Brexit!

[HappyHamza]

3 minutes ago, MattP said:

Public certainly support voter ID.

 

If there's one thing we've learnt about asking the public it's: don't. 

 

And the fact that the majority of people have ID and that the majority can't see any problems with the idea is hardly novel. 

[HappyHamza]

9 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

We know that a long period of amendments etc, won’t go anywhere as there was never a majority for any of the indicative votes. Boris doesn’t want ‘bill fatigue’ to result in a ‘watered down’ version. 
 

it’s possible that a two week timetable could just about be acceptable to the govt but they won’t get that from the HOC as the 322 all want stuff in the bill that the govt don’t (and a majority cannot agree anyway) 

 

so a GE is the only way forward but the opposition down want that either !!

I expect the deal to get through eventually tbh. Think the MPs have got sick of the whole thing. 

Just expect amendments to change a raft of points like, for example, the fact it was hidden within the bill that MPs wouldn't be able to force an extension in a years time when the trade deal isnt complete on time. Utterly ludicrous. 

 

Though what Boris has brought home essentially splits the UK into two. Despite his dishonest bluster, the agreement means that not only will NI be in the customs union with the EU, it will have to take all new rules and laws and be subject to the ECJ. The Tories really need to drop 'and unionist' from their full name. 

 

 

[leicsmac]

Just now, HappyHamza said:

I expect the deal to get through eventually tbh. Think the MPs have got sick of the whole thing. 

Just expect amendments to change a raft of points like, for example, the fact it was hidden within the bill that MPs wouldn't be able to force an extension in a years time when the trade deal isnt complete on time. Utterly ludicrous. 

 

Though what Boris has brought home essentially splits the UK into two. Despite his dishonest bluster, the agreement means that not only will NI be in the customs union with the EU, it will have to take all new rules and laws and be subject to the ECJ. The Tories really need to drop 'and unionist' from their full name. 

 

 

Tbh I think any outcome henceforth splits the UK in two. I can't think of a single one that doesn't.

[HappyHamza]

Just now, leicsmac said:

Tbh I think any outcome henceforth splits the UK in two. I can't think of a single one that doesn't.

True but there is a difference between outcomes leaving us divided and this particular outcome leaving us legally split with a hard customs border (which, again, despite Boris' dishonest bluster, there will be).

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, HappyHamza said:

True but there is a difference between outcomes leaving us divided and this particular outcome leaving us legally split with a hard customs border (which, again, despite Boris' dishonest bluster, there will be).

From a legal standpoint, certainly. From an overall outcomes standpoint in terms of ill feeling and unrest, on that I'm unsure how much difference there is.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think the damage Brexit will do to science research collaboration is enough for me to be fed up with the idea, but.I also know that what I want right now would result in just as much blood on the floor as what is currently being proposed, if not more.

[Guest MattP]

15 minutes ago, HappyHamza said:

I expect the deal to get through eventually tbh. Think the MPs have got sick of the whole thing. 

Just expect amendments to change a raft of points like, for example, the fact it was hidden within the bill that MPs wouldn't be able to force an extension in a years time when the trade deal isnt complete on time. Utterly ludicrous.

You might be right.

 

But if this is now a three month extension we need a general election, Boris can throw his deal in the bin and we can campaign on getting an even better one actually doing what we should do - taking it down to the wire to drag out every concession we can without the Benn Act/Bercow/this parliament handcuffing the PM.

 

Then they can decide whether to vote that through or take us out on no deal.

[RobHawk]

"There is no other pill to take, so swallow the one that made you ill"

 

Recorded back in 1998 it suns up my feeling on Brexit in one simple line

[WigstonWanderer]

44 minutes ago, MattP said:

You might be right.

 

But if this is now a three month extension we need a general election, Boris can throw his deal in the bin and we can campaign on getting an even better one actually doing what we should do - taking it down to the wire to drag out every concession we can without the Benn Act/Bercow/this parliament handcuffing the PM.

 

Then they can decide whether to vote that through or take us out on no deal.

What sort of concessions do you envisage?

[HappyHamza]

53 minutes ago, MattP said:

You might be right.

 

But if this is now a three month extension we need a general election, Boris can throw his deal in the bin and we can campaign on getting an even better one actually doing what we should do - taking it down to the wire to drag out every concession we can without the Benn Act/Bercow/this parliament handcuffing the PM.

 

Then they can decide whether to vote that through or take us out on no deal.

