Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

Personally, I still don’t understand how the actual effect of the vote changes much in terms of procedure and the like?

 

I’ve not seen a good argument that tells me why the now passed amendment makes such a big difference? I’m aware that the act of members voting against their own government and bringing about a defeat is embrassing, but is that anymore embrassing than what’s gone before it such as a failed snap election and the DUP thing last week? 

 

It appears everyone, government ministers, the press and those still hoping Brexit might be stopped are all getting rather excited about this turn of events, suggesting there is a big point in this -but try as I may, I don’t see it that way and sense this is just more pantomime along the way to an enviable destination.

[Captain...]

The effect of the vote is surely just to hold the government to account for something they said they would do, it has hardly cancelled brexit.

 

Or am I missing something, the only reason this became a defeat was because the Tories didn't want to put into law something they said they would do, so probably so that they could weasel out of it if they wanted to, they also hadn't actually defined what they meant by a 'meaningful vote'. By not supporting the amendment they just proved themselves to be untrustworthy and dishonest and opened themselves up to a defeat.

 

That Mail headline is so over the top, even if the rebels had voted to cancel Brexit it would be an overreaction. It is this sort of nonsense (from both sides) that has turned political debate into a cesspit of polarised views over the last few years. You can guarantee that people will read that headline without understanding what actually happened and work themselves up into a frothing rage. I expect a flurry of poorly written expletive filled tweets, making use of those extra characters to get really graphic in what they would do to them.

[Captain...]

 

[Guest]

Dominic Grieve says he has had death threats after Brexit rebellion

Tory MP whose amendment led to defeat for Theresa May reports incidents to police, and questions Daily Mail’s reporting of vote

 

Dominic Grieve voiced concerns about the ‘febrile’ political atmosphere. Photograph: Simon Dawson/Reuters

Anushka Asthana and agencies

Published:17:05 GMT+00:00 Thu 14 December 2017

 Follow Anushka Asthana

 

The Conservative MP Dominic Grieve has faced death threats after leading a parliamentary rebellion that resulted in the prime minister’s first defeat on Brexit.

The former Tory attorney general has reported incidents to the police. Other colleagues who rebelled have also come under pressure.

Austrian leader hopes Brexit can be reversed after Commons setback

“The thing which continues to cause me concern is not that people will disagree vigorously with the positions we take, but that the atmosphere is so febrile that it leads firstly to people not listening to what the debate is about, secondly suggests that any questions around Brexit amount to an intention to sabotage and, thirdly, results in some people expressing themselves in terms that at times include death threats,” he told the Guardian.

AdvertisementHide

 

“Death threats should have no part in the political process of a democracy.”

Grieve also questioned the response of some newspapers to the vote, including a front-page story in the Daily Mail that claimed 11 Tory “self-consumed malcontents” had betrayed their leader, party and 17.4m Brexit voters and had increased the “possibility of a Marxist in no 10”.

He added: “The form of reporting that the Daily Mail adopts is an incitement to obscuring what the issues actually are. That then adds to the atmosphere.”

Earlier May was warned she could face another Commons defeat unless she backed down over plans to write the date of Britain’s exit from the EU into law.

Downing Street said there were no plans to withdraw the government’s amendment to the EU withdrawal bill which spells out that the UK’s membership of the union will end at 11pm on 29 March 2019. Grieve, who led the Tory revolt on Wednesday night, said he was sure the government would be defeated on the measure, while fellow rebel Stephen Hammond called on ministers and whips to negotiate over the proposal.

The prospect of another Commons reverse will increase the pressure on the chief whip, Julian Smith, following claims from rebels that Wednesday’s defeat could have been prevented if the government had engaged with them.

Grieve told BBC Newsnight: “I hope very much it won’t be necessary because if the government comes back with that date I’m sure the government will be defeated, and I have no desire to defeat the government or be involved in the government’s defeat a second time.” Hammond told the BBC: “That’s a week to go in negotiations in terms of whether that’s going to be put to the House of Commons and whether it’s really necessary. People will take their view at the time.”

The shadow Brexit secretary, Keir Starmer, said the vote on the date amendment was an “accident waiting to happen” and called on the government to drop the “ill-conceived gimmick”.

 

[Webbo]

3 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Dominic Grieve says he has had death threats after Brexit rebellion

Tory MP whose amendment led to defeat for Theresa May reports incidents to police, and questions Daily Mail’s reporting of vote

 

Dominic Grieve voiced concerns about the ‘febrile’ political atmosphere. Photograph: Simon Dawson/Reuters

Anushka Asthana and agencies

Published:17:05 GMT+00:00 Thu 14 December 2017

 Follow Anushka Asthana

 

The Conservative MP Dominic Grieve has faced death threats after leading a parliamentary rebellion that resulted in the prime minister’s first defeat on Brexit.

The former Tory attorney general has reported incidents to the police. Other colleagues who rebelled have also come under pressure.

