Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[James.]

Maybe but I think there are some twists to come. Pressure will continue to build, bad news stories will continue to roll in and the reality will become unavoidable. As such politicians and parties may change their view. All it would take is a second referendum and you probably have a remain vote.

[Guest MattP]

Well there isn't going to be a second referendum, no desire for it from the public or the MP's. 

 

I have no doubt the bad stories will.continue to drift in and everyone in the London media will do their best to tell us how awful it is. Fact is we simply won't know until the deal is concluded.

 

The only good thing about it is it makes people expect it to be such a disaster it might benefit us.

[James.]

You seem to think that everyone's views are fixed. Surely recent history would suggest that a lot can change in just a few months.

 

And it's not just the London media is it. It's businesses, trade associations, academics - it's a relentless stream of news and views all going the same way.

 

I would genuinely like to read something positive about Brexit that was written recently and is based on sound judgement. Does anyone have anything?

[Guest Foxin_mad]

3 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

 If you say so. Far be it from me to correct you on my reading habits.

 

I'm guessing you didn't read the Guardian article in question which to me just read like the facts of the matter framed in a fairly benign manner void of venom or sensationalism, if you don't like those facts then that's a different discussion.  If you want to have your point about journalistic equivalence taken seriously though you'll have to provide us with links to Guardian articles resorting to the same bitter ad hominem approach of the first Mail one you linked to or the same outrageous spinning of facts into propaganda as the 4th one you linked.  Nobody's going to argue that the Guardian hasn't got an editorial bias but I'm flabbergasted that you actually think it's anywhere near the Mail corporation's level of tabloid sleaze.  And just in case you didn't understand what I meant in my opening sentence this is the view of a man who if anything reads more Mail articles than Guardian ones (not through choice I hasten to add, it's just that people frequently cite it to support their opinion and I'm not going to respond to a person without reading their links to try and understand what their point is first).

I personally disagree, but hey ho. For a supposedly 'broadsheet' 'high brow' newspaper it is absolutely appalling, I would disagree that much of that article is factual, it is opinion to suit their agenda filled with soundbites.

 

I would have to do some digging but I am pretty sure I can find many hateful articles from the Guardian.  There have been many posted throughout this thread. Pretty much every Guardian article spins the facts into propaganda. Its what the students want to read in Starbucks on their iPhones

[leicsmac]

@Foxin_mad, as you seem to be reasonably adamant regarding the positive impact of Brexit (unless there's something I've missed), could you answer something that I haven't really had a good answer for on here before: what do you make of the impact of Brexit on the UK STEM community in terms of collaboration and future opportunities for UK scientists, and do you think the (likely) negative impact on such is a price worth paying?

[LiberalFox]

Whole thing has been handled badly from the start. I have no confidence in the legitimacy of the vote to leave or the approach by anyone bar Ken Clarke. 

[Carl the Llama]

39 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

I personally disagree, but hey ho. For a supposedly 'broadsheet' 'high brow' newspaper it is absolutely appalling, I would disagree that much of that article is factual, it is opinion to suit their agenda filled with soundbites.

 

I would have to do some digging but I am pretty sure I can find many hateful articles from the Guardian.  There have been many posted throughout this thread. Pretty much every Guardian article spins the facts into propaganda. Its what the students want to read in Starbucks on their iPhones

An editorial bias and propaganda are not quite the same thing:  Promoting facts which support one's sociopolitical stances is not the same as, to use your 4th article earlier, Corbyn having a meeting to outline his party's own approach as a contingency for the not entirely unrealistic scenario that he may have to get directly involved in the near future (yes I do think it's unlikely he'll end up PM but while he's in opposition it's part of his job description to plan ahead like that) and it being reported as an attempt to "disrupt Brexit talks".  That's what propaganda is, when the facts don't actually bear out what's being reported.

 

(To be fair dictionary definitions of the word propaganda don't fully support the above paragraph but if we're using the word as a pejorative for misleading or false news then my point stands.)

 

And if you honestly think the Guardian is a liberal equivalent of the Mail in its practices then we're going to have to agree to disagree because I don't see you changing your opinion on this despite not having the evidence to hand.  Would it be naive of me to suggest you give the Guardian the benefit of the doubt until such time as you are presented with the necessary proof to sustain your present stance?