 There are no concessions to be gained Matt. The argument that the Benn Act has stopped us getting some amazing new deal is ridiculous.  The EU have been consistent for the whole three years.  Ever since the UK designed the backstop, the EU have been clear that it does a job but if theUK can find another workable solution they'll go with that.  There is no workable solution.  What boris has done is swap a temporary backstop for a permanent border within the UK. And yet the right are lapping it up when it's clearly a worse position. What we need is to find a deal that's close to finding consensus - so across the views of the house, not just a narrow section of the tory party - and put it to the people in a referendum.  To be honest, i don't expect to get my wish on that, an election is more likely with corbyn seemingly more interested in that, but a referendum is the only true way to sort the issue out for good. 

[Guest MattP]

11 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

What sort of concessions do you envisage?

Probably very little in terms of the withdrawal agreement - but I'd like to see us right at the point of No Deal to see.

 

It would also give us more power when talking future trade in the next step of negotiations if we had a majority government prepared to walk away.

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, HappyHamza said:

 There are no concessions to be gained Matt. The argument that the Benn Act has stopped us getting some amazing new deal is ridiculous.  The EU have been consistent for the whole three years.  

I stopped reading at this point.

 

The EU has said on numerous occasions the backstop had to stay, it said the withdrawal agreement would never be re-opened and it said certain extensions wouldn't be granted.

 

All of it has proven to be total nonsense, just as Yanis Varoufakis always said it would be and he would know.

[WigstonWanderer]

21 minutes ago, MattP said:

I stopped reading at this point.

 

The EU has said on numerous occasions the backstop had to stay, it said the withdrawal agreement would never be re-opened and it said certain extensions wouldn't be granted.

 

All of it has proven to be total nonsense, just as Yanis Varoufakis always said it would be and he would know.

The EU originally offered something like the current deal but TM rejected it. After much negotiation they ended up with the Backstop. All Johnson has done is go back to the idea that TM rejected as she didn’t want to alienate the DUP, so not much of a victory there. When they said they wouldn’t reopen the WA, TM was still in charge and obviously there’d be no scope for the current arrangement. It’s Johnson who’s moved the Tory red lines. As some have said, the Backstop has been replaced with a Frontstop.

 

Not sure what you mean about certain extensions.

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

We know that a long period of amendments etc, won’t go anywhere as there was never a majority for any of the indicative votes. Boris doesn’t want ‘bill fatigue’ to result in a ‘watered down’ version. 
 

it’s possible that a two week timetable could just about be acceptable to the govt but they won’t get that from the HOC as the 322 all want stuff in the bill that the govt don’t (and a majority cannot agree anyway) 

 

so a GE is the only way forward but the opposition down want that either !!

 

Good interview with Ken Clarke on BBC Breakfast this morning - the voice of sanity (and I'm not a Tory).

Put him in charge for a couple of months before he retires & he'll sort out this mess. 

 

Assuming that the EU offers an extension of up to 3 months, if Govt is serious about Brexit bill they're in a strong position to "call the bluff" of Corbyn / parliament, if you see it like that.

Corbyn's first response yesterday was to offer to agree an alternative timetable. If the extension is 3 months, 2-3 weeks for bill would be enough & would allow time for an election a few weeks before Brexit deadline.

Govt could propose a 2-3 week timetable. If Parliament won't accept, the public will blame it, not the Govt.

 

Nobody wants "bill fatigue" or "Brexit fatigue" to result in an ill-considered outcome of any kind. The consequences are much too important, so proper scrutiny is required, not 2 days for critical legislation with massive, long-term impacts.

As for PM not wanting legislation "watered down"....that applies to every Govt. It's one of the elements of national parliamentary democracy (which Brexiteers used to like): you don't always get everything you want.

 

Let's stop a moment, though. The Govt has just won a vote for its Brexit bill by 30 votes, for the first time (something May never did)......and its reaction is to "pause" the legislation. 

 

That suggests to me that our jobshare PMs (Johnson & Cummings) have other goals:

- PM Johnson: To use - and risk - Brexit in a toxic, divisive election in pursuit of 5 years of unfettered power.

- PM Cummings: To achieve the hardest possible Brexit, preferably No Deal, by cynically abusing everyone & turning the British people against one another & against parliamentary democracy

 

Granted, a few of those Labour/Tory rebel MPs who backed the Brexit bill will seek to amend it - and may vote against it at final reading. But there's a fair chance the bill could get through, particularly if certain amendments are accepted.

Will Parliament really reject the bill if the Govt accepts amendments to firm up employment rights/environmental protection & allow Parliament a better way of extending the transition period to avoid leaving in December 2020 with no FTA?

