IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
Member is Online
|
Post by IFISAcava on Mar 13, 2019 0:10:42 GMT
As I said a long time ago, a good leader would have found a post-referendum consensus How is this achieved, when it is blatantly obvious that no consensus exists?
For me there are 2 groups of villans in this piece:
- MP's of all parties - they voted by a majority of nearly 400 to leave the EU, but over the following 2 years have been unable to agree on what form of leave they want
- The EU and their lack of a leave deal - there is no such thing as a leave deal. The only thing the EU will agree to is either a leave deal that entails remaining in the customs union (not realy leave at all), or a leave deal that results in us being in the indidious back stop potentially for ever.
And as an aside,what is the point of a new referendum or a GE?
- General election - this will just return the same MP's with the same views and the same stalemate
- Second referendum - I don't think that views have changed greatly, and I think the results of a second referendum would be as close as the first one. If remain narrowly wins the second referendum there will be 17m very unhappy punters. If leave win again we are back to square one.
I disagree it is blatantly obvious there is no consensus. May never tried. I think a soft Brexit of some sort could have found a consensus, but TM ruled it out with her red lines and partisan politics. Now people have somewhat retrenched and the opportunity has probably been lost. The second referendum should be on an actual negotiated deal - that would help move things on from where we are now. It would also help to see if people's views have changed or not - as they may well do in a democracy. The polls suggest consistently quite a swing to Remain (from a 4% Leave majority to an 8% Remain majority)
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Mar 13, 2019 0:10:46 GMT
Thank you, martin44 for that unexpected like. We see different solutions as the future, but I do feel the good will of you doing that.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
Member is Online
|
Post by IFISAcava on Mar 13, 2019 0:11:55 GMT
I am depressed having watched Newsnight, by the simply bizarre ideas presented by the politicians interviewed in response to the defeat of the May Deal. Nadim Zadharwi for the Cons said that what was needed was to return to Brussels, and ask for a better deal. With 16 days to go. Barry Gardner for the Labours team said that the Eu had smiled benevolently when they went and presented their customs union proposal, so they should go be allowed to go and ask for that. Nicky Morgan offered some similar muffled trumpet idea. Jesus Christ, what kind of bubble are they living in? Their choices are black and white and Maitliss tried to get them to answer what they would actually endorse faced with the options available, and they just made mealy noises. This is the parliament wed apparently want to "take back control". I wouldn't trust them to call me a taxi. It is ridiculous and reporting to you from Belgium, I can tell you that people are just laughing their heads off. Sums it up really.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,426
Likes: 2,893
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 13, 2019 0:12:21 GMT
I am depressed having watched Newsnight, by the simply bizarre ideas presented by the politicians interviewed in response to the defeat of the May Deal. Nadim Zadharwi for the Cons said that what was needed was to return to Brussels, and ask for a better deal. With 16 days to go. Barry Gardner for the Labours team said that the Eu had smiled benevolently when they went and presented their customs union proposal, so they should go be allowed to go and ask for that. Nicky Morgan offered some similar muffled trumpet idea. Jesus Christ, what kind of bubble are they living in? Their choices are black and white and Maitliss tried to get them to answer what they would actually endorse faced with the options available, and they just made mealy noises. This is the parliament wed apparently want to "take back control". I wouldn't trust them to call me a taxi. It is ridiculous and reporting to you from Belgium, I can tell you that people are just laughing their heads off. I'll probably watch a bit of Newsnight shortly (my box records it automatically) although despite enjoying that programme for at least the last 20 years, since the people's vote in 2016, I am becoming a little annoyed with it because it is obviously pro-remain when it should be pro-impartial. I did vote leave but had remain won and I obviously can only speak for myself, I would have immediately accepted that result as I have accepted the result of every other public vote and election in my life. For me now, the issue of democracy is even more important than whether we leave or remain. I simply can't believe so many of my fellow countrymen believe the issue of the day (remain/leave) as being more important than democracy itself. If we get to the stage of constantly disputing elections due to perceived influences we will end up no better than many third world dictatorships.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
