Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Canada I mean would satisfy Brexiteers, I referenced Norway as Tusk said both. That obviously wouldn't. 

 

For a Canada deal, they'd have had to find a solution to the Irish border issue - or accepted Customs checks in the Irish Sea, though, wouldn't they?

 

Also, they'd have struggled to get a parliamentary majority for it, I'm sure - lots of Soft Brexity Tories opposing, not to mention the DUP....

[Guest MattP]

8 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

For a Canada deal, they'd have had to find a solution to the Irish border issue - or accepted Customs checks in the Irish Sea, though, wouldn't they?

 

Also, they'd have struggled to get a parliamentary majority for it, I'm sure - lots of Soft Brexity Tories opposing, not to mention the DUP....

Of course, that was the major problem with it.

 

Would have been very hard to get through parliament - but probably easier than the one May is trying to get through. 

[Guest MattP]

Anyone watching the interviews on Ridge? 

 

Corbyn just said he didn't know how he would vote in a second referendum. Top man. (Although did say he voted for Remain and reform in the first)

[davieG]

So Raab the notional head of our Brexit negotiations that agreed a deal hardly anybodies happy with even to the point of being part of the Cabinet that decided to "go with it", resigns post publication of it,  gets a new job and then comes out with .......

 

Former Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab has criticised the government's "lack of political will and resolve" in dealing with the European Union.

Mr Raab, who quit on Thursday over the Brexit deal, told the Sunday Times the UK should not allow itself to be "bullied", and must be prepared to walk away from negotiations if necessary.

Mr Raab said if a deal could not be closed "on reasonable terms we need to be very honest with the country that we will not be bribed and blackmailed or bullied, and we will walk away".

He also warned against looking "like we're afraid of our own shadow".

"I think there is one thing that is missing and that is political will and resolve," he said. "I am not sure that message has ever landed."

 

Why did he not 'walk away' / resign sooner?

[Guest MattP]

You are the leader of the opposition ffs

 

 

[Dr The Singh]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

You are the leader of the opposition ffs

 

What do you expect, Dianne is a very demanding woman, and dicktaste his time.

[Buce]

Labour to force amendments that would block a no-deal Brexit

Keir Starmer says he has backing from Tory MPs and ministers to prevent disaster if Theresa May’s deal is voted down

 

Labour is planning to force a Commons vote within weeks that would make it impossible for Britain to crash out of the European Union without a deal, as fears grow about a disastrous hard Brexit if parliament rejects Theresa May’s agreement.

Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, is working on plans to amend key elements of Brexit legislation that still have to pass through the Commons, in order to prevent parliament ever approving the option.

He says he has had assurances from a number of Tory MPs who say they would help push his amendments through parliament to avoid chaos. It is understood that some of them are serving Conservative ministers.

 

With Labour, the 10 Democratic Unionist party MPs, and upwards of 40 Tory MPs ready to vote down May’s deal, senior Labour figures are aware that they need to avoid the possibility of being blamed for rejecting a Brexit agreement that was on the table and helping to trigger chaos that could lead to “no deal”.

Starmer told the Observer that Labour would make sure parliament offered a legislative route to make “no deal” impossible. “If the prime minister’s deal is rejected – and that’s looking increasingly likely – parliament will not just sit back and allow her to proceed with no deal,” he said.

“There are plenty of Conservative MPs who have come up to me to say that they will not countenance the UK crashing out of the EU without an agreement. There is a clear majority in parliament against no deal, and Labour will work across the Commons to prevent no deal. On the government’s own analysis, over 50 changes to legislation would be needed for a no-deal outcome, so there will be no shortage of opportunities to pass binding votes on this issue.”

Many Labour MPs in Leave constituencies had flirted with the idea of backing May’s deal on the grounds that their constituents want to see Brexit delivered, and that the alternatives of crashing out of Europe without an agreement or holding a second referendum would be unacceptable to many voters.

Labour whips are now confident, however, that very few – if any – Labour MPs will back May’s deal because they have concluded it would also be disastrous for their constituents, leaving Britain locked into the EU’s economic system for the foreseeable future but with no say in setting the rules that govern it. Two Labour MPs who had suggested they might back May’s deal, Gareth Snell and Ruth Smeeth, both said last week that they would not back it.

Analysis by the Institute for Government reveals that the Brexit department’s no-deal technical notices commit the government before next March to the creation or expansion of 15 quangos, further legislation in 51 areas and the negotiation of 40 new international agreements either with the EU or other countries.

Labour’s current policy is to push for a general election to resolve the Brexit deadlock, but only after May’s deal is voted down. If it fails it is keeping “all options open”, including a second referendum. Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act an early general election can only come about if a no-confidence motion is tabled in the government and at least two-thirds of the whole House backs it – highly unlikely, as Tory MPs would vote against – or, more likely, if a motion of no confidence is passed by a simple majority and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days.

