. The nature of that reality as being in opposition to the simplicity of elections is a difficult one to overcome.
|
|
1,863 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 12:39:05 GMT
Post by NeilVHughes on Sept 7, 2019 12:39:05 GMT
For those wondering why there are ‘Defend Democracy’ and ‘Stop The Coup’ Demonstrations today despite the opportunity for a General Election.
The reasons as I see it are
1. Prorogation has not been ruled out, we need to ensure this option is not available in the future, we cannot close Parliament for Political gain.
2. The statements by Johnson that he is potentially not going to follow the law and implement a Parliamentary Bill is the destruction of the foundation of Parliamentary Democracy.
These UnDemocratic positions need to be resolved and pressure continued to be applied to ensure these situations cannot be considered in the future, only then can we have General Election.
Once resolved we can move on and introduce a Deal by the end of October or have General Election in November or early December.
A General Election will likely produce another hung Parliament and dependant on the way we vote we will either leave without a Deal or have a second referendum by the end of January. (Brexit Party/Tory Coalition or Labour/Lib Dem/SNP Coalition)
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 12:54:22 GMT
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2019 12:54:22 GMT
For those wondering why there are ‘Defend Democracy’ and ‘Stop The Coup’ Demonstrations today despite the opportunity for a General Election. The reasons as I see it are 1. Prorogation has not been ruled out, we need to ensure this option is not available in the future, we cannot close Parliament for Political gain. 2. The statements by Johnson that he is potentially not going to follow the law and implement a Parliamentary Bill is the destruction of the foundation of Parliamentary Democracy. These UnDemocratic positions need to be resolved and pressure continued to be applied to ensure these situations cannot be considered in the future, only then can we have General Election. Once resolved we can move on and introduce a Deal by the end of October or have General Election in November or early December.A General Election will likely produce another hung Parliament and dependant on the way we vote we will either leave without a Deal or have a second referendum by the end of January. (Brexit Party/Tory Coalition or Labour/Lib Dem/SNP Coalition) Floating around now is the idea that the UK has dicked around for long enough with no real progression with regard to Brexit, as a result Macron and the EU are likely to enforce a 31st October exit. The political 'powers' at the helm currently continue to demonstrate their inability to deal with any real situation and as a result any bargaining power in Trade Deals etc is pretty non-existant now. What do you think the chances are of us ending with a EU enforced no-deal, despite laws passing this side to prevent that?
|
|
1,863 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 13:02:39 GMT
via mobile
Post by NeilVHughes on Sept 7, 2019 13:02:39 GMT
Unlikely, my understanding is the EU Position was garnered before the No-Deal Bill was considered and the Tory defectors only jumped ship when they were confident that the EU would agree to an extension.
This has further angered Cummings and Co as they see themselves as the only ones allowed so speak to the EU conveniently forgetting all Parties have MEP’s
|
|
1,863 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 13:20:30 GMT
via mobile
Post by NeilVHughes on Sept 7, 2019 13:20:30 GMT
As an aside, the report ion the impact of a No-Deal report is known as the Yellowhammer Report.
Not sure who came up with the name but could be an indication of what it contains, not sure if contemptuous or ironic genius.
‘The typical song of the Yellowhammer is often described as sounding a bit like the bird is saying ‘a-little-bit-of-bread-with-no-cheeeese’
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 13:38:37 GMT
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2019 13:38:37 GMT
This becomes a bigger joke by the day, all the in fighting, insults etc. No-one will stand up and try to take a lead and get things sorted.
I voted for Brexit and want it done but a no deal could cause more issues so I really want an agreed withdrawal agreement done so we can get out and just get back with day to day politics.
No-one comes out of this week well - The Tories potentially throwing the Father of the House and Churchill's grandson out of the party. Labour who want an election but then they don't, the SNP who want to remain in Europe but take Scotland independent and effectively out of the EU and then back in again. A load of MPs who have defected from their parties and are running around trying to secure a political future elsewhere, a clearly impartial speaker who goodness knows what he'd do if there was another election as regards standing.
The courts seem to being dragged into everything and this could set a dangerous precedent as anything contentious going forward could end up before the courts then you could have MPs using parliamentary privilege to say things that would be liable or in contempt of court etc.
I can understand the opposition MPs not wanting to agree to an election if Boris and co could move the date to after Brexit deadline and with parliament dissolved nothing could be done.
