Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

She merely needs to refer to the government's own position papers, talk about Switzerland and she's there. The EU have played a blinder by politically gaming a non-issue.

Has anything that's happened in the 'negotiations' so far given you cause to think the EU aren't the ones in total control?

[The Doctor]

3 hours ago, Realist Guy In The Room said:

Cant help but think if they’d have just honoured the bus pledge from the start, all of this would have been a lot easier.

If we're talking what they should have done - it's offered the referendum out as STV - remain, leave to EEA arrangement  (Norway model) or leave to WTO rules. Get an actual mandate for a specific negotiating position rather than deciding based on the balance of power in the Tory party and still not having a solid idea

[Guest MattP]

7 hours ago, toddybad said:

The whole thing is a mess. May needs to decide what she thinks is right (admittedly I wouldn't be saying this if she wasn't clearly going for the softest possible Brexit) and ignore the dup. Brexit is bigger than party politics. Let's be honest, she isn't going to be going down as a top notch tory prime minister so she might a well try to leave something behind that saves her future image.

 

What's the point of being in government if the dup call the shots?

 

About 15-20 quislings.

Around 35-40 rabid mad dog Brexiteers.

The rest are going along with Brexit but don't really want it.

The DUP don't call the shots, they can refuse to vote for something though, do you still think May should ignore them and risk no deal from parliament? 

 

Your figures are way out as well, way over 100 Tory MP's voted leave.

 

7 hours ago, toddybad said:

Matt etc won't agree because it risks the Brexit they've hoped for over years.

However, it is clear that both sides over inflated their claims. We have seen the start of economic problems caused by Brexit and we have seen this whole thing is far more complex than anybody talked about.

I genuinely think that the impact assessments should be given to the public once a deal is agreed. They will contain the information that should have been available prior to the vote.

We had a barrel load of impact assessments during the campaign and almost all of it turned out to be bollocks. 

 

People won't agree but the public ratified the result in June imo when over 85% voted for parties vowing to implement Brexit.

 

A second vote is just a way for remainers to give it one last crack at reversing the decision.

 

6 hours ago, The Doctor said:

If we're talking what they should have done - it's offered the referendum out as STV - remain, leave to EEA arrangement  (Norway model) or leave to WTO rules. Get an actual mandate for a specific negotiating position rather than deciding based on the balance of power in the Tory party and still not having a solid idea

These referendums are never really a goer with three options, same with the "devo max" third option in Scotland - what do you then do if a majority is for leave but not an OM for a position, it has to be binary and then the government has to implement that.

[Guest MattP]

Always worth reading a bit of Brendan O'Neill...

 

The EU has no shame. It is a completely shame-free zone. How else do we explain the grotesque spectacle of EC President Donald Tusk cosying up to Ireland this weekend, and claiming to respect Irish sovereignty, as if the past 15 years of Brussels treating Ireland as a colonial plaything had never happened? As if the EU hadn’t time and again overridden the Irish people’s democratic wishes? As if the EU didn’t just a few years ago send financial experts to run the Irish economy above the heads of the apparently dim Irish demos? Tusk claiming to be a friend of the Irish takes EU chutzpah to dizzying new heights.

EU officials were all over Ireland at the weekend. Tusk decreed that Ireland would have the final say on the Brexit deal. And if the deal hardens the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, then the Republic can choose to scupper it. ‘The key to the UK’s future lies, in some ways, in Dublin,’ said Tusk. Plucky little Ireland and the monolithic EU are as one, he said: ‘The Irish request is the EU request.’

Today Tusk tweeted ‘Tell me why I like Mondays!’ — cringe — after apparently having an encouraging phone call with Taoiseach Leo Varadkar about Brexit and Ireland — which will be bad news for Brexiteers. All over Twitter EU officials have been fawning over the Irish. Guy Verhofstadt, Brexit negotiator for the EU Parliament, tweeted ‘Ireland decides’, with the hashtag: #IamIrish.

