|
Post by martin44 on Mar 31, 2019 19:59:08 GMT
Well that's the Remain Knee Jerk Reaction . I'm not a trog in a wifebeater , neither is 90% of Leavers, anymore than you are a 17 year old in a Guy Fawkes mask . Most of my university friends hanker after their (cheaper) Normandy second home , langoustine's, 4x4 boots full of wine and pate on the terrace . They are cushioned by education (limited) and money. None of them vote and are in denial of much beyond Potters Bar , even tho they have sentimental worker's roots up North. They are very nice but have the inverted snobbery of the BBC who cannot conceive of anybody having a valid opinion other than theirs. I get the impression from you and them, that Leave = Tommy Robson with a baseball bat. Did I really deserve that reply? TBH no.. but neither will we end up as the recently converted Robinson (esq) ukip... but the newly formed brexit party is looking like a good option.
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Apr 1, 2019 21:56:27 GMT
Updated prediction: 1) if EU plays hardball (French approach), and doesn't grant extension, choice is no deal or A50 revocation, and we revoke. 2) if EU plays softball (German approach), Commons will coalesce around a Brexit with permanent customs union +/- confirmatory referendum and we will have 12 months extension to sort it out (and EU elections). 3) Although May said she would go if she gets her deal through, she will go anyway. My view is that if 2 occurs it will have been a perfectly democratic process for the elected HoC to have taken the advice in the referendum, to have coalesced around a consensus form of Brexit (they are elected to represent us, no party won a majority in 2017, and a sensible government would have got that consensus before negotiating its deal) and then to check with the public that they still want to go ahead with Brexit as it is in reality. I'm glad someone can still concoct a prediction, my brain is increasingly turning to mush when trying some logical reasoning ! I held off commenting on this post until today's efforts were known, but the point I'm about to make would have been as valid last week as it is today.
Forget the technical detail of what the 8 indicative vote motions last week were expressing or the 4 today, just sit back and look at the coloured charts of the labour vs tory splits on each vote (the BBC live page has one of todays votes timed at 22:30) - on each of the 12 motions the vast majority of the blue is on one side and the vast majority of the red is on other side. This doesn't strike me as a conventional "coalescing of opinion". Maybe after a few more rounds of this process there will be a majority for something similiar to one of the 12 options consdered recently. But that "something" will actually have been supported by a majority of opposition MP's and a relatively small number of Tory MP's.
Nick Boles has resigned the tory whip this evening, because his colleagues "will not compromise". But that misses the point, concocting a majority in HoC for "something" isn't sustainable if a majority of Tory MP's are fundamentally opposed to it conceptually. If the HoC tries to force the PM to implement the "something", then in effect we would be in the situation of the government implementing opposition policy not government policy given minimal tory support for the "something".
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Apr 1, 2019 22:46:50 GMT
I genuinely don't see any way forward.
The logical step is for a long delay to be requested & agreed next week, GE + Euro elections on 23rd May (Tory Manifesto on Brexit = May's Deal.), but that requires c. 1/3 of Tory's to vote for the disolution of parliament, more if TIG and a few labour MPs are worried about their seats and vote against. Otherwise it needs Corbyn to call a no-confidence vote.
For the reasons outlined in my previous post, I don't think its viable for the government to request an extension based on (say) CU+SM+PV being included in the political declaration, with minimal tory support for such a strategy, it would rupture the tory party (that said, the political declaration isn't binding)
I can't see MV4 getting us anywhere other than a 4th rejection, and revoke simply isn't tenable politically.
Which leaves "no deal", which some credible senior torys (Phil Hammond, Alister Burt) have said May will not allow to happen, and yet it remains the legal default ...
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Apr 1, 2019 22:59:29 GMT
After tonight's proceedings we find ourselves in the exact same position as the last "The house takes control to find consensus" it is quite obvious to anyone with a "Leave" brain or a "Remain" brain, that consensus cannot and will not be achieved around any alternative proposal with an acceptable majority, Nick Boles has resigned, which was almost nailed on after his proposal was rejected, given the fact that he had lost support of his constituency party last week. I have been a long time (Soft) admirer of Mark Francois, his comments tonight were IMO exactly right, given the position we now find the UK in, "Our default position is to leave the EU on April 12th, we should just leave". I am certainly not any kind of parliamentary expert, indeed the opposite, but if nothing further is achieved on Wednesday, then i hope Teresa may (who i admire considerably) will put forward to parliament a simple vote as follows..