We need an election but the campaign could get very bitter and would be dominated by Brexit which does no parties any real favours. With MPs possibly standing as independents and the Brexit party fielding a lot of candidates the votes in some areas could be totally split and we end up with some strange results. Throw in the likely purge of moderates from both main parties and it could be a really hostile campaign.
|
|
5,707 posts
|
Post by lynette on Sept 7, 2019 16:52:57 GMT
I am sure Soames is an excellent person and politician and loyal etc but the very fact that he is Churchill's grandson is interesting on two counts: that he is a member of a particular family should not matter, his opinions are his own, this is several generations on and nobody else from that family has made a particularly wonderful contribution to British life ( except the Duke of Marlborough well before Winston) and for the same reasons it is quite worrying that he is the grandson of Winston in that here is another example of the ruling class of families, on both sides of the House: the Benns have also created a dynasty every bit as much as anyone from Eton. I know being a doctor tends to run in the family but I personally would like to see this passing down of the governing elite concept to disappear.
|
|
2,761 posts
Member is Online
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 17:00:27 GMT
sf likes this
Post by n1david on Sept 7, 2019 17:00:27 GMT
lynette I couldn't agree with you more about 'generations of politicians' on both sides of the House. I think there's a real problem that the amount of scrutiny on politicians now, the possible abuse - not just to them but to friends and family - and the alarming cost of standing for election is greatly minimising the talent pool for our MPs and dissuading a lot of potential strong politicians. (Isabel Hardman's book "Why we get the Wrong Politicians" is great on this). I think the particular focus on Soames with respect to Johnson is that he has repeatedly and cynically used Churchill's name as a personal hero and an inspiration, to the extent of writing a (widely panned) biography of Churchill. I think that's why this has become a particular point of focus.
|
|
2,342 posts
Member is Online
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 17:13:49 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 7, 2019 17:13:49 GMT
This becomes a bigger joke by the day, all the in fighting, insults etc. No-one will stand up and try to take a lead and get things sorted. I voted for Brexit and want it done but a no deal could cause more issues so I really want an agreed withdrawal agreement done so we can get out and just get back with day to day politics. No-one comes out of this week well - The Tories potentially throwing the Father of the House and Churchill's grandson out of the party. Labour who want an election but then they don't, the SNP who want to remain in Europe but take Scotland independent and effectively out of the EU and then back in again. A load of MPs who have defected from their parties and are running around trying to secure a political future elsewhere, a clearly impartial speaker who goodness knows what he'd do if there was another election as regards standing. The courts seem to being dragged into everything and this could set a dangerous precedent as anything contentious going forward could end up before the courts then you could have MPs using parliamentary privilege to say things that would be liable or in contempt of court etc. I can understand the opposition MPs not wanting to agree to an election if Boris and co could move the date to after Brexit deadline and with parliament dissolved nothing could be done. We need an election but the campaign could get very bitter and would be dominated by Brexit which does no parties any real favours. With MPs possibly standing as independents and the Brexit party fielding a lot of candidates the votes in some areas could be totally split and we end up with some strange results. Throw in the likely purge of moderates from both main parties and it could be a really hostile campaign. Not according to Pat
|
|
1,972 posts
|
Post by sf on Sept 7, 2019 17:27:42 GMT
I voted for Brexit and want it done but a no deal could cause more issues so I really want an agreed withdrawal agreement done so we can get out and just get back with day to day politics. The trouble is, a withdrawal agreement won't take us back to day-to-day politics/business as usual/whatever. A withdrawal agreement only addresses the terms of the divorce. The exact nature of the future relationship - a trade deal, security, citizens' rights, freedom of movement and all the rest of it - still has to be addressed, and those negotiations will dominate the news for years after the withdrawal date. We'd avoid crashing out without a deal and there'd be some kind of transition period where arrangements stay broadly as they are now, but in terms of the negotiations a withdrawal agreement is only phase one.
|
|
2,342 posts
Member is Online
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 17:44:25 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 7, 2019 17:44:25 GMT
lynette I couldn't agree with you more about 'generations of politicians' on both sides of the House. I think there's a real problem that the amount of scrutiny on politicians now, the possible abuse - not just to them but to friends and family - and the alarming cost of standing for election is greatly minimising the talent pool for our MPs and dissuading a lot of potential strong politicians. (Isabel Hardman's book "Why we get the Wrong Politicians" is great on this). I think the particular focus on Soames with respect to Johnson is that he has repeatedly and cynically used Churchill's name as a personal hero and an inspiration, to the extent of writing a (widely panned) biography of Churchill. I think that's why this has become a particular point of focus. Apart from a name there is not much Anthony Wedgwood shares with his son
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Sept 7, 2019 18:50:23 GMT
I voted for Brexit and want it done but a no deal could cause more issues so I really want an agreed withdrawal agreement done so we can get out and just get back with day to day politics. The trouble is, a withdrawal agreement won't take us back to day-to-day politics/business as usual/whatever. A withdrawal agreement only addresses the terms of the divorce. The exact nature of the future relationship - a trade deal, security, citizens' rights, freedom of movement and all the rest of it - still has to be addressed, and those negotiations will dominate the news for years after the withdrawal date. We'd avoid crashing out without a deal and there'd be some kind of transition period where arrangements stay broadly as they are now, but in terms of the negotiations a withdrawal agreement is only phase one. Indeed. Even a carefully thought-out and well-organised Brexit (which is not the type of Brexit we are getting!) would take up another few years of negotiations and political oxygen. This clusterf*** of a Brexit is likely to be dominating our politics for the next decade!