 

As an Irish citizen currently mortified beyond description by the the weaponisation of Ireland’s border concerns against Brits’ democratic vote for Brexit, I have only one thing to say to this EU love for Paddies: pass me the sickbag. The EU respects Ireland’s borders and national integrity like a shark respects a seal. Is the crisis of historical memory now so pronounced that we have forgotten how the EU treated Ireland when its people had the temerity to vote against the Nice Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty? It was the polar opposite of ‘The Irish request is the EU request’; it was more like ‘The Irish request is pig ignorant and must be ignored by all good people’.

 

Years before the EU referendum, our Irish cousins were revolting against Brussels. In June 2001 the Irish stunned EU officials by rejecting the Nice Treaty in EU enlargement. The EU was at first bamboozled, then furious. It said the result was unacceptable — not least because the Irish had received so much EU cash — and it insisted the Irish be made to vote again. In the words of Roger Cole of the anti-EU Peace and Neutrality Alliance, the EU’s ‘contempt for the Irish people clearly showed in their reaction to our vote against the [Nice] Treaty’. In the second referendum in 2002, under huge political and economic pressure from every wing of the establishment, the Irish relented and voted Nice through.

In 2008, the Irish people voted against the Lisbon Treaty, which was in essence a new constitution for the EU. A Brussels insider described them as ‘ungrateful bastards’. The EC said there was ‘no Plan B’ to Lisbon — in short, it would carry on regardless of what the daft Irish thought. Pro-EU commentators insisted the Irish had been brain-warped by ‘populist demagogues’. It was precursor to the snobbish, anti-democratic fury that has likewise greeted the Brexit vote in certain EU fanboy circles. On Lisbon, too, the Irish were forced to vote again, and again they gave in the second time round.

Not content with dissing Irish voters, the EU then took over the running of their country in 2011. It sent the Troika — the EC, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund — to oversee an overhauling of Irish public spending in order to keep the Euro ticking over. The Troika suits were effectively an unelected government. In the words of an Irish Times account of how they conducted their affairs in Ireland, they ensured that ‘members of the government were deliberately kept in the dark’. A budget for Ireland was drawn up by EU officials who didn’t consult Ireland’s own cabinet. To the EU, Ireland is a kind of colonial outpost, and its people pesky, irritating know-nothings.

And yet now the EU says it is Ireland’s mate and trusts it to make big decisions. It really doesn’t. It wants Ireland to do one thing and one thing only: wound Brexit. Ireland is being played like a fiddle. It is being used by an EU that is still reeling from our brilliant Brexit sucker-punch and which is so desperate to preserve its flagging authority that it is willing to pit Ireland against Britain; the Irish government against the British people; Irish concerns against British democracy. This is cynical, divisive and dangerous. An oligarchical institution that has demonstrated nothing but contempt for Irish and British voters and which is so speedily losing the plot that it’s happy to stir up tensions between nations in order to do over a democratic vote? With each passing day I grow happier and happier that I voted for Brexit.

[The Doctor]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

 

These referendums are never really a goer with three options, same with the "devo max" third option in Scotland - what do you then do if a majority is for leave but not an OM for a position, it has to be binary and then the government has to implement that.

That can't happen under STV... you'd get a first round result, if no overall majority then the lowest candidates votes are reassigned to the second choice: at which point in a three option system you've got an overall majority unless the referendum was so tight to be a dead 50/50 - in which case FPTP wouldn't have helped either. 

[lgfualol]

Brexit seems to be going well

[Guest MattP]

3 minutes ago, lgfualol said:

Brexit seems to be going well

It was always going to be hard, when the people vote against the elite you have to be prepared for a fight and hope that those in charge have the will to see it through. 

 

Trump was elected 12 months ago, the EU referendum was 18 months ago and the establishment are still trying to do everything they can to sabotage both of the results. That tells you all you need to know.

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, MattP said:

It was always going to be hard, when the people vote against the elite you have to be prepared for a fight and hope that those in charge have the will to see it through. 

 

Trump was elected 12 months ago, the EU referendum was 18 months ago and the establishment are still trying to do everything they can to sabotage both of the results. That tells you all you need to know.

Trump is a disastrous president.