Austrian leader hopes Brexit can be reversed after Commons setback

“The thing which continues to cause me concern is not that people will disagree vigorously with the positions we take, but that the atmosphere is so febrile that it leads firstly to people not listening to what the debate is about, secondly suggests that any questions around Brexit amount to an intention to sabotage and, thirdly, results in some people expressing themselves in terms that at times include death threats,” he told the Guardian.

AdvertisementHide

 

“Death threats should have no part in the political process of a democracy.”

Grieve also questioned the response of some newspapers to the vote, including a front-page story in the Daily Mail that claimed 11 Tory “self-consumed malcontents” had betrayed their leader, party and 17.4m Brexit voters and had increased the “possibility of a Marxist in no 10”.

He added: “The form of reporting that the Daily Mail adopts is an incitement to obscuring what the issues actually are. That then adds to the atmosphere.”

Earlier May was warned she could face another Commons defeat unless she backed down over plans to write the date of Britain’s exit from the EU into law.

Downing Street said there were no plans to withdraw the government’s amendment to the EU withdrawal bill which spells out that the UK’s membership of the union will end at 11pm on 29 March 2019. Grieve, who led the Tory revolt on Wednesday night, said he was sure the government would be defeated on the measure, while fellow rebel Stephen Hammond called on ministers and whips to negotiate over the proposal.

The prospect of another Commons reverse will increase the pressure on the chief whip, Julian Smith, following claims from rebels that Wednesday’s defeat could have been prevented if the government had engaged with them.

Grieve told BBC Newsnight: “I hope very much it won’t be necessary because if the government comes back with that date I’m sure the government will be defeated, and I have no desire to defeat the government or be involved in the government’s defeat a second time.” Hammond told the BBC: “That’s a week to go in negotiations in terms of whether that’s going to be put to the House of Commons and whether it’s really necessary. People will take their view at the time.”

The shadow Brexit secretary, Keir Starmer, said the vote on the date amendment was an “accident waiting to happen” and called on the government to drop the “ill-conceived gimmick”.

 

When Matt posted a picture of a Momentum march calling for the tories to be hung you called him a snowflake.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

Your response @Captain... kind of echos my point... in that to coin a phrase “nothing has changed” - so why all the fuss from both sides? 

 

It would also appear we’re gearing up for round 2, what with the governments own amendment to insert a defining date of leaving into the bill to go through debate and a vote next week - and Tory rebels again promising the government a defeat if it does indeed bring the motion forward. 

 

Now that - that I could understand as being seen as a ‘threat’ from Brexiters to leaving and I suspect the government will want to hang tough and win that particular vote somehow (I think they could win back some of the Labour Brexit MP’s on that one). 

 

But on the one just passed - I don’t see the issue. Time and orderly process was discussed as an overriding issue by the government, but given whatever is agreed also has to go through the EU Parliament and it’s members at the same point, I saw that as nefarious argument.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Webbo said:

When Matt posted a picture of a Momentum march calling for the tories to be hung you called him a snowflake.

Can you just link to my post to remind me?

Are you defending the mail then?

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Can you just link to my post to remind me?

Are you defending the mail then?

It could 100 pages back I'm not looking for that. Not defending anything, I just don't buy your phoney outrage.

[Guest]

Just now, Webbo said:

It could 100 pages back I'm not looking for that. Not defending anything, I just don't buy your phoney outrage.

I think it's absolutely ridiculous for a paper to put the sort of headlines the mail has in such a febrile political environment, particularly given Jo Cox. I'm not sure what's phony about that argument. 

 

But obviously you have to take the right wing line on every single thing. As you were.

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, toddybad said:

I think it's absolutely ridiculous for a paper to put the sort of headlines the mail has in such a febrile political environment, particularly given Jo Cox. I'm not sure what's phony about that argument. 

 

But obviously you have to take the right wing line on every single thing. As you were.

You've posted articles saying that tories are deliberately starving children, killing poor people but you're telling me you're offended that the Mail has asked tory MPs are you proud of yourself? I don't believe you.

[Alf Bentley]

11 minutes ago, Webbo said:

You've posted articles saying that tories are deliberately starving children, killing poor people but you're telling me you're offended that the Mail has asked tory MPs are you proud of yourself? I don't believe you.

 

@toddybad can answer for himself, but I certainly wasn't bothered about the "are you proud of yourselves?" headline.

 

What I thought was out of order was labeling them traitors ("self-consumed malcontents pull the rug from under our EU negotiators, betray their leader, party and 17.4m Brexit voters") while prominently naming them and printing their photos.

All MPs hold public surgeries and attend well-advertised local events, usually with little security. As with Jo Cox, all it would take is one unhinged fanatic fired up to wreak patriotic revenge on the "traitors".....such front pages make that more likely.

[Rogstanley]

On 02/10/2017 at 10:08, toddybad said:

Jesus Christ, get a backbone Matt, ffs. You're as bad as the liberal left for false outrage.

 

Anyway, as if we didn't already know it

 

Cabinet is split over how Brexit should happen, Hammond admits

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/02/cabinet-is-split-over-how-brexit-should-happen-hammond-admits?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

Not hard to find this post, just needed to know the date the story came out. Nothing about snowflakes.