Member is Online
|
Post by IFISAcava on Mar 13, 2019 0:37:36 GMT
I am depressed having watched Newsnight, by the simply bizarre ideas presented by the politicians interviewed in response to the defeat of the May Deal. Nadim Zadharwi for the Cons said that what was needed was to return to Brussels, and ask for a better deal. With 16 days to go. Barry Gardner for the Labours team said that the Eu had smiled benevolently when they went and presented their customs union proposal, so they should go be allowed to go and ask for that. Nicky Morgan offered some similar muffled trumpet idea. Jesus Christ, what kind of bubble are they living in? Their choices are black and white and Maitliss tried to get them to answer what they would actually endorse faced with the options available, and they just made mealy noises. This is the parliament wed apparently want to "take back control". I wouldn't trust them to call me a taxi. It is ridiculous and reporting to you from Belgium, I can tell you that people are just laughing their heads off. I'll probably watch a bit of Newsnight shortly (my box records it automatically) although despite enjoying that programme for at least the last 20 years, since the people's vote in 2016, I am becoming a little annoyed with it because it is obviously pro-remain when it should be pro-impartial. I did vote leave but had remain won and I obviously can only speak for myself, I would have immediately accepted that result as I have accepted the result of every other public vote and election in my life. For me now, the issue of democracy is even more important than whether we leave or remain. I simply can't believe so many of my fellow countrymen believe the issue of the day (remain/leave) as being more important than democracy itself. If we get to the stage of constantly disputing elections due to perceived influences we will end up no better than many third world dictatorships. Few people dispute it - although of course some do make the case that had it been legislated as a binding referendum the result would have been annulled due to the criminality in the campaign. The issue is that a) democracy is not static, and cannot be stuck for all time in 2016 (or 1975 for that matter); and b) we have a representative democracy that in this scenario has struggled to gel with a rather ill conceived plebiscite that rendered the complex and difficult issue of Leaving the EU with all its potential ramifications as a simple binary choice before any of it had been worked through.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Mar 13, 2019 7:54:55 GMT
I'll probably watch a bit of Newsnight shortly (my box records it automatically) although despite enjoying that programme for at least the last 20 years, since the people's vote in 2016, I am becoming a little annoyed with it because it is obviously pro-remain when it should be pro-impartial. I did vote leave but had remain won and I obviously can only speak for myself, I would have immediately accepted that result as I have accepted the result of every other public vote and election in my life. For me now, the issue of democracy is even more important than whether we leave or remain. I simply can't believe so many of my fellow countrymen believe the issue of the day (remain/leave) as being more important than democracy itself. If we get to the stage of constantly disputing elections due to perceived influences we will end up no better than many third world dictatorships. I can understand where that feeling comes from, and I'd probably feel the same if I was a leaver. But IMV this is still democracy at work, albeit representative democracy and with a big caveat. I'd hope you'd agree that the Leave result was somewhat undefined (putting it mildly) and needed shaping by parliamentarians whatever happened. There simply was nowhere near enough detail about what it meant. It was the Government's job to shape that effectively, gathering input from MP's acting on behalf of their constituents. The fact that that process has been so monumentally botched has led to MP's voting against what is an abomination of a deal. Even with it being such a terrible deal, it could have gone through despite the forecast economic damage, if it weren't for Theresa's red lines. MP's recognise that democracy said 'Leave', and most have bent over backwards to fulfil that. However, they also have a duty to not do harm to their constituents. Whilst leave wasn't well-defined, no-one wanted this deal on the table. In short, I don't think putting such a deal through could ever have been considered a victory for democracy. Far from it. Putting myself in your shoes, I'd blame Theresa May, not democracy. Her red lines, inflexibility and inability to work with others has led to this. Back in my shoes, I blame David Cameron. If he had shaped even an outline view of Brexit to vote for rather a smorgasbord and structured the vote with 2 rounds, this sorry state wouldn't have come to pass. If leave was still voted for, it'd have at least had a target to shoot for.