You've picked a good comparison.

[Strokes]

It’s hard brexit or no brexit. Soft brexit is dead now, kill TM off, call an election and stand with no deal on the manifesto. That will see a big shift in the polls one way or the other. Go big or go home.

[Realist Guy In The Room]

13 hours ago, Webbo said:

a) Who are" they"? The leave campaign are not the govt so they have no power.

b) There won't be any money until after we've left so how could they do it yet?

a) The Government

b) Commit to spending it after we’ve left

[Guest MattP]

36 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Trump is a disastrous president.

You've picked a good comparison.

Keep that in the Trump bashing thread.

 

He's finally getting some policy through one so we can see how it goes.

[Carl the Llama]

41 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Trump is a disastrous president.

You've picked a good comparison.

Thing is with most of his deregulation and policy scrapping the results won't be felt for many years by which point his supporters (and devil's advocates) will refuse to admit he had a hand in it anyway and blame the govt of the day. There's no winning the trump argument it is one that has already been entirely removed from the logical sphere.

[Rogstanley]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

It was always going to be hard, when the people vote against the elite you have to be prepared for a fight and hope that those in charge have the will to see it through. 

 

Trump was elected 12 months ago, the EU referendum was 18 months ago and the establishment are still trying to do everything they can to sabotage both of the results. That tells you all you need to know.

Since when were the DUP the establishment?

 

The only reason they have any voice whatsoever is because of the incompetence of May and because 'the people' voted to say they weren't confident in her leading the country. A dignified person would have got the message, May used our money to buy power and ploughed on regardless, fumbling from one shambles to the next.

 

Edited 5 December 2017 by Rogstanley

[Guest]

Theresa May must call the DUP’s bluff – this EU deal has to happen

Simon Jenkins

Published:10:01 GMT+00:00 Tue 5 December 2017

 Follow Simon Jenkins

 

DUP leader Arlene Foster and party colleagues. ‘The DUP has three days to make amends, or a terrible vengeance should be taken on them.’ Photograph: David Young/PA

A minority party has humiliated the British government by wielding a veto over the Irish border. May needs to garner all-party support to push through this deal

Fudge is good only if it tastes sweet. Theresa May’s deal with the EU on Irish border trade is apparently too bitter for Ulster’s Democratic Unionist party to stomach. Yesterday they wielded a veto. A British government at an international summit was humiliated by a minority partypursuing a minority point of view. It is why governments should never rely on extremist parties. The DUP has three days to make amends, or a terrible vengeance should be taken on them.

It does not matter that the DUP is hypocritical. Decades of Westminster indulging its political primitivism have come home to roost. Unionists have demanded separatism on education, trade, corporate taxes, abortion, homosexuality and a host of pet issues, yet they want to call themselves “British”. They are Irish.

Now the fiendish complexity of detaching the UK from the EU – on which question Northern Ireland voted remain – requires the DUP at least to honour the “all-Ireland economy”, which it accepted in the 1998 Good Friday agreement. The concept of “regulatory alignment” in yesterday’s deal should give it no practical problems, albeit possible administrative headaches. Objection appears to be one of principle: that the DUP wants a frictionless border, but nothing to make it different from a Brexit UK. It wants to square the circle. Like so much of international trade, that was always going to require fudge.

May must call the DUP’s bluff at once – and incidentally confront her own “rebel 50”. She must insist that it is this deal or the idiocy of the cliff edge. No deal has minimal support in parliament and in the country. Especially on worker migration, it would impose a massive economic burden on Britain, and on Northern Ireland a nightmare. A deal there must be. The backwoodsmen must be driven to the back of the wood.

Now May must urgently call a meeting with the leaders of other parties in the Commons, and request assurances on a vote in favour of the Brussels agreement. In return she should form an all-party committee to monitor the ongoing talks. Party politics should be off the table for the duration. If Labour or others are unhappy with the eventual settlement, she can promise – or threaten – another referendum or an election. She might indeed have no option. For the DUP that could well drive them from majority status.

