Meat Wad

Brexit, WTF

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Laser1 said:

Seeing it put like that, this is just astonishing. 

I'm not surprised that Barnier et al will or are taking a more aggressive stance from here on in.   I'd love to be a fly on the wall in Strassbourg and hear them say, in the privacy of their office, that the UK can ..... shove it!!

Bercow wisely declined to put that amendment to the house. Say what you like about the Speaker but he is one savvy guy when it comes to running the children under his care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this amendment can be done again by the MV3, but after talking about it and wanting to vote about it saying now I am for it but will not vote for it just is  to political for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Not surprising. Their only escape route to A50 revoked or a 2nd Referendum. Watching them Brexiteer piggies squeal now as the heat is put on is gratifying.

But they squeal earlier then i thought, still a mv3 and 15 days to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I right to understand that a new referendum has just been voted down as well ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, for now. Will be amended later is the political game. The timing is wrong :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this time a 2nd referendum has been voted down. It wouldn't have passed anyway but Labour abstained on the grounds that it would invalidate a further amendment looking to guarantee an Extension. There will be another vote on a 2nd referendum another time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LeoV said:

But they squeal earlier then i thought, still a mv3 and 15 days to go.

They have only just started squealing..big over read by Rees Mogg of Dominant Pig Theory... May starting to look the smarter pig than many think here.

 

images (3).png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you do that pig test ?
Would not surprise that if on MV3 large group of ERG and DUP agrees but not all, and it not being enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May narrowly defeats bid to let MPs take control of parliamentary timetable by majority of two

The Benn amendment has been defeated by 314 votes to 312 - a majority of two.

Close call, and was a way for indicative votes next week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

412 /202 for an extension

only takes one of the 27 countries to give a nay

Guy Verhofstadt just mentioned on telly that if they come with a request for an extension, at least there should be another vote on the question what they really want, something positive ... fat chance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally a government motion that passes.
Extension allowed, May have to ask EU for that.

So basically "let's just agree that if you vote against my deal next Wednesday then we will have less than 24 hours to dream up a new plan."

And Labour now talking about the need for a 2d ref, politics....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If labour had voted for a 2nd referendum at this stage ot would have failed or it would have taken down the ammendment on indicative votes

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

What I don't understand is your sister not owning up her kids are yours??

Okay, you win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, rgeek said:

If labour had voted for a 2nd referendum at this stage ot would have failed or it would have taken down the ammendment on indicative votes

The twist and turns of politics.

On a program here a top ex EU politician, respect for May, she lost control over the house, her party and her government but still could succeed in her tactics.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Today's decision to charge only one British soldier with murder in connection with the deaths in Derry on Bloody Sunday, 1972, will offer an excuse to some for a return to violence in Northern Ireland, as a reaction to the perception that the British state is not interested in the welfare of its citizens in that part of the UK."

 

Discuss in the context of the current complications caused by Northern Ireland for Brexit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/13/2019 at 1:48 PM, IPLore said:

To resolve the quagmire, a referendum would have to present 3 unambiguous options and require the voters to indicate their first and second choice.

The options would be:-

1. Remain

2. Leave the EU on the terms of the agreement negotiated between the UK and the EU. 

3. Leave with No Deal

If any of the three options commands a majority , then it immediately is selected.

If none of the options commands a majority (and we have to acknowledge that this is at least a strong possibility) then if one of the options has a 2nd choice majority, then that is selected.

If none of the options commands a majority of 2nd choice then, the option with the least 1st choice options the votes get allocated to the other 2 options based on the voters 2nd choice.

That would hardly be fair though, would it? Splitting the leave vote.

I suspect that a number of remain voters would not want the stays quo maintained - perhaps that should be on the ballot.  I.e.

1. Remain on current terms

2. Remain only if, say, migration rules are changed and plans for EU army is dropped

3. Leave on May deal

4. Leave on no deal

Please don’t take this as any hint as to which way I voted. I have never declared that and never will.  Both sides are playing silly games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

2. Remain only if, say, migration rules are changed and plans for EU army is dropped

 

been smoking some weird mushrooms ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sosoomii said:

That would hardly be fair though, would it? Splitting the leave vote.

 

The leave vote is already split. That is why the UK has not left!