|
|
2,342 posts
Member is Online
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 20:16:28 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 7, 2019 20:16:28 GMT
I voted for Brexit and want it done but a no deal could cause more issues so I really want an agreed withdrawal agreement done so we can get out and just get back with day to day politics. The trouble is, a withdrawal agreement won't take us back to day-to-day politics/business as usual/whatever. A withdrawal agreement only addresses the terms of the divorce. The exact nature of the future relationship - a trade deal, security, citizens' rights, freedom of movement and all the rest of it - still has to be addressed, and those negotiations will dominate the news for years after the withdrawal date. We'd avoid crashing out without a deal and there'd be some kind of transition period where arrangements stay broadly as they are now, but in terms of the negotiations a withdrawal agreement is only phase one. In your calculations did you bake in this Brexit would be organised by the right wing of the conservative party?
|
|
5,707 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 20:17:04 GMT
Post by lynette on Sept 7, 2019 20:17:04 GMT
lynette I couldn't agree with you more about 'generations of politicians' on both sides of the House. I think there's a real problem that the amount of scrutiny on politicians now, the possible abuse - not just to them but to friends and family - and the alarming cost of standing for election is greatly minimising the talent pool for our MPs and dissuading a lot of potential strong politicians. (Isabel Hardman's book "Why we get the Wrong Politicians" is great on this). I think the particular focus on Soames with respect to Johnson is that he has repeatedly and cynically used Churchill's name as a personal hero and an inspiration, to the extent of writing a (widely panned) biography of Churchill. I think that's why this has become a particular point of focus. Apart from a name there is not much Anthony Wedgwood shares with his son Names open doors. We all know that. Might be a revolving door of course if not up to scratch.
|
|
2,342 posts
Member is Online
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 20:55:57 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 7, 2019 20:55:57 GMT
Government is Rudderless now
|
|
1,863 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 21:32:19 GMT
via mobile
xanady likes this
Post by NeilVHughes on Sept 7, 2019 21:32:19 GMT
Rumours were circulating on Thursday that Rudd was about to resign.
Looks as if she waited for the Sunday’s to have maximum impact and surrendering the whip makes her 22 and further reduces Johnson’s majority.
Could be/ There Is a realignment of the Conservative Party taking place, interesting to see if any more jump ship now that Johnson has pushed the Party too far, it couldn’t have been comfortable having Tommy Robinson’s crew chanting Boris is a hero today.
Will be interesting how this is spun if it can, the Tory grandees will need to act fast as having your Party fall apart is not a good platform to go to the Polls.
Ken Clarke is also not too kind in the Observer and says he may vote Lib Dem at the election.
The only potential Tory good news is that 3% of the Brexit Party vote has moved over to the Tories as per Observer Poll confirming the strategy to become the Brexit Party is working.
In the same poll it continues to show a strong Lib Dem standing and appears to be picking up Labour voters and now another ex Labour MP joins the Lib Dem’s.
Can the Lib Dem’s/Labour/SNP work as a coalition? as that may be where we are heading.
|
|
952 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 7, 2019 22:03:43 GMT
via mobile
Post by vdcni on Sept 7, 2019 22:03:43 GMT
Another key thing about the resignation is that Rudd has confirmed what we knew, that the government weren't actually seriously pursuing negotiations with the EU so the idea that taking away no deal as an option would damage their negotiating position has been exposed as complete nonsense.
|
|
2,761 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Sept 7, 2019 23:42:25 GMT
What’s clear in the last few years is that our electoral system is just not fit for purpose. In any country with proper PR both the Tories and Labour would have split into smaller parties allowing a General Election to give a clearer view of public opinion. No change is going to happen, which is why a GE is not going to change much - most people are still going to have to decide between two big parties, with whom many people won’t buy into everything, and the opportunity for a statement vote, be it Brexit Party or LibDems, will be a waste.
The Tories managed very effectively to kill any change to our electoral system with the AV vote. Dominic Cummings ran that campaign. I wonder now if he thinks that a more representative electoral system might actually have been in his favour?
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 8, 2019 0:51:10 GMT
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2019 0:51:10 GMT
The Lib Dems would never do a coalition with Corbyn as PM IMO. Also loom what happened after they went into coalition in 2010 and lost over 25 years of hard work of building up the party at the 2015 election. The SNP might support Corbyn but it would be conditional on another referendum. A few of the other smaller parties or one man bands might help out but without the Lib Dems I couldn't see them getting the required numbers.
Labour had 262 seats last time and the current betting indicates them at around 238 seats. I'll split the difference and lets say they get 250 seats. The SNP may do very well again and get 45 to 50 seats. That would only put them at a combined 300 best case scenario.
|
|