|
Post by mrclondon on Mar 14, 2019 23:12:02 GMT
Labour's position is too cunning for me - if they can't get a GE (they can't), they'll push for a second referendum (they don't). I though that the popular view was that JC would be putting forward another vote of no confidence. I wonder how Chuka and his new mates in TIG would vote, given they will all probably be out of a job if we have a GE. But theoretically if a no confidence motion was won, JC has 14 days to prove he could command a majority of the house. Whilst very unlikely I'll admit, TIG could be king maker in those circumstances. However more likely in the present circumstances is an interim Tory leader (Hunt or Javid say) would succeed in re-establishing cconfidence fairly quickly. Hence a GE forced by a no confidence motion is I think unlikely, and the LibDems have already said ( Guardian article Jan 19) they would need serious convincing to support such a motion again (unless the GE is to win approval for a 2nd referendum)
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Mar 14, 2019 23:22:03 GMT
I wonder if May will use the agreed extension to her advantage - "approve my deal next time and I'll ask for an extension of a couple of months to do the paperwork, vote it down again and I'll ask for 1-2 year extension, hold a GE and/or second referendum, then who knows what'll happen". Quite right, that was how i read the motion today as well... i'm happy to be corrected, but to me it stated (taking into account all amendments were voted down) that the gov would apply for an extension if ("IF") it was in the position that a deal had been agreed... hence the expected re-introduction of the Deal on "Tuesday 19th" (i'm guessing a bit here) which in contradiction would suggest that if the deal is again voted down, then in fact TM does not have to apply for an extension to A50, and could in fact state we still leave on march 29th either with her deal or with no deal, and maybe then a 4th and last introduction of the deal.Or have i too gone mad..
|
|
|
Post by df on Mar 14, 2019 23:24:04 GMT
I though that the popular view was that JC would be putting forward another vote of no confidence. I wonder how Chuka and his new mates in TIG would vote, given they will all probably be out of a job if we have a GE. I can't talk for all of them but Chuka is my local MP and he had a 25k majority at the last election in a constituency that was 75% remain. Don't know about Chuka, but I'm sure in the event of GE Chris will lose his job. He was only hanging on because of Labour logo/brand. There's a lot of support for JC in my constituency and I think many voters will welcome a Labour candidate who is in line with the current party leader. I don't think Chris has any chance as an independent.
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Mar 14, 2019 23:45:39 GMT
I can't talk for all of them but Chuka is my local MP and he had a 25k majority at the last election in a constituency that was 75% remain. Don't know about Chuka, but I'm sure in the event of GE Chris will lose his job. He was only hanging on because of Labour logo/brand. There's a lot of support for JC in my constituency and I think many voters will welcome a Labour candidate who is in line with the current party leader. I don't think Chris has any chance as an independent. I would agree and also add anna soubry to that list, being a conservative ex-MP, in a middle England Nottingham shire constituency which voted to leave.. her days are surely numbered as well.
|
|
|
Post by df on Mar 15, 2019 1:15:04 GMT
I though that the popular view was that JC would be putting forward another vote of no confidence. I wonder how Chuka and his new mates in TIG would vote, given they will all probably be out of a job if we have a GE. But theoretically if a no confidence motion was won, JC has 14 days to prove he could command a majority of the house. Whilst very unlikely I'll admit, TIG could be king maker in those circumstances. However more likely in the present circumstances is an interim Tory leader (Hunt or Javid say) would succeed in re-establishing cconfidence fairly quickly. Hence a GE forced by a no confidence motion is I think unlikely, and the LibDems have already said ( Guardian article Jan 19) they would need serious convincing to support such a motion again (unless the GE is to win approval for a 2nd referendum) We are stuck. The only weight in the balance was DUP because the other NI half excluded themselves due to their political stance. I don't think this new group of "defectors" will shift the balance. LibDems gone very small after entering partnership with Tories. UKIP's "glory" is a history. Monster Raving Loony - are they still around (could win an MP, you never know these days?). There were several socialist breakaways when Tony invented New Labour, can't recall any of them winning seats. Greens don't get more than 1 MP. George's Respect party don't seem to exist anymore... BNP seem to be vanished too.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,233
Likes: 6,038
|
Post by registerme on Mar 15, 2019 1:20:22 GMT
The notion that the DUP somehow commands the future of the United Kingdom is terrifying.
|
|
|
Post by batchoy on Mar 15, 2019 7:39:18 GMT
It is interesting to note that a conversation I had a few weeks ago with a very astute non-British non-European businessman seems to be coming to fruition. His view on the Brexit referendum is that the British people voted for the right thing but for the wrong reasons and that Brexit will ultimately fail because MPs have no experience of having to act on the will of the people. Coming from New Zealand he has a somewhat jaundiced view of the European project given the 8-10 years economic impact the UK joining the EEC had on NZ, however he believes that NZ is stronger as a result and that after a few years of difficulty the UK would recover given a WTO+ Brexit deal. On Brexit his view is that the EU will become a Federal State with central budgetary control in order to stabilise the Euro. This will then present non-Euro countries with three options: - join the Euro and give up budgetary control to a system designed to maintain Germany's economy since ultimately they will be the ones underwriting all the other economies.
