Guest MattP Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Kopfkino said: But the point is, you really have to have some idea of what you want to achieve, saying we're opposition, we're not negotiating so we don't need a policy is merely shirking. Let's be clear, a vote against any deal leads to no deal and therefore probably leads to a vote of no confidence. What do Labour propose to do then? The point is, Labour really needs to think about what it's going to do if it rejects the government's deal. Hokey Cokey Brexit. Tell the City students we're in, tell the working class Northerners we're out. If questioned about it shout "jobs first" Brexit and shout something about the Tories, the 350 million bus or bankers. Edited 6 December 2017 by MattP
Guest Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 1 minute ago, Kopfkino said: But the point is, you really have to have some idea of what you want to achieve, saying we're opposition, we're not negotiating so we don't need a policy is merely shirking. Let's be clear, a vote against any deal leads to no deal and therefore probably leads to a vote of no confidence. What do Labour propose to do then? The point is, Labour really needs to think about what it's going to do if it rejects the government's deal. Let's be clear, what the final vote will be a choice of is yet to be decided. There's still some way for the Brexit bill to go. If it's a soft Brexit it may will be a binary choice. If it's a hard one there's no way 600 remainer parliamentarians are going to allow a vote on two bad choices.
Guest Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 Just now, MattP said: Hokey Cokey Brexit. Tell the City students we're in, tell the working class Northerners we're out. If questioned about it shout "jobs first" Brexit and shout something about the Tories, the 350 million bus or bankers. At no point had the Labour leadership said anything other than we're going agreed with Brexit. The rest is your imagination.There's only one party that can't stick to a Brexit line and that's the Tories.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 1 minute ago, toddybad said: Let's be clear, what the final vote will be a choice of is yet to be decided. There's still some way for the Brexit bill to go. If it's a soft Brexit it may will be a binary choice. If it's a hard one there's no way 600 remainer parliamentarians are going to allow a vote on two bad choices. How are they going to alter the vote? It will be do you accept this deal or not.
Guest MattP Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 2 minutes ago, toddybad said: Lmao you're desperate for there to be a problem in the Labour party. There are only 2 labour mps that want a hard Brexit. Yes the majority don't want to leave full stop but the party has always had the softest possible Brexit in sight. There has been some disagreement between Starmer and the leadership over the single market but even the leave the single market version worked have been very, very soft. Ultimately it's either soft Brexit or no Brexit. There is no chance of Corbyn being usurped. If you really don't think Labour are divided on this then I pity the delusion, your leader and shadow chancellor has walked through the same lobbies as all those Tory hard-Brexiteers for the last thirty years. As for that absurd statement that there are only 2 labour mps that want a hard Brexit - I'll also give you Gisela Stuart, Kate Hoey and Frank Field just off the top of my head.
Guest MattP Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 1 minute ago, Kopfkino said: How are they going to alter the vote? It will be do you accept this deal or not. For some strange reason he doesn't seem to understand this, you are wasting your breath.
Guest Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 2 minutes ago, Kopfkino said: How are they going to alter the vote? It will be do you accept this deal or not. They haven't yet finished with amending the Brexit bill. One of the amendments deals with a meaningful vote and mps have already made clear they don't see a yes or no vote as meaningful. I don't think that argument has finished yet.
Guest Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 2 minutes ago, MattP said: If you really don't think Labour are divided on this then I pity the delusion, your leader and shadow chancellor has walked through the same lobbies as all those Tory hard-Brexiteers for the last thirty years. As for that absurd statement that there are only 2 labour mps that want a hard Brexit - I'll also give you Gisela Stuart, Kate Hoey and Frank Field just off the top of my head. Hoey and Field are my 2. You've got to 3.
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 26 minutes ago, Kopfkino said: Absolutely the worst option. Most of the benefits of leaving come from being outside of the Customs Union. Problem is we will need to construct hard borders, obviously Ireland is a massive problem, if Scotland decide they want to remain in and London, then we very quickly end up with Hard Borders around half the country, it would be very messy. We could negotiate something similar but, for the borders to be open we would most likely have to comply with whatever the EU says anyway so its seems futile!