A debate is now under way at the top of the party over how soon Labour should table a motion of no confidence in the government. Some believe that anger among the DUP at the Brexit deal could open the way for the government to lose a confidence vote. At present, the DUP is relied upon to prop up May’s minority administration.

Some insiders believe the best moment to strike will be immediately after May loses a vote on her Brexit deal. Launching a no confidence motion against her would also fulfil Jeremy Corbyn’s pledge that he will seek a general election before backing other options, such as a second referendum.

Should the government lose a no confidence motion, Labour would have a 14-day period to attempt to form a new administration or an election is called. However, while some senior figures say the time for such a putsch is “getting close”, others are warning that it could backfire.

“Any false move by us will have possibly dire consequences if we misunderstand the mood in the country,” said one shadow cabinet member. “Any premature attempt by us which fails will look like either we want to overturn the referendum result or more likely that we see it as an opportunity to make an unprincipled dash to grab power.”

Meanwhile, Labour backers of a second referendum believe that the leadership is now facing a “tidal wave” of demands for the party to back the idea once May’s deal has been voted down.

“From every part of the party, unions, MPs and members, there are growing demands,” said one senior MP. “Huge parts of the parliamentary party now talk supportively of it, and it has to be where we end up.”

[Innovindil]

12 minutes ago, Buce said:

Labour to force amendments that would block a no-deal Brexit

Keir Starmer says he has backing from Tory MPs and ministers to prevent disaster if Theresa May’s deal is voted down

 

Labour is planning to force a Commons vote within weeks that would make it impossible for Britain to crash out of the European Union without a deal, as fears grow about a disastrous hard Brexit if parliament rejects Theresa May’s agreement.

Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, is working on plans to amend key elements of Brexit legislation that still have to pass through the Commons, in order to prevent parliament ever approving the option.

He says he has had assurances from a number of Tory MPs who say they would help push his amendments through parliament to avoid chaos. It is understood that some of them are serving Conservative ministers.

 

With Labour, the 10 Democratic Unionist party MPs, and upwards of 40 Tory MPs ready to vote down May’s deal, senior Labour figures are aware that they need to avoid the possibility of being blamed for rejecting a Brexit agreement that was on the table and helping to trigger chaos that could lead to “no deal”.

Starmer told the Observer that Labour would make sure parliament offered a legislative route to make “no deal” impossible. “If the prime minister’s deal is rejected – and that’s looking increasingly likely – parliament will not just sit back and allow her to proceed with no deal,” he said.

“There are plenty of Conservative MPs who have come up to me to say that they will not countenance the UK crashing out of the EU without an agreement. There is a clear majority in parliament against no deal, and Labour will work across the Commons to prevent no deal. On the government’s own analysis, over 50 changes to legislation would be needed for a no-deal outcome, so there will be no shortage of opportunities to pass binding votes on this issue.”

Many Labour MPs in Leave constituencies had flirted with the idea of backing May’s deal on the grounds that their constituents want to see Brexit delivered, and that the alternatives of crashing out of Europe without an agreement or holding a second referendum would be unacceptable to many voters.

Labour whips are now confident, however, that very few – if any – Labour MPs will back May’s deal because they have concluded it would also be disastrous for their constituents, leaving Britain locked into the EU’s economic system for the foreseeable future but with no say in setting the rules that govern it. Two Labour MPs who had suggested they might back May’s deal, Gareth Snell and Ruth Smeeth, both said last week that they would not back it.

Analysis by the Institute for Government reveals that the Brexit department’s no-deal technical notices commit the government before next March to the creation or expansion of 15 quangos, further legislation in 51 areas and the negotiation of 40 new international agreements either with the EU or other countries.

Labour’s current policy is to push for a general election to resolve the Brexit deadlock, but only after May’s deal is voted down. If it fails it is keeping “all options open”, including a second referendum. Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act an early general election can only come about if a no-confidence motion is tabled in the government and at least two-thirds of the whole House backs it – highly unlikely, as Tory MPs would vote against – or, more likely, if a motion of no confidence is passed by a simple majority and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days.

A debate is now under way at the top of the party over how soon Labour should table a motion of no confidence in the government. Some believe that anger among the DUP at the Brexit deal could open the way for the government to lose a confidence vote. At present, the DUP is relied upon to prop up May’s minority administration.

Some insiders believe the best moment to strike will be immediately after May loses a vote on her Brexit deal. Launching a no confidence motion against her would also fulfil Jeremy Corbyn’s pledge that he will seek a general election before backing other options, such as a second referendum.

Should the government lose a no confidence motion, Labour would have a 14-day period to attempt to form a new administration or an election is called. However, while some senior figures say the time for such a putsch is “getting close”, others are warning that it could backfire.