Now we see how damaging it is for Westminster to be choreographed for destruction rather than construction. Anyone can pick holes in May’s tactics and her strategy – including her denial of a customs union. Her failure to nail the DUP to the floor is costing her dear. But she must be given support from across the spectrum, when this is clearly in the national interest. A deal there must be with the EU. Northern Ireland cannot stop it.

Edited 5 December 2017 by Guest

[Strokes]

Don’t listen to the quislings.

[Strokes]

What do we want.....brexit.

How do we want it........hard.

 

[Guest MattP]

I have to say, the whole argument the DUP have of "not being treated any differently" to the rest of the UK in any way might carry a little more moral authority if they didn't demand to be treated completely differently when it came to things like abortion and gay marriage.

Edited 5 December 2017 by MattP

[Guest]

Ruth Davidson:

 

The question on the Brexit ballot paper asked voters whether the UK should stay or leave the European Union - it did not ask if the country should be divided by different deals for different home nations.

While I recognise the complexity of the current negotiations, no government of the Conservative and Unionist party should countenance any deal that compromises the political, economic or constitutional integrity of the United Kingdom.

All sides agree there should be no return to the borders of the past between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Similarly, jeopardising the UK’s own internal market is in no-one’s interest.

If regulatory alignment in a number of specific areas is the requirement for a frictionless border, then the prime minister should conclude this must be on a UK-wide basis.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Strokes said:

What do we want.....brexit.

How do we want it........hard.

 

There is absolutely no chance of a hard Brexit getting through parliament.

[Guest Kopfkino]

7 minutes ago, Strokes said:

What do we want.....brexit.

How do we want it........hard.

 

Think I'm down for this now, even just to see the BBC meltdown

 

 

6 minutes ago, MattP said:

I have to say, the whole argument the DUP have of "not being treated any differently" to the rest of the UK in any way might carry a little more moral authority if they didn't demand to be treated completely differently when it came to things like abortion and gay marriage.

I think corporation tax is a better example of the hypocrisy of it. Given power over it just to bring them in line with Ireland. 

 

But still, there are many in the Conservative party that would only vote this through because of the risk of Corbyn meaning it isn't worth the hassle.  The DUP aren't alone here but they're most vocal.

 

I'm ashamed that we've cowered to the EU and been prepared to undermine our constitutional integrity for their games.

[Strokes]

12 minutes ago, toddybad said:

There is absolutely no chance of a hard Brexit getting through parliament.

No deal is happening  

[Strokes]

5 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

Think I'm down for this now, even just to see the BBC meltdown

 

 

I think corporation tax is a better example of the hypocrisy of it. Given power over it just to bring them in line with Ireland. 

 

But still, there are many in the Conservative party that would only vote this through because of the risk of Corbyn meaning it isn't worth the hassle.  The DUP aren't alone here but they're most vocal.

 

I'm ashamed that we've cowered to the EU and been prepared to undermine our constitutional integrity for their games.

I wish I could rep this more.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Strokes said:

It’s hard brexit or no brexit. Soft brexit is dead now, kill TM off, call an election and stand with no deal on the manifesto. That will see a big shift in the polls one way or the other. Go big or go home.

Lol. There's absolutely no chance. Huge majority of MPs against hard Brexit. If it looked like it was going to happen the government would fall.

[Guest MattP]

31 minutes ago, toddybad said:

There is absolutely no chance of a hard Brexit getting through parliament.

We leave on 31st March 2019, if the deal is voted down it's what you have called "the hardest of hard Brexits" that we exit on.

 

But I imagine we'll see compromise as we go on.

 

The hyperbole around all this at the minute is a little bit ridiculous and as many have said, the DUP won't let the government fall and even if they did a significant number of backbench Tories (more than oppose Brexit policy) would have to vote for an election which just isn't going to happen.

[Guest MattP]

5 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Lol. There's absolutely no chance. Huge majority of MPs against hard Brexit. If it looked like it was going to happen the government would fall.

Where do you get this from given only about 110 out of 650 backed the amendment to stay in the customs union?

 

You seem to be living in May 2016.

Edited 5 December 2017 by MattP