Nevertheless, that is why each voter should have a second choice, to allow leavers to coalesce around a compromise.

My guess is that based on a first and second choice poll, the majority would overwhelmingly reach a compromise of a Deal Brexit.

The problem with the current process is that the Leave/Remain vote was so close and the majority in favor of leaving was so narrow that it has allowed minority extremists to take over Brexit.   Thus, purely as an example:  If the voters in favor of Brexit were 52%, it would only take 3% to control and over influence the process. Without that 3% extremist minority, the moderate leavers would be left with only 49%.  This is a partial explanation of what is happening in Parliament. Parliament is simply reflecting the impact that a radical minority can have on a majority position with a narrow majority.  

However if those leavers would be allowed to express a second choice, they would probably say "Well our first preference is to remain, but given a majority want to leave, we would much rather support the rational moderate leavers than the extremists.  The "leave with a deal" option would be seen as a compromise that most could live with and the "outsize" influence that a small minority of ERG members have had hitherto would quickly be diminished.   

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

That would hardly be fair though, would it? Splitting the leave vote.

I suspect that a number of remain voters would not want the stays quo maintained - perhaps that should be on the ballot.  I.e.

1. Remain on current terms

2. Remain only if, say, migration rules are changed and plans for EU army is dropped

3. Leave on May deal

4. Leave on no deal

Please don’t take this as any hint as to which way I voted. I have never declared that and never will.  Both sides are playing silly games.

How can you make a ballot in the UK conditional on a what's happening in Europe?

We already had an exclusion from 'Ever closer union', we would only have had to be part of a venture like that if we'd agreed to it anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brexit means leaving on the 29th, but Davies and May voted against that before there is a deal. You would not have thought that a few weeks ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if I recap correctly;
with a non binding; No No deal
with a binding; government must ask for a delay.
and no amendment been pushed for more negotiations.

It looks like the ERG is out of steam, they only can simmer.
And No deal is now very unlikely.
And MV3 will be close if ERG DUP supports it in large numbers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sosoomii said:

That would hardly be fair though, would it? Splitting the leave vote.

I suspect that a number of remain voters would not want the stays quo maintained - perhaps that should be on the ballot.  I.e.

1. Remain on current terms

2. Remain only if, say, migration rules are changed and plans for EU army is dropped

3. Leave on May deal

4. Leave on no deal

Please don’t take this as any hint as to which way I voted. I have never declared that and never will.  Both sides are playing silly games.

As they say on Sesame St. “one of these is not like the other”.

Option 1, 3, and 4 are all within the ability of the UK gov’t / parliament to deliver.

Option 1, revoke article 50, done.

Option 3, sign existing deal negotiated between UK and EU, done.

Option 4, do nothing allow article 50 clock to run down, enjoy WTO terms.

 

Option 2 requires the EU (27 other governments etc.) to engage and agree. This is just not something that can be offered to the UK electorate by the UK governement on its own. Its the equivalent of the promises on the side of the buses...just not on offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Black Sox said:

Discuss in the context of the current complications caused by Northern Ireland for Brexit.

That emotions still run deep and that it only needs a spark to kick the whole sordid thing off again.

F8cking around with people of that mindset is a very dangerous game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with second choices is that they are second choices.  So the three way choice with 2nd choices as being binding is never going to be acceptable.  

Honestly, I can't see any structure of voting that will work in the current project.  For example, if the process elicits a 2nd choice (leave with a deal) and then is  confirmed with a binding binary choice between the highest two choices, e.g. leave with deal, as against leave with no deal, how is that markedly different than what is going on now, in these last few days? 

The real problem is one of information asymmetry.  The first referendum was conducted blind, and led to the current moral morass.  Lies, damn lies, and statistics were used to push the blind public around.  And now, it is pure gamesmanship at work.   seed the wind, reap the whirlwind stuff.

If a second choice approach is going to work, it needs enlightened leadership.  But there is a leadership vacuum in the UK on Brexit.  True leadership would have consulted, would have prepared a series of options, would have led a rational choice in the house of commons, and would have put the question back to the people for confirmation.  

People admire May for her tenacity, but that is not leadership.  Most authoritarians are tenacious.  Flexibility and dynamism are the hallmarks of great leadership.  There is precious little of that on the front benches.  And yet we see in backbenches many examples of this kind of behaviour. 