ON APRIL THE 12TH.
A. We leave the EU with MY deal.
B. We leave the EU with NO deal.
No more extensions.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 6,316
|
Post by registerme on Apr 2, 2019 2:59:33 GMT
Other than sundering the Tory party in two (oh the irony) and increasing the chances of a Corbyn government, what would a GE actually achieve? And What, specifically, would it achieve wrt Brexit?
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Apr 2, 2019 8:01:58 GMT
Other than sundering the Tory party in two (oh the irony) and increasing the chances of a Corbyn government, what would a GE actually achieve? And What, specifically, would it achieve wrt Brexit? My guess is that people are hoping that one of the main parties could gain sufficient overall majority to be able to deliver their version of Brexit. Problems i) seems unlikely either Labour or Conservatives could get such a majority ii) even if they did, could they hold the party to one line. I think Labour might be more successful at that.
Article here says recent polling suggests GE would deliver hung parliament, Cons 300, Labour 263
|
|
travolta
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,480
Likes: 1,191
|
Post by travolta on Apr 2, 2019 8:55:40 GMT
Even today the BBC is still hammering out Remain Propaganda. I just switched off an in depth rant from the director of Siemens. Another example of the vocal media and captains of industry who do not represent the UK . The CBI is waved as the Gandalf of industry and represents the views of a minority including the BBC. They could just as easily represent us ex EU. There is no hunger for change when your bonus packet is fat and reliable. Just look at the byzantine meanderings of Brussels and realise that its PREVENTING international seamless trade , not promoting it beyond its cabal of cronies.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 6,316
|
Post by registerme on Apr 2, 2019 9:32:13 GMT
My guess is that people are hoping that one of the main parties could gain sufficient overall majority to be able to deliver their version of Brexit. That would make sense if either of them had a "version of Brexit" (that commanded enough support). Sorry, not shooting the messenger.....
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Apr 2, 2019 9:40:11 GMT
Other than sundering the Tory party in two (oh the irony) and increasing the chances of a Corbyn government, what would a GE actually achieve? And What, specifically, would it achieve wrt Brexit? In May's mind, it woud secure a mandate for her deal - assuming the Torys remain the largest party, which if GE held before Brexit party's Euro election results are known might well be the case based on current polling. Would the EU view "Please Sir, I want 9 months delay to hold a GE and then ratify the Withdrawal Areement" favourably ? Probably not, as the likelihood of a large majority for either party is low to zero. Timing is tight for 23rd May - disolution would have to be next week, and the EU summit on the 10th too late to start the process I think.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Apr 2, 2019 10:01:45 GMT
Wrt to the need to compromise that people are always talking about (presumably because Leave won by only 52%-48%, albeit 1m+ difference) - I wonder what would have happened if Remain had won 52%-48%. Would they have said "we won, but 48% wanted to Leave so we do need to distance ourselves somewhat from the EU" or (more likely imo) would they have said "we won, get over it, no changes".
I'd like to see a GE a) for the fun of seeing parties trying to come up with a clear Brexit policy they could all stand behind and b) because I think a lot of them are overdue an appointment with the unemployment office (or whatever it's called these days)
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Apr 2, 2019 12:13:35 GMT
Updated prediction: 1) if EU plays hardball (French approach), and doesn't grant extension, choice is no deal or A50 revocation, and we revoke. 2) if EU plays softball (German approach), Commons will coalesce around a Brexit with permanent customs union +/- confirmatory referendum and we will have 12 months extension to sort it out (and EU elections). 3) Although May said she would go if she gets her deal through, she will go anyway. My view is that if 2 occurs it will have been a perfectly democratic process for the elected HoC to have taken the advice in the referendum, to have coalesced around a consensus form of Brexit (they are elected to represent us, no party won a majority in 2017, and a sensible government would have got that consensus before negotiating its deal) and then to check with the public that they still want to go ahead with Brexit as it is in reality. I'm glad someone can still concoct a prediction, my brain is increasingly turning to mush when trying some logical reasoning ! I held off commenting on this post until today's efforts were known, but the point I'm about to make would have been as valid last week as it is today.
