Brexit!

[Ali Begbie]

47 minutes ago, String fellow said:

Does anyone take Jo Swinson seriously when she says 'We WILL revoke Article 50 on day one'? Shouldn't that read 'We WOULD revoke Article 50 on day one'? The conditional tense is required, since her completely undemocratic statement is conditional upon (a) the assumption that the next GE will occur prior to the UK leaving the EU, and (b) the assumption that the Liberal (un)Democrats will win the GE with an overall majority. Imo, she's living in cloud-cuckoo land and has clearly taken leave of her senses, rather like David Steel did when he told his party conference to 'go back to your constituencies and prepare for government'. Whilst having a go at her, I'd also like to make the point that she seemed quite happy to accept the result of the Scottish Independence referendum, despite her wish to nullify the result of the Brexit referendum.     

The logic is that if they win a majority in the election that will give them the democratic mandate to revoke.

 

So it's not going to happen. Obvs. But it's a fairly interesting approach.  Are the Lib Dems now going to try and push themselves as the anti-establishment party? 

 

The next GE will give voters 3 clear options on Brexit. It is just a shame it can't be a referendum instead.

 

 

 

 

[LiberalFox]

22 minutes ago, HappyHamza said:

I rather like the idea of a government building a deal then giving the reality of the options people have - all the trade offs we have to consider - then letting us decide.  Why does the government have to push an opinion when it's done it's best to fulfil its mandate and then asks what we want? Its clear it's the governments deal. 

 

The other two parties have pushed to the extremes and, amusingly, corbyn is actually the one in the middle ground. 

Well you have 4 options:

 

Brexit Party - Leave without a withdrawal agreement.

Tories - Leave, maybe with a withdrawal agreement (negotiated by Boris).

Labour - Referendum between Leave with a withdrawal agreement (negotiated by Corbyn) and Remain.

Lib Dems - Remain.

[Tommo220]

11 minutes ago, bovril said:

At the time of the Lisbon treaty wasn't it? 8 years before the '16 referendum. 

 

And I agree that Corbyn's new position is quite absurd, as Kopfkino points out why on earth is the EU going to negotiate a WA with the British government if that government aren't going to support it? 

This isn't too dissimilar  to the situation that we find ourselves in at the minute though, is it?  Why would the EU bother to negotiate with Boris when he has no working majority in government, and therefore no ability to get an agreement back home?

 

 

What a bloody mess.  We've got a divided nation, parliament prorogued, the government defending its actions in the supreme court and Boris Johnson in No. 10.  Let's all just go back to 2015.  Football was better, the nation was better and Boris was just a bumbling TV personality only really famous for riding zip lines and rugby tackling toddlers.

 

[bovril]

3 minutes ago, Tommo220 said:

This isn't too dissimilar  to the situation that we find ourselves in at the minute though, is it?  Why would the EU bother to negotiate with Boris when he has no working majority in government, and therefore no ability to get an agreement back home?

 

 

What a bloody mess.  We've got a divided nation, parliament prorogued, the government defending its actions in the supreme court and Boris Johnson in No. 10.  Let's all just go back to 2015.  Football was better, the nation was better and Boris was just a bumbling TV personality only really famous for riding zip lines and rugby tackling toddlers.

 

Sometimes I wonder if we made a pact with the devil - giving up the continued stability of Western liberal democracy for one season of Leicester City glory. 

[Tommo220]

3 minutes ago, bovril said:

Sometimes I wonder if we made a pact with the devil - giving up the continued stability of Western liberal democracy for one season of Leicester City glory. 

Worth it......

 

[Ali Begbie]

11 minutes ago, bovril said:

Sometimes I wonder if we made a pact with the devil - giving up the continued stability of Western liberal democracy for one season of Leicester City glory. 

 

Worth it.

 

 

[Alf Bentley]

35 minutes ago, bovril said:

 

And I agree that Corbyn's new position is quite absurd, as Kopfkino points out why on earth is the EU going to negotiate a WA with the British government if that government aren't going to support it? 

 

Genuine question........... Has Labour said that it will renegotiate the WA?

If it has, I take your point, but I can't find any reference to that.

 

It has said that it would negotiate a new Brexit deal, but couldn't all the issues that it wants to renegotiate come under the Political Declaration / prospective Agreement on the Future Relationship?

It wants to renegotiate on CU, SM relationship, employment/environmental guarantees etc.