Edited 7 July 2017 by Carl the Llama

[Buce]

17 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

An editorial bias and propaganda are not quite the same thing:  Promoting facts which support one's sociopolitical stances is not the same as, to use your 4th article earlier, Corbyn having a meeting to outline his party's own approach as a contingency for the not entirely unrealistic scenario that he may have to get directly involved in the near future (yes I do think it's unlikely he'll end up PM but while he's in opposition it's part of his job description to plan ahead like that) and it being reported as an attempt to "disrupt Brexit talks".  That's what propaganda is, when the facts don't actually bear out what's being reported.

 

(To be fair dictionary definitions of the word propaganda don't fully support the above paragraph but if we're using the word as a pejorative for misleading or false news then my point stands.)

 

And if you honestly think the Guardian is a liberal equivalent of the Mail in its practices then we're going to have to agree to disagree because I don't see you changing your opinion on this despite not having the evidence to hand.  Would it be naive of me to suggest you give the Guardian the benefit of the doubt until such time as you are presented with the necessary proof to sustain your present stance?

 

In a word, yes.

[Captain...]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Well there isn't going to be a second referendum, no desire for it from the public or the MP's. 

 

I have no doubt the bad stories will.continue to drift in and everyone in the London media will do their best to tell us how awful it is. Fact is we simply won't know until the deal is concluded.

 

The only good thing about it is it makes people expect it to be such a disaster it might benefit us.

I think you underestimate the changing will of the people:

 

http://whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/uk-poll-results/

 

Of the 4 featured polls 3 of them are showing an anti Brexit trend and that more people now want to stay in the EU, although it is still close. I don't think it would take much more for a clear majority to support staying in the EU. 

[Buce]

12 minutes ago, Captain... said:

I think you underestimate the changing will of the people:

 

http://whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/uk-poll-results/

 

Of the 4 featured polls 3 of them are showing an anti Brexit trend and that more people now want to stay in the EU, although it is still close. I don't think it would take much more for a clear majority to support staying in the EU. 

 

Interestingly, something I read the other day suggested that by the time Brexit comes around, the number of elderly Brexit voters that have died, and the number of Remain supporting youngsters that have reached the voting age, would actually see a majority for Remain.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said:

An editorial bias and propaganda are not quite the same thing:  Promoting facts which support one's sociopolitical stances is not the same as, to use your 4th article earlier, Corbyn having a meeting to outline his party's own approach as a contingency for the not entirely unrealistic scenario that he may have to get directly involved in the near future (yes I do think it's unlikely he'll end up PM but while he's in opposition it's part of his job description to plan ahead like that) and it being reported as an attempt to "disrupt Brexit talks".  That's what propaganda is, when the facts don't actually bear out what's being reported.

 

(To be fair dictionary definitions of the word propaganda don't fully support the above paragraph but if we're using the word as a pejorative for misleading or false news then my point stands.)

 

And if you honestly think the Guardian is a liberal equivalent of the Mail in its practices then we're going to have to agree to disagree because I don't see you changing your opinion on this despite not having the evidence to hand.  Would it be naive of me to suggest you give the Guardian the benefit of the doubt until such time as you are presented with the necessary proof to sustain your present stance?

He could be out to disrupt Brexit talks though who knows? its subjective I would say personally but as you say we will have to agree to disagree.

 

 Chances are it will be shot down anyway by the Guardian loving lefties here, I will have to find the articles but recently there have been articles on the Grenfell tower fire being a result of 'austerity', the deaths in the terrorist attacks being a result of austerity to name a few complete sensationalism and lies. I'm sure there is an article listed a few pages back here too.

 

Here are a few. Very little substance, a lot of stiring.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/07/austerity-britain-labour-neoliberalism-reagan-thatcher

https://www.theguardian.com/membership/commentisfree/2017/apr/15/knife-crime-cause-death-dare-not-speak-name-austerity-cuts-youth-funding

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/24/austerity-cuts-privatising-george-osborne-britain-assets

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/17/management-consultants-cashing-in-austerity-public-sector-cuts

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/28/grenfell-tower-effects-austerity-corbyn-may-pmqs

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/03/britain-power-contempt-grenfell-labour-haringey-social-housing

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/03/grenfell-tower-fire-and-the-inevitable-human-cost-of-austerity

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/22/grenfell-people-die-housing-inequality-austerity

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/14/wealthy-retire-austerity-pensioners-work

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/17/the-guardian-view-on-the-economy-its-bad

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/07/the-great-british-brexit-robbery-hijacked-democracy

 

There was the horrible van picture a after the Finsbury park Mosque incident. The kind of levels tabloids sink to from a supposedly 'high brow' paper, or at least those who read it think so!