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 13, 2019 7:57:23 GMT
It was made clear by both sides in the referendum that a vote to leave was a vote to leave the customs union and the single market and to end the free movement of people.Both Labour and the Conservatives included all three of these things in their manifestos for the 2017 general election and received 80% of the vote. For a PM and government to then go against all that would be a pretty blatant disrespect of the democratic choice of the people of this country in my view - and I say all that having voted remain and would do so again. The withdrawal agreement is not some sort of hard Brexit. It keeps us in the customs union until the actual future terms are agreed. I think it is extremely disingenous of Labour to be voting against it. No it wasn't David Cameron said 2 weeks before the referendum: "“The British public would be voting if we leave would be to leave the EU and leave the single market. We’d then have to negotiate a trade deal from outside with the European Union... But if we leave the EU and the German finance minister was very clear, you’re either in or you’re out, leaving the single market, you’ve then got to negotiate a trade deal.”
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 13, 2019 8:02:56 GMT
It was made clear by both sides in the referendum that a vote to leave was a vote to leave the customs union and the single market and to end the free movement of people. Both Labour and the Conservatives included all three of these things in their manifestos for the 2017 general election and received 80% of the vote. For a PM and government to then go against all that would be a pretty blatant disrespect of the democratic choice of the people of this country in my view - and I say all that having voted remain and would do so again. The withdrawal agreement is not some sort of hard Brexit. It keeps us in the customs union until the actual future terms are agreed. I think it is extremely disingenous of Labour to be voting against it. Yes it is (read with the accompanying political declaration). TM has said all along that the aim is to leave the SM and CU (i.e. Hard Brexit). The backstop (which no one wants) is staying in the CU. The future trade deal can not be agreed until after we have left. The transition period is soft....once we leave everything is up for grabs. That's the exact reason Kier Starmer gave for Labour voting against the deal when Ken Clark asked him in the commons what exactly it is the Labour party don't like about the deal. Staying in the customs union and SM post leaving is just bonkers. It's effectively staying but giving up our votes and influence. I think all sides would agree it would be better off staying in than staying in the CU and SM with no votes. Leaving the CU, SM and ending free movement is absolutely not undeliverable.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,333
Likes: 2,753
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Mar 13, 2019 8:11:23 GMT
What a shambles, I don't think what is going on in Parliament has much to do with Brexit any more. It's just posturing and political maneuvering, they are all so puffed up with their own importance they have forgotten what it is they are meant to be doing. If there is a GE we should deliberately vote ALL of them out.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Mar 13, 2019 8:32:29 GMT
What a shambles, I don't think what is going on in Parliament has much to do with Brexit any more. It's just posturing and political maneuvering, they are all so puffed up with their own importance they have forgotten what it is they are meant to be doing. If there is a GE we should deliberately vote ALL of them out. The EU could help us with that if, as expected, MPs vote against no-deal Brexit then for an extension.
EU could say -MPs aren't aligned with the population and have no clear idea of how to proceed -we'll give you a 1 year extension, time enough to sort yourselves out, but in that time you must
-hold a GE to get MPs and the population more aligned (hint: stand on a manifesto you intend to and can implement) -hold an indyref2 referendum in Scotland -hold a should-we-unite-NI/Ireland referendum -hopefully then representatives will be more closely aligned with voters' feelings
OK, I know it's not going to happen, but MPs are likely to open themselves up to just about anything from the EU if they vote as expected.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
Member is Online
|
Post by IFISAcava on Mar 13, 2019 10:06:49 GMT
David Cameron said 2 weeks before the referendum: "“The British public would be voting if we leave would be to leave the EU and leave the single market. We’d then have to negotiate a trade deal from outside with the European Union... But if we leave the EU and the German finance minister was very clear, you’re either in or you’re out, leaving the single market, you’ve then got to negotiate a trade deal.” We can play the quoting game if you want. But honestly it won't make a difference and I am too tired to start sourcing it all. There was (deliberately) no clear promise from Vote Leave for a hard Brexit (leaving CU and SM) and they explicitly said both that a deal would be negotiated (i.e. they weren't suggesting a no deal exit) and also that the terms of the deal would be sorted before starting the process of leaving (if only).