What a strange place Westminster is.  As much as  soft "Oi" culture, as expressed in a Guy Ritchie motion picture, is fun, it is dark and disturbing.  The heart of oak is a heart of darkness...

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point I was making is that that is why a second referendum with remain on it is not workable,  evermind not fair.  Yes, the leave vote is split.  So is the remain vote, it just hasn’t been explored to the same extent.  But there certainly isn’t a unified vision of remain.

If the remain options can’t offer what people want (which we don’t know and can’t offer without EU consent) then remain options shouldn’t be on the card. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

The point I was making is that that is why a second referendum with remain on it is not workable,  evermind not fair.  Yes, the leave vote is split.  So is the remain vote, it just hasn’t been explored to the same extent.  But there certainly isn’t a unified vision of remain.

If the remain options can’t offer what people want (which we don’t know and can’t offer without EU consent) then remain options shouldn’t be on the card. :blink:

You have been watching too much Brexit TV.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

The point I was making is that that is why a second referendum with remain on it is not workable,  evermind not fair.  Yes, the leave vote is split.  So is the remain vote, it just hasn’t been explored to the same extent.  But there certainly isn’t a unified vision of remain.

If the remain options can’t offer what people want (which we don’t know and can’t offer without EU consent) then remain options shouldn’t be on the card. 

 

In essence you are saying if you can’t offer people what they want they don’t offer them anything...

Unfortunately that is not an option. A decision has to be made between rescinding article 50, accepting the negotiated deal, or choosing to exit on WTO terms. That’s reality.

Inaction produces exit on WTO terms. Unless that is the preferred option of the ones available then the UK would be best to choose another option from the other two.

There are all sorts of fantasies one could dream up that people might want and would even vote for...unfortunately  voting for fantasies doesn’t help (arguably it was a fantasy of what Brexit would look like that produced this situation) but hopefully UK leaders have learned a bit since the referendum.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

The point I was making is that that is why a second referendum with remain on it is not workable,  evermind not fair.  Yes, the leave vote is split.  So is the remain vote, it just hasn’t been explored to the same extent.  But there certainly isn’t a unified vision of remain.

If the remain options can’t offer what people want (which we don’t know and can’t offer without EU consent) then remain options shouldn’t be on the card. 

This makes no fucking sense. 

The point of a referendum is decide what people want, if you decide before hand what people want then why have one at all? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MiddayGun said:

This makes no fucking sense. 

The point of a referendum is decide what people want, if you decide before hand what people want then why have one at all? 

In this case it doesn’t really matter what people want...a choice has to be made of available options. No point choosing options that are not available. Not choosing is choosing...WTO terms.

Obviously after choosing from the available options the UK can pursue further changes to its relationship with the EU.

Negotiate a different path for the EU...

Rescind article 50 and then invoke it again later when you have your act together.

Exit on WTO terms (or with offered deal) and then negotiate different arrangements.

But any path starts with one of those options, rescind, deal on offer, WTO terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If leave options can't offer what people want (which are sunlit upland fantasies and nobody can offer them) then leave options shouldn't be on the cards.

Leave campaign is talking to Hungary, Poland and Italy too make them refuse an extension. Time to repeat that, it is not gossip, it is actual UK politicians at work.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, KC375 said:

In this case it doesn’t really matter what people want...a choice has to be made of available options. No point choosing options that are not available. Not choosing is choosing...WTO terms.

 

Obviously after choosing from the available options the UK can pursue further changes to its relationship with the EU.

 

Negotiate a different path for the EU...

 

Rescind article 50 and then invoke it again later when you have your act together.

 

Exit on WTO terms (or with offered deal) and then negotiate different arrangements.

 

But any path starts with one of those options, rescind, deal on offer, WTO terms.

 

 

My point is that saying 'Remain' shouldn't be on the options list because its 'not what people want' is stupid, the whole point of it is to give people a choice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LeoV said:

if leave options can't offer what people want (which are sunlit upland fantasies and nobody can offer them) then leave options shouldn't be on the cards.

Leave campaign is talking to Hungary, Poland and Italy too make them refuse an extension. Time to repeat that, it is not gossip, it is actual UK politicians at work.
 