But would it have major issues over the existing WA (divorce payment, EU/UK citizens' rights, Irish border/backstop, transition period) if Labour itself had control of negotiations over the future relationship?

Surely, a big part of Labour's previous rejection of May's WA was about Brexit happening via WA & the Tories then having carte blanche to negotiate a deregulated, arm's-length future relationship - not about the contents of the WA per se?

 

Feel free to tell me if I'm being naive or over-thinking, tying my brain in knots and making an arse of myself! 

 

@Kopfkino @bovril

 

[The Guvnor]

Why oh why do they hold interviews outside the Supreme Court with all those fcuking idiots shouting , impossible to concentrate or hear anything but their hysterical ramblings.

[simFox]

Barnier doing some practice back tracking. Obviously got a whiff of BoJo's tactics and is getting ready to draught his 11th hour agreement...

[WigstonWanderer]

I do hope that the Supreme Court reassert the supremacy of Parliament by ruling the government’s prorogation of Parliament illegal. This has ramifications well beyond Brexit. The UK’s largely unwritten constitution is mostly based on conventions, so someone like Johnson can otherwise abuse the situation fairly easily unless limits are imposed on prerogative powers.

 

What’s to prevent a tinpot dictator shutting down parliament for lengthy periods to avoid scrutiny? If the courts cannot provide protection, then who can?

 

Having seen direct democracy in action, surely we can agree that representative democracy is far superior.

[Leicester_Loyal]

2 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

I do hope that the Supreme Court reassert the supremacy of Parliament by ruling the government’s prorogation of Parliament illegal. This has ramifications well beyond Brexit. The UK’s largely unwritten constitution is mostly based on conventions, so someone like Johnson can otherwise abuse the situation fairly easily unless limits are imposed on prerogative powers.

 

What’s to prevent a tinpot dictator shutting down parliament for lengthy periods to avoid scrutiny? If the courts cannot provide protection, then who can?

 

Having seen direct democracy in action, surely we can agree that representative democracy is far superior.

Usually happens once a year every year. Also usually happens when we get a new Government.

[Alf Bentley]

24 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Usually happens once a year every year. Also usually happens when we get a new Government.

 

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-parliament-prorogation-explained

 

"House of Commons stats reveal that since 2010, the average prorogation has been eight days long. And that figure has been dragged up by a relatively long 20-day period in 2014, which included the European parliamentary elections and the Whitsun recess. The same report finds that “in the last 40 years Parliament has never been prorogued for longer than three weeks: in most cases it has been prorogued for only a week or less.”

The Queen has approved an order to suspend parliament “no earlier than Monday 9 September and no later than Thursday 12 September” until 14 October. That means [this] prorogation could last up to 34 days".

 

So, this is by far the longest prorogation for at least 40 years (other sources say since WW2 or since 1930).

 

At the time of the biggest crisis since WW2, our democracy is being suspended by a period unprecedented for many decades!

[Carl the Llama]

6 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-parliament-prorogation-explained

 

"House of Commons stats reveal that since 2010, the average prorogation has been eight days long. And that figure has been dragged up by a relatively long 20-day period in 2014, which included the European parliamentary elections and the Whitsun recess. The same report finds that “in the last 40 years Parliament has never been prorogued for longer than three weeks: in most cases it has been prorogued for only a week or less.”

The Queen has approved an order to suspend parliament “no earlier than Monday 9 September and no later than Thursday 12 September” until 14 October. That means [this] prorogation could last up to 34 days".

 

So, this is by far the longest prorogation for at least 40 years (other sources say since WW2 or since 1930).

 

At the time of the biggest crisis since WW2, our democracy is being suspended by a period unprecedented for many decades!

Thaaaaat's democracy!

[Leicester_Loyal]

If they haven't sorted it in over 3 years is the extra week going to make any difference?

 

Also no deal has been taken off the table, so parliament have nothing to worry about now, no?

Edited 18 September 2019 by Leicester_Loyal

[WigstonWanderer]

3 hours ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Usually happens once a year every year. Also usually happens when we get a new Government.

Does anyone seriously believe that this is just a normal prorogation?

Edited 18 September 2019 by WigstonWanderer

[StanSP]

6 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Does anyone seriously believe that this is just a normal prorogation?

The deluded Brexiteers that think everything will be rosy and shiny when we're out of the EU...