 

A small fringe group chanting something silly is obviously a bit different from a mainstream national newspaper lining up people on their front page as targets.

 

Just a page or so back from this Mattp was crying about fake outrage over national embarrassment Boris Johnson's Burma gaffe. Hours later he himself was outraged over this.

 

I'd love to know what the rules are around outrage, I really would. You can't even express mild disappointment anymore without someone aggressively calling you out for fake outrage.

[Webbo]

3 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

Not hard to find this post, just needed to know the date the story came out. Nothing about snowflakes.

 

A small fringe group chanting something silly is obviously a bit different from a mainstream national newspaper lining up people on their front page as targets.

 

Just a page or so back from this Mattp was crying about fake outrage over national embarrassment Boris Johnson's Burma gaffe. Hours later he himself was outraged over this.

 

I'd love to know what the rules are around outrage, I really would. You can't even express mild disappointment anymore without someone aggressively calling you out for fake outrage.

Fair enough it was lifted fox who called Matt a delicate flower. It was 170 odd pages back.

 

He did actually say;

 

Quote

Jesus Christ, get a backbone Matt, ffs. You're as bad as the liberal left for false outrage.

Now if a banner with "Hang the Tories" isn't offensive to someone then I don't believe the Daily Mail story was either.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

27 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Now if a banner with "Hang the Tories" isn't offensive to someone then I don't believe the Daily Mail story was either.

 

Which national newspaper did that? 

 

And should we be trying to ‘justify’ two undesirables because one did this first?

Edited 14 December 2017 by DJ Barry Hammond

[Realist Guy In The Room]

Sarah Wollaston was just on the local news.  Had a load of hate mail already.

[leicsmac]

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

@toddybad can answer for himself, but I certainly wasn't bothered about the "are you proud of yourselves?" headline.

 

What I thought was out of order was labeling them traitors ("self-consumed malcontents pull the rug from under our EU negotiators, betray their leader, party and 17.4m Brexit voters") while prominently naming them and printing their photos.

All MPs hold public surgeries and attend well-advertised local events, usually with little security. As with Jo Cox, all it would take is one unhinged fanatic fired up to wreak patriotic revenge on the "traitors".....such front pages make that more likely.

This. The way these MP's are put up in the front page wanted poster-style is rather different to the generalities mentioned by other sections of the press, And it doesn't need to be explicit in a "go after these traitors" or a "hang the Tories" kind of fashion - it just needs the dog whistle. Of course, should (heaven forbid) anything bad happen to one of these MP's because of this, that then means the Mail has a figleaf to hide behind when they say they're not complicit - but though absolute proof of intent isn't there so as to avoid legal consequences that intent is obvious enough to anyone with any sense.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Webbo said:

Fair enough it was lifted fox who called Matt a delicate flower. It was 170 odd pages back.

 

He did actually say;

 

Now if a banner with "Hang the Tories" isn't offensive to someone then I don't believe the Daily Mail story was either.

Some random non-entity holding a stupid banner is hardly the same as a national newspaper. You're beyond parody Webbo, I can't be bothered with you any more.

Edited 14 December 2017 by Guest

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

@MattP

 

You watching This Week this evening?

 

If you’ve missed it, I suggest you catch up on iPlayer (not for any political reason either)

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

 

[Guest MattP]

23 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

@MattP

 

You watching This Week this evening?

 

If you’ve missed it, I suggest you catch up on iPlayer (not for any political reason either)

I will give it a watch

 

Just watching Question Time, Barnsley audience brutal. 

[Guest MattP]

Interesting to hear RLB say they want parliament to have this vote as they can reject the deal for nothing.

 

Does this mean Labour now support the "no deal is better than a bad deal" mantra?

[Guest MattP]

5 hours ago, Rogstanley said:

Not hard to find this post, just needed to know the date the story came out. Nothing about snowflakes.

 

A small fringe group chanting something silly is obviously a bit different from a mainstream national newspaper lining up people on their front page as targets.

 

Just a page or so back from this Mattp was crying about fake outrage over national embarrassment Boris Johnson's Burma gaffe. Hours later he himself was outraged over this.

 

I'd love to know what the rules are around outrage, I really would. You can't even express mild disappointment anymore without someone aggressively calling you out for fake outrage.

I'm not outraged over anything, you've made that up.

 

I'm sick of Anna Soubry and still think she shouldn't have stood if she didn't want to stand on the key manifesto pledges but that's about it. @DJ Barry Hammond has already explained that the amendment in reality makes little difference to anything. 

Edited 15 December 2017 by MattP

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

@MattP

 

You watching This Week this evening?

 

If you’ve missed it, I suggest you catch up on iPlayer (not for any political reason either)

What a delight that is to wake up to see. ?

[Guest MattP]

17 hours ago, ealingfox said:

Imagine thinking the Mail and the Guardian are equivalent

Speaking of The Grauniad, merry Xmas from them 

 

Edited 15 December 2017 by MattP

[Rogstanley]