You do realise I was quoting that? Those aren't my words. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it does make sense. Make remaining with conditions an option but if the EU don’t agree to the conditions then default back to leave. 

Referenda are a bad idea. Two is doubly bad. Putting an option back on the table that has been democratically rejected is insane.

Remain has been rejected, leaving only two choices - leave with a deal or without.

The EU says no other deal is available, so the choice is simply May’s deal or no deal.  Parliament has rejected both choices.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

Referenda are a bad idea. Two is doubly bad

Time for a motion nullifying the non binding referenda.

 

13 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

Make remaining with conditions an option but if the EU don’t agree to the conditions then default back to leave. 

Using blackmail as politics is never smart. Looks very Cameronite to me. And a way to shift the blame to the EU, as usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

Yes it does make sense. Make remaining with conditions an option but if the EU don’t agree to the conditions then default back to leave. 

Referenda are a bad idea. Two is doubly bad. Putting an option back on the table that has been democratically rejected is insane.

Remain has been rejected, leaving only two choices - leave with a deal or without.

The EU says no other deal is available, so the choice is simply May’s deal or no deal.  Parliament has rejected both choices.  

 

1. Hubris. The EU aren't going to respond to black mail. And who will agree on what those conditions are? 

2. Referendums are a bad idea, this one shouldn't have happened. But why shouldn't there be an option to remain? Considering how much new information has come to light? If its 'insane' then people will no doubt reject it. It seems to me you don't want it on there as there's a chance people could change their minds. 

3. False dichotomy. See 2. 

4. Correct. Although a customs union might be available. Unfortunately its one of the red lines of the government. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

Yes it does make sense. Make remaining with conditions an option but if the EU don’t agree to the conditions then default back to leave. 

 

 

weird mushrooms indeed ! are you delusional or just trying to stir ?

does the term blackmail make any sense to you ? that is just what your "remaining with conditions" would be, or on a lighter note it's just like this little child yanking about "I want a lolly, I want a lolly or I'll run away"

oops, see that Leo also used the term blackmail, but no problem, just goes to show how this line of thinking would be assessed on this side

last year, during an after sail drink (grin) with some brits, one of them, a declared brexiteer, made following statement : 'look here, us brits have been universally known for centuries as the best shopkeepers, if you silly europeans would have just allowed us to mind the european shop like we would want it there would be no problems at all, there would not be a brexit, just let us mind the european shop and follow our lead" ... and the guy was utterly serious, and in fact what you are saying is just the same. answer was and is : you silly plonker

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Albatros said:

weird mushrooms indeed ! are you delusional or just trying to stir ?

I think a person who sees his dream of an hard exit gone.  Must be tough.

ps Middaygun, I deleted the wrong quote, stupid forum software being used by a even more stupid person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is negotiation, not blackmail, to set out your position if you are to remain.  Like when you resign your job and your boss asks what it would take to keep you.  

Hysterical cries don’t help. The EU are quite at liberty to reject any conditional offer to remain.

But this all misses the point.  Remain was rejected, leave was chosen.  Those voting leave did not do so on condition of a deal being reached.  To not leave, and certainly to remain on existing terms, would be lead to blood on the streets and the death of democracy.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, believes the UK could extricate itself from the backstop under the terms of the Vienna convention if it began to have a “socially destabilising effect on Northern Ireland”, according to the Daily Telegraph (£).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You must be kidding, that is the reason there is a GFA and a backstop in the first place. Bring in the troops and you can be sure of a socially destabilising effect.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LeoV said:

I think a person who sees his dream of an hard exit gone.  Must be tough.

ps Middaygun, I deleted the wrong quote, stupid forum software being used by a even more stupid person.

As I said earlier, I’m not going to say which way I voted.  But I was still undecided as I walked to the polling station.  Anyone who thinks the EU is wholly good or wholly bad is simple. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sosoomii said:

But this all misses the point.  Remain was rejected, leave was chosen.  Those voting leave did not do so on condition of a deal being reached.  To not leave, and certainly to remain on existing terms, would be lead to blood on the streets and the death of democracy.