[StanSP]

 

 

[Leicester_Loyal]

1 hour ago, StanSP said:

The deluded Brexiteers that think everything will be rosy and shiny when we're out of the EU...

You seem a very bitter person Stan. I've not seen many Brexiteers on here who have claimed it will all be easy? Why are you so angry and spiteful all the time? Relax, take a step back and realise you're spouting mean words over the internet.

[Leicester_Loyal]

45 minutes ago, StanSP said:

 

 

We're also paying the EU a billion every month on top of our usual contributions due to the fact we haven't left yet.

 

So bascally, if we'd been allowed to leave after 2 years like Cameron stated we would, we'd have an extra 3 billion pounds a month right now.

 

Who's fault are you trying to suggest the above post is? People who voted leave? Those 'deluded' ordinary voters?

[StanSP]

19 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

You seem a very bitter person Stan. I've not seen many Brexiteers on here who have claimed it will all be easy? Why are you so angry and spiteful all the time? Relax, take a step back and realise you're spouting mean words over the internet.

What mean words ? 

 

Not bitter at all by the way. Just frustrated, angered at all the mess that's been created by corrupt politicians and liars in the past few years (on all sides) who have dug this country right in to the ground. Breaking promises, creating false hopes, under-delivering. But hey, who gives a shit about people eh? As long as pockets continue to get lined and corruption still gets covered up, they'll continue to do what they do without actually doing anything.

 

Majority of politicians may say they care. Their actions speak differently. 

 

I don't get why I should 'relax' and just let it all flow by without saying anything about something I care about strongly. I've not once been bitter or abused/offended anyone with mean words however on this topic. I'm surprised you think this. 

[StanSP]

24 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

We're also paying the EU a billion every month on top of our usual contributions due to the fact we haven't left yet.

 

So bascally, if we'd been allowed to leave after 2 years like Cameron stated we would, we'd have an extra 3 billion pounds a month right now.

 

Who's fault are you trying to suggest the above post is? People who voted leave? Those 'deluded' ordinary voters?

That's why it says 'emergency funding', not anything about what could have been done a couple of years ago. 

 

Who's fault? Cameron for instigating the vote in the first place? 

Maybe the government(s) since then that have failed our NHS (I'm wholeheartedly behind those that say 'the NHS isn't failing, the government have failed our NHS'. Funny how they can miraculously pull billions of pounds out of thin air for Brexit funding but desperately struggled to find much for the NHS. But hey, if nurses and staff use food banks at an alarmingly increasing it's fine eh? 

 

Didn't May say something about magic money trees when criticising Corbyn? I may be wrong, not quite sure who. 

[Kopfkino]

50 minutes ago, StanSP said:

That's why it says 'emergency funding', not anything about what could have been done a couple of years ago. 

 

Who's fault? Cameron for instigating the vote in the first place? 

Maybe the government(s) since then that have failed our NHS (I'm wholeheartedly behind those that say 'the NHS isn't failing, the government have failed our NHS'. Funny how they can miraculously pull billions of pounds out of thin air for Brexit funding but desperately struggled to find much for the NHS. But hey, if nurses and staff use food banks at an alarmingly increasing it's fine eh? 

 

Didn't May say something about magic money trees when criticising Corbyn? I may be wrong, not quite sure who. 

 

We're plunging an extra £20bn a year into the NHS black hole by 2023. You're talking about a one off £2bn.

[Spiritwalker]

11 hours ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

If they haven't sorted it in over 3 years is the extra week going to make any difference?

 

Also no deal has been taken off the table, so parliament have nothing to worry about now, no?

I think this goes deeper than Brexit and sets a dangerous precedent.

[Tommo220]

1 hour ago, Kopfkino said:

 

We're plunging an extra £20bn a year into the NHS black hole by 2023. You're talking about a one off £2bn.

"black hole" is such an alarmist term and doesnt really do the situation justice..

 

The UK is nowhere near the biggest spender on healthcare in the EU.  in fact as a % of GDP, were currently barely even top 10, so i'd say that £20bn in to that "black hole" is most likely money well spent, especially given the amazing service these underpaid, overstretched miracle workers give daily (to which i experienced first hand not too long ago).

 

it also doesn't take into consideration the fact that the NHS has been experiencing under funding for years (something that the government admitted as far back as 2012). 

[The Guvnor]

10 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Does anyone seriously believe that this is just a normal prorogation?

Is anything currently in politics normal?