- stay outside the Euro and be sidelined in the majority of EC discussions because they will all contain some aspect that centres on the Euro
- leave the EU
In choosing to leave now, the UK should in theory have been in a strong position to negotiate a WTO+ agreement, however with the majority of MPs wedded to the European project and with no experience of acting on the will of the people but against their own opinions there is little likelihood of an agreement happening and they will vote to stay in the EU rather than to leave on a WTO rules basis
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,524
Likes: 2,667
|
Post by cb25 on Mar 15, 2019 9:10:53 GMT
... Brexit will ultimately fail because MPs have no experience of having to act on the will of the people. As various people have pointed out before, MPs see their jobs to be our representative rather than our delegate. They translate that as "you vote for me to use my experience to vote as I see fit on any/all issues".
Lots of problems with that: -allows them to ignore (as now) anything they might have stood on in the manifesto
-they don't necessarily have much relevant experience in the subject they're voting on -they tend to obey the party whip even if it goes against their experience -it generally doesn't matter to them what the electorate think(*). In the case of the referendum, though they can validly play on the "it was only carried by a 52%-48% majority" their 'experience' and/or party whip would have been telling them to vote as now even if it had been (say) 70%-30%
(*) Exceptions tend to be things like closure of a local hospital. They know if their 'experience' tells them to vote for closure but that's against the feelings of the electorate, they'll be out of a job come the time of the next election. Simple job preservation.
I know it's the current system, but Brexit has shown it to be severely lacking.
---
I hope the extension allows the UK to vote in the European elections, as that's going to be fun
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Mar 15, 2019 12:38:48 GMT
After some thought, I've concluded that if MPs are intent on blocking leaving with no withdrawal agreement in the next few months, my preference is for a 2 or even 3 year extension to article 50, for the UK to participate in the Euro elections, and for an autumn GE.
Those arguing for a 2nd ref may have a point, but before that you need to decide the options that are to be put to the public, which means MPs making some decisions in their role as representatives of the people. A GE would allow for a set of MPs to be elected that represent (within the limitations of FPTP) the people based on where we are today. Maybe the chips will land more or less in the same proportions as they are today (in terms of leave vs remain; ignoring left vs right for now) but may be they will land differently.
An autumn GE allows time for May to stand down (voluntarily) and a new Tory leader to elected following normal party rules, ditto the LibDems, and allow TIG to get a perty setup. But more importantly time for all parties to have some space to think through their manifestos.
Its 5 years since the last Euro elections, and again at this point it needs an election to ensure the UK MEP's do represent the people based on todays situation. Alllowing the currently elected set of MEP's to continue for years is simply undemocratic IMO.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Mar 15, 2019 12:52:02 GMT
After some thought, I've concluded that if MP's are intent on blocking leaving with no withdrawal agreement in the next few months, my preference is for a 2 or even 3 year extension to article 50, for the UK to participate in Euro elections, and for an autumn GE.
Those arguing for a 2nd ref may have a point, but before that you need to decide the options that are to be put to the public, which means MP's making some decisions in their role as representatives of the people. A GE would allow for a set of MP's to be elected that represent (within the limitations of FPTP) the people based on where we are today. Maybe the chips will land more or less in the same proportions as they are today (in terms of leave vs remain; ignoring left vs right for now) but may be they will land differently.
An autumn GE allows time for May to stand down and a new Tory leader to elected following normal party rules, ditto the LibDems, and allow TIG to get a perty setup. But more importantly for all parties to have some space to think through their manifestos.
Its 5 years since the last Euro elections, and again at this point it needs an election to ensure the UK MEP's do represent the people based on todays situation. Alllowing the currently elected set of MEP's to continue for years is simply undemocratic IMO.
While I agree with much of that, I don't agree with the highlighted bit. The problem being that MPs don't get to even stand for election unless they are first selected by the relevant committees made up of active party members of their respective parties. And the active party members are simply not representative of the electorate. In this toxic situation, with active membership tending to sit at the extremes on this topic, its not a good way to end up with a parliament which is reasonably representative of the more balanced (remember it was a 52/48 vote) constituency of the general public.