If this was a democratic, non-divisive govt, it would at least give that a try. Hopefully it will, but I suspect that it has more cynical, destructive aims, between its two PMs.

 

[HappyHamza]

28 minutes ago, MattP said:

I stopped reading at this point.

 

The EU has said on numerous occasions the backstop had to stay, it said the withdrawal agreement would never be re-opened and it said certain extensions wouldn't be granted.

 

All of it has proven to be total nonsense, just as Yanis Varoufakis always said it would be and he would know.

Are you joking?

Have you ever been involved in any serious negotiations?

[Guest MattP]

Just now, HappyHamza said:

Are you joking?

Have you ever been involved in any serious negotiations?

Certainly have, affiliate agreements that often took months to conclude just as an individual - an absolute nightmare and a couple of times I did walk away rather than take terms I didn't see as worth it.

 

Yourself?

[Milo]

Any half decent opposition would have a field day in the current climate. Weak government, divisive policies, mistrust...

 

Wtf does Labour think it’s playing at? 

[HappyHamza]

23 minutes ago, MattP said:

Certainly have, affiliate agreements that often took months to conclude just as an individual - an absolute nightmare and a couple of times I did walk away rather than take terms I didn't see as worth it.

 

Yourself?

Yep, business partnerships and terms etc.

I've always found that a deal is sought when two parties want an outcome and those two parties both state clearly what their ideal outcome is before working to try to find a common position that does it's best to satisfy both.  Good negotiation is something involving mutual respect and positivity. The way the right talks about the trade negotiations as being us vs them Is setting us up to fail.

[Guest MattP]

5 minutes ago, HappyHamza said:

Yep, business partnerships and terms etc.

I've always found that a deal is sought when two parties want an outcome and those two parties both state clearly what their ideal outcome is before working to try to find a common position that does it's best to satisfy both.  Good negotiation is something involving mutual respect and positivity. The way the right talks about the trade negotiations as being us vs them Is setting us up to fail.

There is a World of difference between negotiation in business partnership to a negotiation that sees the conclusion of that negotiation become a business competitor.

 

The EU needs a find a balance that doesn't hurt their own people but also discourages anyone else from leaving the bloc, our government needs one that does the same but also satisfies the electorate that voted to leave.

 

It's different to anything either of us will have done. 

[Guest MattP]

Rumours of a Tories-Brexit pact electoral pact where they would put Boris deal v No Deal to the electorate afterwards. 

 

That's a pretty good idea I have to say and would surely unite the leave vote. 

 

BP steps aside in Tory marginals - Tory step aside in Midland/Northern seats that they can't win.

[ealingfox]

3 minutes ago, MattP said:

Rumours of a Tories-Brexit pact electoral pact where they would put Boris deal v No Deal to the electorate afterwards. 

 

That's a pretty good idea I have to say and would surely unite the leave vote. 

 

BP steps aside in Tory marginals - Tory step aside in Midland/Northern seats that they can't win.

 

Wtf is the point in that? A monumental waste of time and money.

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

Wtf is the point in that? A monumental waste of time and money.

Delivering a parliamentary majority for Brexit and then letting the people decide what sort of Brexit they want. 

 

FWIT I still don't see Boris taking it up.

[Strokes]

3 hours ago, HappyHamza said:

I expect the deal to get through eventually tbh. Think the MPs have got sick of the whole thing. 

Just expect amendments to change a raft of points like, for example, the fact it was hidden within the bill that MPs wouldn't be able to force an extension in a years time when the trade deal isnt complete on time. Utterly ludicrous

Yet your beloved EU negotiators agreed to it? Strange that.

Maybe they too are getting sick of the delays.

[Strokes]

46 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

 

Wtf is the point in that? A monumental waste of time and money.

Why is more democracy a problem?

[HappyHamza]

20 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Yet your beloved EU negotiators agreed to it? Strange that.

Maybe they too are getting sick of the delays.

The bill isnt the same at the withdrawal agreement. 

The withdrawal agreement doesn't consider the mechanisms for how the UK reaches decisions.

The bill is the UK way of implementing the agreement but they are separate things. 

[Strokes]

53 minutes ago, MattP said:

Rumours of a Tories-Brexit pact electoral pact where they would put Boris deal v No Deal to the electorate afterwards. 

 

That's a pretty good idea I have to say and would surely unite the leave vote. 

 

BP steps aside in Tory marginals - Tory step aside in Midland/Northern seats that they can't win.

Can you imagine this place if boris won a majority and the leader of the opposition was Nigel Farage. I know it’s pure fantasy but I can’t get my head around anyone voting labour anymore.