Forget the technical detail of what the 8 indicative vote motions last week were expressing or the 4 today, just sit back and look at the coloured charts of the labour vs tory splits on each vote (the BBC live page has one of todays votes timed at 22:30) - on each of the 12 motions the vast majority of the blue is on one side and the vast majority of the red is on other side. This doesn't strike me as a conventional "coalescing of opinion". Maybe after a few more rounds of this process there will be a majority for something similiar to one of the 12 options consdered recently. But that "something" will actually have been supported by a majority of opposition MP's and a relatively small number of Tory MP's.
Nick Boles has resigned the tory whip this evening, because his colleagues "will not compromise". But that misses the point, concocting a majority in HoC for "something" isn't sustainable if a majority of Tory MP's are fundamentally opposed to it conceptually. If the HoC tries to force the PM to implement the "something", then in effect we would be in the situation of the government implementing opposition policy not government policy given minimal tory support for the "something".
But remember no one 'won' the election and we have a hung parliament, so not a surprise if sometimes (especially with controversial policies) government can't get its way. In the old days government would resign in this situation, but fixed term parliamnet act (and modern politics) has changed things somewhat.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 6,316
|
Post by registerme on Apr 2, 2019 12:45:04 GMT
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 6,316
|
Post by registerme on Apr 2, 2019 17:29:11 GMT
Wrt to the need to compromise that people are always talking about (presumably because Leave won by only 52%-48%, albeit 1m+ difference) - I wonder what would have happened if Remain had won 52%-48%. Would they have said "we won, but 48% wanted to Leave so we do need to distance ourselves somewhat from the EU" or (more likely imo) would they have said "we won, get over it, no changes". Interesting question. For one thing Farage is on record as having said something to the effect of "if it's 52-48 in favour of remain it ain't over". I suspect you're right in your "no changes" belief, but it's inherent - people would have voted for the status quo so by definition no changes would be required (contrast with the actual leave result where "change" of some kind is definitely required). Ironically I suspect a 52-48 vote for remain would have given our political establishment, and that of the EU, more pause for thought about the direction of the EU than the actual result. Certainly at the moment the EU seem to be more in damage limitation mode than giving thought to why the UK voted to leave and what they could do to change the EU to make it more palatable / acceptable to those who resent or reject it in its current form.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Apr 2, 2019 17:39:18 GMT
BBC says May is to ask EU for another extension and agree a plan with Corbyn www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47794235
Corbyn will try to get the softest possible Brexit (e.g. Customs Union and Single Market) to keep Labour MPs happy and maximum chance of splitting the Tory party.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Apr 2, 2019 18:01:30 GMT
Wrt to the need to compromise that people are always talking about (presumably because Leave won by only 52%-48%, albeit 1m+ difference) - I wonder what would have happened if Remain had won 52%-48%. Would they have said "we won, but 48% wanted to Leave so we do need to distance ourselves somewhat from the EU" or (more likely imo) would they have said "we won, get over it, no changes". .... Ironically I suspect a 52-48 vote for remain would have given our political establishment, and that of the EU, more pause for thought about the direction of the EU than the actual result. Certainly at the moment the EU seem to be more in damage limitation mode than giving thought to why the UK voted to leave and what they could do to change the EU to make it more palatable / acceptable to those who resent or reject it in its current form. Agreed. With perhaps one nuance. It may well have given the northern states - and perhaps east european (some of whom were already having "thoughts") in particular food for thought anyway, but it's given far less time and space on which to act on it for now as they are so pre-occupied on the immediate fallout.
The EU had long ago moved away from being a German-French axis, mainly because the German's moved away from the French. The Germans have for many years been closer to the UK, and other northern states than they have in been in hock to the French. Brexit is every French politician's dream in terms of increased influenced.
|
|