Guest Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 10 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: Problem is we will need to construct hard borders, obviously Ireland is a massive problem, if Scotland decide they want to remain in and London, then we very quickly end up with Hard Borders around half the country, it would be very messy. We could negotiate something similar but, for the borders to be open we would most likely have to comply with whatever the EU says anyway so its seems futile! You could say it seems ill thought through.
ealingfox Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 Pretty desperate stuff from Davis I think we can all admit. Hardly inspires confidence.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 38 minutes ago, toddybad said: They haven't yet finished with amending the Brexit bill. One of the amendments deals with a meaningful vote and mps have already made clear they don't see a yes or no vote as meaningful. I don't think that argument has finished yet. Just think about this logically. In what way, given a fixed deadline, can parliament construct a vote that isn't essentially take the deal or don't? 38 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: Problem is we will need to construct hard borders, obviously Ireland is a massive problem, if Scotland decide they want to remain in and London, then we very quickly end up with Hard Borders around half the country, it would be very messy. We could negotiate something similar but, for the borders to be open we would most likely have to comply with whatever the EU says anyway so its seems futile! There's just not a problem. The UK has said it will not impose a border with Ireland. It has proposed two solutions in the papers released in the summer (and I'm sure discussed other solutions). If the EU doesn't like those solutions, we are still not imposing any kind of border with Ireland. Any border will be imposed by the EU and Ireland, not us. It is not up to us to solve their border problems. In fact, there is a paper from the EU that is not too dissimilar from that of th government's position paper http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596828/IPOL_STU(2017)596828_EN.pdf The actual solution to the problem comes from talking about a future trade relationship so we can see what customs checks might be needed. But given that customs declarations are increasing done in advance and online, and with new technologies like blockchain likely being the future of customs borders, it's a diminishing concern anyway. Switzerland manages 1100 miles of border with the EU without being in the customs union. By and large, travel across those borders is unobstructed, with customs check largely intelligence/risk led. Admittedly it's not entirely frictionless (though neither is the Irish border, checks are occasionally done on trains for example) and it may help that Switzerland is in Schengen, but if it can be done satisfactorily in mainland Europe, with almost 3 times the length of border, to 4 times as many countries, I think it can be done on the island of Ireland.
Guest Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 1 hour ago, Kopfkino said: But the point is, you really have to have some idea of what you want to achieve, saying we're opposition, we're not negotiating so we don't need a policy is merely shirking. Let's be clear, a vote against any deal leads to no deal and therefore probably leads to a vote of no confidence. What do Labour propose to do then? The point is, Labour really needs to think about what it's going to do if it rejects the government's deal. 1 hour ago, MattP said: Just to be clear on this as I am struggling to comprenhend what you have just written. The biggest issue and negotiation in our lifetime and you think it's absolutely fine if the opposition doesn't even have a policy on it? I have no idea what to say to that. Hammond confirms cabinet has not had specific discussion about final Brexit outcome it wants Q: Has the cabinet discussed the end state, where the UK wants to get to after Brexit? Hammond says there have been discussions about Brexit, but not a specific one about the end state. He says the first discussion will come in a cabinet committee. That can only happen when they know talks will move to phase two. Any discussion before then would be premature, he claims.
leicsmac Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 38 minutes ago, Kopfkino said: Just think about this logically. In what way, given a fixed deadline, can parliament construct a vote that isn't essentially take the deal or don't? There's just not a problem. The UK has said it will not impose a border with Ireland. It has proposed two solutions in the papers released in the summer (and I'm sure discussed other solutions). If the EU doesn't like those solutions, we are still not imposing any kind of border with Ireland. Any border will be imposed by the EU and Ireland, not us. It is not up to us to solve their border problems. In fact, there is a paper from the EU that is not too dissimilar from that of th government's position paper http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596828/IPOL_STU(2017)596828_EN.pdf The actual solution to the problem comes from talking about a future trade relationship so we can see what customs checks might be needed. But given that customs declarations are increasing done in advance and online, and with new technologies like blockchain likely being the future of customs borders, it's a diminishing concern anyway. Switzerland manages 1100 miles of border with the EU without being in the customs union. By and large, travel across those borders is unobstructed, with customs check largely intelligence/risk led. Admittedly it's not entirely frictionless (though neither is the Irish border, checks are occasionally done on trains for example) and it may help that Switzerland is in Schengen, but if it can be done satisfactorily in mainland Europe, with almost 3 times the length of border, to 4 times as many countries, I think it can be done on the island of Ireland. 2 I'll be honest, I think the Brexit arguments on here are frankly circular right now, but this I wanted to chip in on with an observation; the last time I checked, Switzerland didn't have a centuries-old sectarian conflict that quite often directly involves its border with another nation - that might yet have an effect on the landscape should the border conditions be changed in the wrong way.