“Any false move by us will have possibly dire consequences if we misunderstand the mood in the country,” said one shadow cabinet member. “Any premature attempt by us which fails will look like either we want to overturn the referendum result or more likely that we see it as an opportunity to make an unprincipled dash to grab power.”

Meanwhile, Labour backers of a second referendum believe that the leadership is now facing a “tidal wave” of demands for the party to back the idea once May’s deal has been voted down.

“From every part of the party, unions, MPs and members, there are growing demands,” said one senior MP. “Huge parts of the parliamentary party now talk supportively of it, and it has to be where we end up.”

If they do that then it's automatic second referendum isn't it? How can you possibly negotiate from such a position. 

[simFox]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

Anyone watching the interviews on Ridge? 

 

Corbyn just said he didn't know how he would vote in a second referendum. Top man. (Although did say he voted for Remain and reform in the first)

He's a known antiEU/Leaver. He's just canvassing votes. Any remainer putting their faith in Comrade Corbyn would be seriously misplaced.

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, simFox said:

He's a known antiEU/Leaver. He's just canvassing votes. Any remainer putting their faith in Comrade Corbyn would be seriously misplaced.

I know that, but there are some people out there that still believe he wants to Remain.

 

To new fair to him, May has answered the same. Anyone would think they are lying to us.

[bovril]

Leave-voting Nadine Dorries complains that May's deal would leave us "without MEP's". Go figure. 

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, Buce said:

Analysis by the Institute for Government reveals that the Brexit department’s no-deal technical notices commit the government before next March to the creation or expansion of 15 quangos, further legislation in 51 areas and the negotiation of 40 new international agreements either with the EU or other countries.

 

[WigstonWanderer]

22 hours ago, The Doctor said:

Not really Mays fault tbh, it was always going to damage whatever party was in charge because the vision the leave campaign sold was never achievable. The actual terms of the deal are near irrelevant in the criticism of it, it was never going to satisfy the Eurosceptics. Only brexit strategy that might have worked for her was to throw last year's election and leave Corbyn holding the time bomb.

Not really sure what people expected. When you go into negotiations and your only leverage is the threat of shooting yourself in the head, you can’t really expect much.

[WigstonWanderer]

19 hours ago, simFox said:

Don't know if this haa been posted, but pretty much sums it up for me..

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/10/tony-abbott-how-to-save-brexit/

Australia’s spokesman for the coal industry

[simFox]

1 hour ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Australia’s spokesman for the coal industry

He's an ex prime minister.

[Smudge]

7 hours ago, Innovindil said:

If they do that then it's automatic second referendum isn't it? How can you possibly negotiate from such a position. 

I'm not sure of the outcome but no-one can negotiate with these caveats

[st albans fox]

The eu are proposing that the targeted latest end date for extension period is end 2022...... does that only leave the n Ireland ‘issue’ as the main stumbling block for many mp’s to support this deal, voting whilst ‘holding their noses’ .......

[yorkie1999]

In the event of a no deal brexit, what would our position in the Eurovision Song Contest be? No one has bothered to mention that.

[The Doctor]

10 hours ago, bovril said:

Leave-voting Nadine Dorries complains that May's deal would leave us "without MEP's". Go figure. 

- "it's unacceptable that leaving the EU means not being involved in the EUs parliament". Possibly the second most stupid remark I've ever heard a politician make (top will always be Malcolm Turnbull declaring that Australia gets to decide whether the laws of mathematics apply there, because it's a sovereign nation)

[bovril]

1 minute ago, The Doctor said:

- "it's unacceptable that leaving the EU means not being involved in the EUs parliament". Possibly the second most stupid remark I've ever heard a politician make (top will always be Malcolm Turnbull declaring that Australia gets to decide whether the laws of mathematics apply there, because it's a sovereign nation)

After Schrodinger's immigrant, we now have Schrodinger's Brexit.  

[WigstonWanderer]

6 hours ago, simFox said:

He's an ex prime minister.

Yes I know, I live in Australia

Edited 19 November 2018 by WigstonWanderer

[Vardinio'sCat]

9 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Not really sure what people expected. When you go into negotiations and your only leverage is the threat of shooting yourself in the head, you can’t really expect much.

 

Have you ever seen Blazing Saddles? That's us...

[WigstonWanderer]

7 hours ago, Vardinio'sCat said:

 

Have you ever seen Blazing Saddles? That's us...

For a minute there I thought we were in trouble....

[Wymsey]

Have heard of reports that some people are topping up their essential British food stock for cheap now in large quantities prior to the potential negative Brexit effect.

Hope this fiasco doesn't drag on as it seems more are getting wound up by it all as each day passes.

[simFox]

9 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Yes I know, I live in Australia

How are you getting on over there without EU membership?