 

As you say I guess we will have to agree to disagree and a lot of it is subjective. But perhaps people should use impartial new agencies articles to back up their cases.

 

Edited 7 July 2017 by Foxin_mad

[Carl the Llama]

17 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

I can get the evidence, its a matter of having the time to pull it together. Chance are it will be shot down anyway by the Guardian loving lefties here, I will have to find the articles but recently there have been articles on the Grenfell tower fire being a result of 'austerity', the deaths in the terrorist attacks being a result of austerity to name a few complete sensationalism and lies. I'm sure there is an article listed a few pages back here too.

Didn't take you long to find those Mail articles   And instead of blaming nonspecific "Guardian loving lefties" for you not doing so how about you let us judge the evidence on its own merits?  From what I understand of the paper I expect you should have no trouble finding biased pieces, it's the Dacrian lowest-common-denominator shrieking rhetoric that I'm dubious about the existence of.

[Guest MattP]

2 hours ago, James. said:

You seem to think that everyone's views are fixed. Surely recent history would suggest that a lot can change in just a few months.

 

And it's not just the London media is it. It's businesses, trade associations, academics - it's a relentless stream of news and views all going the same way.

 

I would genuinely like to read something positive about Brexit that was written recently and is based on sound judgement. Does anyone have anything?

Plenty, the opportunities are obvious really, we have the chance to strike our own trade deals and hopefully gain more tariff free access to goods around the World. Being outside the ECJ and controlling our borders gives a genuine opportunity to set policy as we see fit. We have to wait though to see what is negotiated.

 

I get what you mean about how things  an change but so much would have to happen before March 2019 for any backtracking on this.

 

May would have to fall and be replaced by a remainer (extremely unlikely), Corbyn would have to fall and be replaced by a remainer (almost impossible now) and we'd have to see the EU tell us we can just change oour minds (possible).

 

I just can't see it. If people wanted to stop this they should have voted Lib Dems, the vast majority, over 70% now believe Brexit has to happen.

 

1 hour ago, Captain... said:

I think you underestimate the changing will of the people:

 

http://whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/uk-poll-results/

 

Of the 4 featured polls 3 of them are showing an anti Brexit trend and that more people now want to stay in the EU, although it is still close. I don't think it would take much more for a clear majority to support staying in the EU. 

So the polls are pretty much where they were on referendum day then...

 

The methods being used probably still don't reach those people who don't usually vote who came out that day to vote leave.

Edited 7 July 2017 by MattP

[Guest MattP]

MP's turning up the heat on the BBC coverage on Brexit.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/05/cross-party-group-mps-accuse-bbc-brexit-bias/

[Sharpe's Fox]

Snowflake Tory MP's lel

 

edit, state of the comments in that article my sides what a bunch of nonces

Edited 7 July 2017 by Sharpe's Fox

[foxinexile]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Plenty, the opportunities are obvious really, we have the chance to strike our own trade deals and hopefully gain more tariff free access to goods around the World. Being outside the ECJ and controlling our borders gives a genuine opportunity to set policy as we see fit. We have to wait though to see what is negotiated.

 

I really do have to smile when I see this reason given as a positive for Brexit. I suppose having a border post in France isn't control enough? Although fortunately, the French government did confirm last November that after we leave the EU, they'll close this post. I can't imagine the French authorities then putting much effort into preventing refugees/economic migrants travelling to the UK.

 

So just to clarify: We are currently able to have a border presence in France, in another country outside the UK. After Brexit, we will only be able to control our borders from ... well, from our own borders. Am I the only one seeing the irony here?