Buce Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 4 hours ago, Strokes said: Those people should be prime for medical trials, or make them wash the dishes for a week in the restaurant. You're too soft to be a Tory. 2 hours ago, Izzy Muzzett said: You write beautifully @Kopfkino. Far to eloquent and intelligent for an internet football forum imo Oh, Izzy.
leicsmac Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 3 minutes ago, Buce said: Oh, Izzy. Economics don't interest me all that much but even I can see how well Kopf writes on them, even if his and my solutions for such matters (as far as such things can be ascertained in such a subjective field) sometimes differ.
Guest Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 Reality might just be starting to dawn on some people https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5078538/david-davis-admits-his-own-departments-brexit-reports-werent-that-good-and-says-there-is-no-way-to-forecast-effect-of-leaving-the-eu-on-the-economy/ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5151193/David-Davis-says-Brexit-impact-like-2008-crash.html#comments
Buce Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 1 minute ago, leicsmac said: Economics don't interest me all that much but even I can see how well Kopf writes on them, even if his and my solutions for such matters (as far as such things can be ascertained in such a subjective field) sometimes differ. I'm not disputing that. But he didn't write that piece he posted.
leicsmac Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 2 minutes ago, Buce said: I'm not disputing that. But he didn't write that piece he posted. Ah, it was quoted? Hahaha, fair enough then.
Realist Guy In The Room Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, leicsmac said: I'll be honest, I think the Brexit arguments on here are frankly circular right now, but this I wanted to chip in on with an observation; the last time I checked, Switzerland didn't have a centuries-old sectarian conflict that quite often directly involves its border with another nation - that might yet have an effect on the landscape should the border conditions be changed in the wrong way. As a brexit voter, this is the main issue that would change my mind. Having got a couple of mates who have served in NI, from what they’ve said, any border whatsoever will be the excuse some need to kick off again. It seems because quite a bit of time has passed and Islamic terror is the order of the day, some people have conveniently forgotten just how troublesome the troubles were over here, not just over there. It’s a pandoras box not worth opening for Brexit or anything else. Edited 6 December 2017 by Realist Guy In The Room 3
lgfualol Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 30 minutes ago, toddybad said: Reality might just be starting to dawn on some people https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5078538/david-davis-admits-his-own-departments-brexit-reports-werent-that-good-and-says-there-is-no-way-to-forecast-effect-of-leaving-the-eu-on-the-economy/ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5151193/David-Davis-says-Brexit-impact-like-2008-crash.html#comments Brexit is great entertainment. The government havent got a clue what they're doing. 1
Captain... Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 3 hours ago, MattP said: Hokey Cokey Brexit. Tell the City students we're in, tell the working class Northerners we're out. If questioned about it shout "jobs first" Brexit and shout something about the Tories, the 350 million bus or bankers. 3 hours ago, toddybad said: At no point had the Labour leadership said anything other than we're going agreed with Brexit. The rest is your imagination.There's only one party that can't stick to a Brexit line and that's the Tories. They are clearly both as divided and effing useless as each other, this is a massively divisive issue. Sadly one of the most defining issues in recent years is being overseen by incompetent fvckwits on both sides, and that is the biggest reason why I hope we abandon this whole ill thought out idea. 3
Izzy Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 (edited) 56 minutes ago, lgfualol said: Brexit is great entertainment. The government havent got a clue what they're doing. I think some people forget that Brexit is uncharted territory and that there's no 'instruction manual' for it. Any party in charge of overseeing it would struggle imo. It's unprecedented and there's no tried and tested written process for it. The government are learning as they're doing (just as Labour would be if they were in charge of Brexit) and they're bound to make some mistakes along the way. All they're trying to do is implement what the country voted for, in the best way they can, with all the complexities and unknowns involved. It might be great entertainment, but I believe TM when she says they're just trying to do what's best for the U.K. Edited 6 December 2017 by Izzy Muzzett
Claridge Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 Can't get over excited, surely nobody is stupid enough to think it won't be sorted at the last minute. With both sides claiming victory.
Guest Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 8 minutes ago, Claridge said: Can't get over excited, surely nobody is stupid enough to think it won't be sorted at the last minute. With both sides claiming victory. As far as I can see only Britain - and more specifically leave voters - thinks things is a game to be won or lost.
Recommended Posts