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
Member is Online
|
Post by IFISAcava on Mar 13, 2019 10:09:50 GMT
Yes it is (read with the accompanying political declaration). TM has said all along that the aim is to leave the SM and CU (i.e. Hard Brexit). The backstop (which no one wants) is staying in the CU. The future trade deal can not be agreed until after we have left. The transition period is soft....once we leave everything is up for grabs. That's the exact reason Kier Starmer gave for Labour voting against the deal when Ken Clark asked him in the commons what exactly it is the Labour party don't like about the deal. Staying in the customs union and SM post leaving is just bonkers. It's effectively staying but giving up our votes and influence. I think all sides would agree it would be better off staying in than staying in the CU and SM with no votes. Leaving the CU, SM and ending free movement is absolutely not undeliverable. It is undeliverable unless a) you don't care about Ireland and are prepared to break the GFA and b) you are happy not to deliver on all your other promises about Brexit
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Mar 13, 2019 11:13:38 GMT
Tories may be about to implode as a lot of Leave voters aren't going to take a 'standstill until Dec 2021' very well:
"Meanwhile as many as 15 Brexiteer ministers will threaten to resign if they are told they cannot vote for a "Plan B" Brexit amendment, which would see Britain attempt to secure a "mutual standstill" with the EU until December 2021."
Edit: "The Prime Minister has now given MPs a free vote on the amendment, as well as the main motion."
----
I'd like to see a GE rather than a second referendum -GE lets political parties state their positions clearly and be questioned on it by the media. Brexit aside, we need a functioning government
-problem with a second referendum is i) agreeing the choices, ii) believing politicians will implement the result.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
Member is Online
|
Post by IFISAcava on Mar 13, 2019 11:24:40 GMT
Tories may be about to implode as a lot of Leave voters aren't going to take a 'standstill until Dec 2021' very well:
"Meanwhile as many as 15 Brexiteer ministers will threaten to resign if they are told they cannot vote for a "Plan B" Brexit amendment, which would see Britain attempt to secure a "mutual standstill" with the EU until December 2021."
----
I'd like to see a GE rather than a second referendum -GE lets political parties state their positions clearly and be questioned on it by the media -problem with a second referendum is i) agreeing the choices, ii) believing politician will implement the result. I believe i) can be achieved, but I have no confidence ii) can be (depending on the outcome)
regarding ii) - The EU is clear there is only one deal on offer - May's deal. So have a referendum on ratifying or not the deal on offer, and make it binding this time. Would ensure the electoral rules were followed too. Party manifestos are not binding and the lack of honesty about the necessary tradeoffs and compromises of Brexit would just continue (from both sides of the House).
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Mar 13, 2019 12:04:33 GMT
Tories may be about to implode as a lot of Leave voters aren't going to take a 'standstill until Dec 2021' very well:
"Meanwhile as many as 15 Brexiteer ministers will threaten to resign if they are told they cannot vote for a "Plan B" Brexit amendment, which would see Britain attempt to secure a "mutual standstill" with the EU until December 2021."
----
I'd like to see a GE rather than a second referendum -GE lets political parties state their positions clearly and be questioned on it by the media -problem with a second referendum is i) agreeing the choices, ii) believing politician will implement the result. I believe i) can be achieved, but I have no confidence ii) can be (depending on the outcome)
regarding ii) - The EU is clear there is only one deal on offer - May's deal. So have a referendum on ratifying or not the deal on offer, and make it binding this time. Would ensure the electoral rules were followed too. Party manifestos are not binding and the lack of honesty about the necessary tradeoffs and compromises of Brexit would just continue (from both sides of the House). Though I accept MPs don't want it, no-deal Brexit is also on the table (in fact it's the law and will remain so even after today's vote as Laura Kuenssberg just explained on BBC2's Politics Live in front of Rory Stewart). If a second referendum is announced, I can see a petition starting almost immediately asking that no-deal Brexit be included as an option.
Politics Live also had Anneliese Dodds (Labour) MP on it. I believe Labour's position is that they want to be in a (not 'the') customs union, but one that allows the UK to negotiate free trade deals. Despite the fact the EU will never allow it.
|
|