So some Brexiteers should swallow their pride and vote for MAy's deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cox stirring the Vienna Convention.  Talk about blackmail that will blow back.  He had recovered some of his professional reputation earlier this week but yabbering on about vacating the treaty under the provisions of A-62 is embarrassing.  I have a book or two I could send him for some night-time reading.

  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

Labour, SNP, PC and Lib Dem MPs

bit late for that, they manifestoed for at least a more Norway style deal, not the May Deal.
May choose to redline it comforting ERG /DUP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

It is negotiation, not blackmail, to set out your position if you are to remain.  Like when you resign your job and your boss asks what it would take to keep you.  

 

 

it is blackmail, pure and simple, but then of course -grin- any mobster would call that a normal negotiation technique. so your boss asks you what it would take to keep you, you answer that you want him to drop his pants, suck your dick and as of now just do whatever you tell him to do, now that is some great negotiation .... rolleyes

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, WGWarburton said:

SNP Westminster Leader Ian Blackford in the HOC today, where Labour don't seem to be prepared to support a second referendum:

"A shiver has run along the front bench of the Labour Party looking for a spine to crawl up - and it hasn’t been able to find one,"

 :-) Nice turn of phrase, Ian...

Cheers,

               W.

 

He’s one of the very few that hasn’t made a very reasoned response throughout it all. 

If there was a way I could vote for him, I would. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sosoomii said:

If the remain options can’t offer what people want (which we don’t know and can’t offer without EU consent) then remain options shouldn’t be on the card. 

That's a good plan for having rioting in the streets, some looting and burning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LeoV said:

The attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, believes the UK could extricate itself from the backstop under the terms of the Vienna convention if it began to have a “socially destabilising effect on Northern Ireland”, according to the Daily Telegraph (£).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You must be kidding, that is the reason there is a GFA and a backstop in the first place. Bring in the troops and you can be sure of a socially destabilising effect.
 

Don't compain to loud. If they need a fig leaf let them have it.

...

PS Remain means to remain a full member of the EU. Everything else is a form of leaving the EU with various versions of what a future co-operation agreement might look like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remain has been voted on and rejected already. That may make you sad but it is a fact. The debate has (or should have) moved on to how we leave. Far more chance of rioting if remain becomes an option again imo.

I actually don’t care if we leave or go, I think the long term impact either way is much exaggerated.  But I am deeply concerned about the constitutional problems that failing to honour democracy may bring.  Half the country might never bother to vote again and that would be disastrous.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had lunch with an Irish couple today. We agreed, some of these new craft beers are not very good, and I will join his group of motorcycle friends for a ride, when they get going in April. All that, and the surprising number of well known Irish songs, written by non Irish folks. New subject. If they vote again, I wonder who will qualify. All us silly English in far off places, or will they have a residency requirement. If the outliers could vote, that might change things, except my brother and I would likely vote opposite sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

Remain has been voted on and rejected already. That may make you sad but it is a fact. The debate has (or should have) moved on to how we leave. Far more chance of rioting if remain becomes an option again imo.

I actually don’t care if we leave or go, I think the long term impact either way is much exaggerated.  But I am deeply concerned about the constitutional problems that failing to honour democracy may bring.  Half the country might never bother to vote again and that would be disastrous.

 

Yawn. To rehash: The UK is a Parliamentary democracy, not an anarchist commune.

Respecting the fact that the UK is also a first past the post democracy, while the overall vote way may have been close, the constituency vote clearly wasn't. So "leave" it is. All parties campaigned on a leave ticket

While the Scottish independence referendum was a prime example of how to run a referendum the Brexit job was the complete opposite.

The referendum just said: Reamin or Leave. It didn't say Leave on the 29th of March. It didn't say Leave without an agreement on future co-operation in place.

Having left what Leave actually meant completely open it's clearly left in the hands of the democratically elected representatives of Her Majesties Government, under the scrutiny of her Parliament, to decide on the timing and what kind of future relationship with the EU the UK can negotiate having left.

It's not the fault of everybody else that the views put forward by the harder Brexiteers have turned out to be complete and utter bolocks from start to finish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, sosoomii said:

Remain has been voted on and rejected already. That may make you sad but it is a fact. The debate has (or should have) moved on to how we leave. Far more chance of rioting if remain becomes an option again imo.