[Guest MattP]

5 minutes ago, foxinexile said:

I really do have to smile when I see this reason given as a positive for Brexit. I suppose having a border post in France isn't control enough? Although fortunately, the French government did confirm last November that after we leave the EU, they'll close this post. I can't imagine the French authorities then putting much effort into preventing refugees/economic migrants travelling to the UK.

 

So just to clarify: We are currently able to have a border presence in France, in another country outside the UK. After Brexit, we will only be able to control our borders from ... well, from our own borders. Am I the only one seeing the irony here?

Ermmmm....you do realise the French government has completely changed this year?

[foxinexile]

23 minutes ago, MattP said:

Ermmmm....you do realise the French government has completely changed this year?

I was aware of that yes. What's the relevance? Have they changed their position regarding this after we leave the EU? I must have missed that, so if you could point me in the direction of it, that'd be great.

[Strokes]

39 minutes ago, foxinexile said:

I really do have to smile when I see this reason given as a positive for Brexit. I suppose having a border post in France isn't control enough? Although fortunately, the French government did confirm last November that after we leave the EU, they'll close this post. I can't imagine the French authorities then putting much effort into preventing refugees/economic migrants travelling to the UK.

 

So just to clarify: We are currently able to have a border presence in France, in another country outside the UK. After Brexit, we will only be able to control our borders from ... well, from our own borders. Am I the only one seeing the irony here?

What do you think they can just send boats full of migrants over here? P&O will be stacked out ferrying them to Dover and there would be nothing we can do? How come all these migrants don't just catch a ferry from holland or Belgium then where we don't have border posts? If it's that easy?

[Captain...]

3 hours ago, MattP said:

Plenty, the opportunities are obvious really, we have the chance to strike our own trade deals and hopefully gain more tariff free access to goods around the World. Being outside the ECJ and controlling our borders gives a genuine opportunity to set policy as we see fit. We have to wait though to see what is negotiated.

We are giving up free trade deals with our closest trading partners and a bloc that comprises around 50% of all our international trade so that we can get tariff free trade with other countries? I don't see the benefit, unless you are talking about joining the EEA and getting free trade with the EU and being able negotiate free trade outside the EU. 

 

With EU trade now including Canada and Japan it makes even less sense to leave if the economic benefit is being able to negotiate our own free trade deals. The articles I've read about US conditions on tariff free trade (chlorine washed meat and GM produce which don't currently meet our health and safety standards) and Indian conditions (free movement for Indian citizens to the UK). The reason why the EU has not negotiated more free trade deals, with more countries is that the terms aren't beneficial and the demands are not acceptable.

 

You can't argue that being able to negotiate free trade is an economic benefit when we are giving up a free trade deal with our largest single trading partner.

 

As an aside The US is our second largest trading partner, after the EU with about a quarter of the trade we do with the EU.

[James.]

4 hours ago, MattP said:

Plenty, the opportunities are obvious really, we have the chance to strike our own trade deals and hopefully gain more tariff free access to goods around the World. Being outside the ECJ and controlling our borders gives a genuine opportunity to set policy as we see fit. We have to wait though to see what is negotiated.

No offence but as per my post I was looking for a link to a respectable news article or research piece describing the positives of Brexit from someone of power, influence or expertise as opposed to just what MattP off Foxestalk thinks will happen.

[Buce]

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

What do you think they can just send boats full of migrants over here? P&O will be stacked out ferrying them to Dover and there would be nothing we can do? How come all these migrants don't just catch a ferry from holland or Belgium then where we don't have border posts? If it's that easy?

 

There is a slight difference to how it works now, Strokes.

 

Once they make it into British waters (the three mile zone) we are obliged to process them - they are our problem, not France's; I wouldn't put it past our Gallic neighbours to not be trying too hard to stop refugees getting on to small craft.

[Strokes]

25 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

There is a slight difference to how it works now, Strokes.

 

Once they make it into British waters (the three mile zone) we are obliged to process them - they are our problem, not France's; I wouldn't put it past our Gallic neighbours to not be trying too hard to stop refugees getting on to small craft.

Under EU law?

[Buce]

Just now, Strokes said:

Under EU law?

 

I'm not sure what you're asking, mate.

[Strokes]

Just now, Buce said:

 

I'm not sure what you're asking, mate.

Sorry, is that process an EU obligation or an international one?