The other aspect here is that the parties are simply not internally unified on the matter, so getting them to "think through their manifesto's" doesn't really help.
And also: the problem with these discussions on "the parties to decide what they want" is it ultimately ignores the fact that they probably cannot get what they want: there is a constituency of another 27 countries sitting on the other side of the negotiation.
|
|
jj
Member of DD Central
Jolly Jammy
Posts: 320
Likes: 358
|
Post by jj on Mar 15, 2019 13:37:14 GMT
I think any extension is a bad idea. I work in the service/manufacturing industry. Back in 2016 we had a 5 year order book. Now in 2019 our order book is now at 2 1/2 years.
Businesses are not going to invest until a decision is made one way or another. If a decision is not made a downturn is inevitable.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,524
Likes: 2,667
|
Post by cb25 on Mar 15, 2019 13:39:33 GMT
After some thought, I've concluded that if MP's are intent on blocking leaving with no withdrawal agreement in the next few months, my preference is for a 2 or even 3 year extension to article 50, for the UK to participate in Euro elections, and for an autumn GE.
Those arguing for a 2nd ref may have a point, but before that you need to decide the options that are to be put to the public, which means MP's making some decisions in their role as representatives of the people. A GE would allow for a set of MP's to be elected that represent (within the limitations of FPTP) the people based on where we are today. Maybe the chips will land more or less in the same proportions as they are today (in terms of leave vs remain; ignoring left vs right for now) but may be they will land differently.
An autumn GE allows time for May to stand down and a new Tory leader to elected following normal party rules, ditto the LibDems, and allow TIG to get a perty setup. But more importantly for all parties to have some space to think through their manifestos.
Its 5 years since the last Euro elections, and again at this point it needs an election to ensure the UK MEP's do represent the people based on todays situation. Alllowing the currently elected set of MEP's to continue for years is simply undemocratic IMO.
The other aspect here is that the parties are simply not internally unified on the matter, so getting them to "think through their manifesto's" doesn't really help.
I agree with you on that. How many times in the past few months have we heard MPs from each of the two main parties say "I know I was elected on a manifesto to do X but I'm not bound by that so I'm doing the opposite and I know that the electorate want Y but in my experience it's best to do the opposite of that" (presumably justified by them being a representative there to use their experience and ignore absolutely everything/everybody else)
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,524
Likes: 2,667
|
Post by cb25 on Mar 15, 2019 17:16:19 GMT
I watched last night's BBC2 This Week programme. Dominic Grieve stating the public don't like May's deal and he wanted to see a referendum of May's deal vs Remain. He had no good response when Andrew Neil accused him of wanting a rigged referendum.
|
|
|
Post by samford71 on Mar 15, 2019 17:36:58 GMT
While I agree with much of that, I don't agree with the highlighted bit. The problem being that MPs don't get to even stand for election unless they are first selected by the relevant committees made up of active party members of their respective parties. And the active party members are simply not representative of the electorate. In this toxic situation, with active membership tending to sit at the extremes on this topic, its not a good way to end up with a parliament which is reasonably representative of the more balanced (remember it was a 52/48 vote) constituency of the general public ....
I'm not sure if any party's membership is representative of the electorate but the Tory party is clearly the most unrepresentative. They refuse to publish numbers, but Tory party membership has fallen from over 400k to a maximum of 124k now. Some estimate the average age to be as high as 71. Some of the attrition is due to resignations and others not renewing their memberships but the primary reason for the fall in membership is death. The Tory membership is quite literally dying out. The SNP membership should overtake them as the second largest in the next year or so. The Libdems possibly within 5 years. And in a similar manner to Labour members, who tend to be toward the left of the Labour voter, the Tory members are way to the right of the Tory voter. One of biggest political issues is that we have a large majority of centrist voters, yet the centrist parties are totally incapable of attracting their votes.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,524
Likes: 2,667
|
Post by cb25 on Mar 15, 2019 17:45:54 GMT
While I agree with much of that, I don't agree with the highlighted bit. The problem being that MPs don't get to even stand for election unless they are first selected by the relevant committees made up of active party members of their respective parties. And the active party members are simply not representative of the electorate. In this toxic situation, with active membership tending to sit at the extremes on this topic, its not a good way to end up with a parliament which is reasonably representative of the more balanced (remember it was a 52/48 vote) constituency of the general public ....
.. the Tory members are way to the right of the Tory voter.
Where's the evidence for that?
If these allegedly right-wing Tory members are the ones selecting Tory MPs, perhaps I need to join up and beef them up as I find the current Tory party way to the left of me.
|
|