Maybe you should open the window and shout out your referendum ideas to this mob.

147018.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LeoV said:

The attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, believes the UK could extricate itself from the backstop under the terms of the Vienna convention if it began to have a “socially destabilising effect on Northern Ireland”, according to the Daily Telegraph (£).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You must be kidding, that is the reason there is a GFA and a backstop in the first place. Bring in the troops and you can be sure of a socially destabilising effect.
 

I would not be too sure. After all leading Brexiteers said "Just send in the troops." before.
(That line of arguments got silenced for some reason real quick. Who would have thought...)

 

There was a representative poll in the UK now 9 months (?) ago if breaking the GFA was an acceptable price to achieve Brexit. IIRC roughly 80% said yes.
6 (?) months ago the same or a similar question was used to do a representative poll of Tory members (or at least those identifying as such). IIRC roughly 80% said yes...

(Via one of the think tank debates likes here before. The one in the US with the Irishman who also said "Only two numbers, 1xx border crossings on the EU mainland, 2xx border crossings in Northern Ireland.")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Chasm said:

There was a representative poll in the UK now 9 months (?) ago if breaking the GFA was an acceptable price to achieve Brexit. IIRC roughly 80% said yes.
6 (?) months ago the same or a similar question was used to do a representative poll of Tory members (or at least those identifying as such). IIRC roughly 80% said yes...

Even the ERG have stepped away from that. That is not to say the GFA won't fall apart because of some stupid decision. There appears to be a much wider appreciation of NI border issue now compared to last year, so a similar poll today I think would produce a far different result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LeoV said:

And MV3 will be close if ERG DUP supports it in large numbers.

Speaker a Remainer selects amendments and he has hinted at blocking a 3rd vote on May's withdrawal bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So many catchphrases have been built out of Brexit.

Stephen Kinnock MP and a soft Brexit/Norway style coined a good one about the referendum result and leave voters intentions. "They voted to leave the house but not the neighbourhood"

ERG & Co have failed to understand that concept by trying to railroad a hard Brexit/No Deal through.

Good summary of why some punters hate the EU so much.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Speaker a Remainer selects amendments and he has hinted at blocking a 3rd vote on May's withdrawal bill.

Yes, although it is allowed, it is very rare that a motion which has been defeated can be brought back for a second round.  Although with some fancy drafting, the item could be brought back with a small amendment relating to the extension of the Brexit date, and then would be formally considered a new motion.

The Speaker will go down in history as perhaps the most interesting speaker in a long time (I love listening to the guy - lots to learn about chairmanship there) who will not be granted a peerage because of petty politics.  He has nothing to lose by doing the right thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, crashdog said:

The Speaker will go down in history as perhaps the most interesting speaker in a long time (I love listening to the guy - lots to learn about chairmanship there) who will not be granted a peerage because of petty politics.  He has nothing to lose by doing the right thing.

Yeah I think he pretty cool... probably have some role in the media post political life.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sosoomii said:

But I am deeply concerned about the constitutional problems that failing to honour democracy may bring.  

That is the same moral authority argument nonsense that Rees Mogg has been clinging to in opposing a People's Vote. Question should be is why is he so scared of one? The answer is obvious, he is shit scared of democracy burying his life long Brexit dream.

It is hogwash to pretend one vote is it and to vote again is undemocratic. Referendums / General Elections are a constantly revolving door. The was a referendum in the 70's to join, then one to leave in 2016. What is undemocratic about a 3rd one in 2019?

It is a disengenous argument. It's like saying there shouldn't have been a 2016 referendum or a government gets voted in at a general election are there for life.

The Mogg looking very uncharacteristically punch drunk here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, sosoomii said:

The point I was making is that that is why a second referendum with remain on it is not workable, 

Remain was on the second EU referendum.  If there was a third it could equally well include remain as an option. However I agree with those who doubt that an additional referendum is particularly useful at this stage, because its reasonably  apparent that the electorate remains close to evenly divided on a statistical basis.  With the electorate evenly divided the responsibility of a representative democracy is to work with the information it has and make a decision based on its merits

 

7 hours ago, sosoomii said:

Remain has been rejected, leaving only two choices - leave with a deal or without.

The EU says no other deal is available, so the choice is simply May’s deal or no deal.  Parliament has rejected both choices.  

 

As you say Parliament has currently rejected both leave options and in a representative democracy, the vote of the legislature trumps the straw poll of a referendum.  The constituents can always elect different representatives if they dont trust the judgement of their elected reps.

6 hours ago, sosoomii said:

 I was still undecided as I walked to the polling station. 

Hence why a referendum is merely a poll to guide the elected . Parliament is a representative democracy where elected representatives are meant to dedicate their time and resources to assembling the facts and debating the options.  If a poll indicated that 70% favored remain or leave that would send a certain strength of signal to the elected reps......at 52% (where a likely good number were flipping a coin as they entered the poll booth) that is largely noise from a statistical pov . It demonstrates that half of the population is deeply unhappy with the EU. It provides parliament with a mandate to leave the EU if parliament thinks it is the right thing to do.

No serious class association would change class rules with a 52 % majority but they would examine closely why half the members are unhappy with the rule and half are happy and see if they can find an alternative rule that makes 70% happy.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, IPLore said:

The constituents can always elect different representatives if they dont trust the judgement of their elected reps.

The problem with a General Election and Brexit still on the table each major party has to either chose Remain or Leave and if Leave is it Soft or Hard, then if they both make the same choice literally have to field two potential candidates in each electrorate, one a Remainer the other a Leaver. With the electorate split down the middle on Brexit ...oh what a mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

The problem with a General Election and Brexit still on the table each major party has to either chose Remain or Leave and if Leave is it Soft or Hard, then if they both make the same choice literally have to field two candidates in each electrorate, one a Remainer the other a Leaver. 

Jack and I might not agree on that. 

Voters will elect an MP that they respect and trust.   I thought that one of the best speeches on Wednesday was the woman MP who said that she was not scared of her voters, that in a strongly leave constituency, she was elected for the work she did and the way that she cared about the working people in her constituency. They entrusted her to do the right thing and she was ready to explain why she voted against and will continue to vote against a no-deal brexit.  She will tell her constituents that extending or even remaining is better than no deal and they can choose to trust her judgement or not. 

Although I happen to disagree with her politics....I credit her, because that is the way its meant to work. 

I could never vote for Rees Mogg as my MP, not because of his votes on one matter or another but because he is such an obvious plonker!  (love that Brit word)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, IPLore said:

Jack and I might not agree on that

There was a hint of sarcasm font there :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Brexit was mishandled from day one, starting with the referendum legislation, Cameron's pre-referendum negotiations with the EU, his resignation and everything after...

Time to pull the plug on Brexit...

Cameron should have stayed on to run the Government and given the Brexiters (all parties) the responsibility to negotiate the deal with the EU. If they could not negotiate a deal that was acceptable to Parliament, then they should take responsibility for the Brexit failure and the Government then pulls the plug as the refo was non-binding. Putting people in charge of Brexit who don't necessarily believe in it is never a receipt for success. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IPLore said:

Remain was on the second EU referendum.  If there was a third it could equally well include remain as an option. However I agree with those who doubt that an additional referendum is particularly useful at this stage, because its reasonably  apparent that the electorate remains close to evenly divided on a statistical basis.  With the electorate evenly divided the responsibility of a representative democracy is to work with the information it has and make a decision based on its merits

 

As you say Parliament has currently rejected both leave options and in a representative democracy, the vote of the legislature trumps the straw poll of a referendum.  The constituents can always elect different representatives if they dont trust the judgement of their elected reps.

Hence why a referendum is merely a poll to guide the elected . Parliament is a representative democracy where elected representatives are meant to dedicate their time and resources to assembling the facts and debating the options.  If a poll indicated that 70% favored remain or leave that would send a certain strength of signal to the elected reps......at 52% (where a likely good number were flipping a coin as they entered the poll booth) that is largely noise from a statistical pov . It demonstrates that half of the population is deeply unhappy with the EU. It provides parliament with a mandate to leave the EU if parliament thinks it is the right thing to do.

No serious class association would change class rules with a 52 % majority but they would examine closely why half the members are unhappy with the rule and half are happy and see if they can find an alternative rule that makes 70% happy.

 

Quote
Quote

I don’t disagree with much of that.  The referendum was a bad idea and badly done.  Another referendum would be a case of two wrongs not making a right.

But at the time Conservatives and Labour said that would honour the result - it was always more than a straw poll. There has subsequently been a general election where they both repeated they would honour the result.  

So over 80% of MPs were elected on a ticket of implementing the result.  At least the Lib Dem’s stood on a manifesto of reversing the decision, but hardly anyone voted for them.

Oh, and a 1.3 million majority is not noise, it’s the biggest margin of victory in any UK vote - bigger than the population of our second biggest city, Birmingham.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IPLore said:

Jack and I might not agree on that. 

Voters will elect an MP that they respect and trust.   I thought that one of the best speeches on Wednesday was the woman MP who said that she was not scared of her voters, that in a strongly leave constituency, she was elected for the work she did and the way that she cared about the working people in her constituency. They entrusted her to do the right thing and she was ready to explain why she voted against and will continue to vote against a no-deal brexit.  She will tell her constituents that extending or even remaining is better than no deal and they can choose to trust her judgement or not. 

Although I happen to disagree with her politics....I credit her, because that is the way its meant to work. 

I could never vote for Rees Mogg as my MP, not because of his votes on one matter or another but because he is such an obvious plonker!  (love that Brit word)

That is exactly what is happening in my parents' constituency. I suspect in many others.

In others it's clear that the grassroots have dictated what the MP, in some cases with some arm twisting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the decision of a 2dref.
If you think you should not have a 2d ref as you have to respect the first one for ever, you would think too that general elections are a waste of time too :)
It has now been so on since that anyone would have an inkling of feeling it has maybe shifted. But I noticed empathy is loosing out in the UK.
With the handling of the Tories of the deal I bet you that many people would want to leave but not in the way it has now been handled.
The May deal and No Deal was not on their mind. Maybe as much as Birmingham. If your so sure the Leavers never changed their mind you would not oppose a 2d ref, Leave would win again.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DUP ERG remain against May's deal. They admitted the Vienna was unworkable.
So MV3 will be lost too, maybe a MV4 after the 22 March summit, or a cancellation of the MV3 out in the last moment. The ultimate kicking the can plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU27 seems to fall in line for an extension, only Hungary is quiet.
Spain even said Gib will not be used, only will be brought on the table if the WA is broken open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UK and tax havens, 1 April an EU tax audit will be done, if the UK is still in the EU they must comply. 5 April UK tax year starts.
There are some minor problems with it for people with offshore accounts.
Some want to keep tax havens.
http://www.cityam.com/274714/iea-says-attacks-tax-havens-undermine-competition-and
The IEA’s report said laws to tackle tax avoidance stifled positive competition. “By pushing corporate tax rates down, tax havens do other countries a service”, it said, as “corporate tax is an inefficient tax”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LeoV said:

DUP ERG remain against May's deal. They admitted the Vienna was unworkable.
So MV3 will be lost too, maybe a MV4 after the 22 March summit, or a cancellation of the MV3 out in the last moment. The ultimate kicking the can plan.

Do you have a source or that? Not seen a clear report yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How not to win over the doubters: The Daily Telegraph’s Steven Swinford has got hold of the latest legal advice drawn up by Attorney General Geoffrey Cox in his bid to win over Euroskeptic Tory MPs and the DUP. Cox claims Britain would be able to end the Irish backstop under the Vienna Convention, if it was having a “socially destabilizing effect on Northern Ireland,” which would be considered a “fundamental change” of circumstances under the terms of the treaty. In a letter to the Times, crossbench peer and leading barrister David Pannick writes that “as a matter of law, the U.K. would not be bound to remain permanently in a backstop arrangement,” but goes on to caveat that whether it would be wise politically to invoke so-called Article 62 was a “different matter.”

Not so fast: Swinford also got hold of analysis from the Euroskeptic ERG’s legal eagles, who count among their number Nigel Dodds, the Westminster leader of the all-important DUP. They have already concluded Cox’s advice is “erroneous” and “badly misconceived,” according to Swinford. The Times’ Sam Coates hears similar. Coates says Cox has been given until Sunday to update the advice ahead of next week’s vote.

And there’s more: Lawyer Martin Howe, who also sits in the ERG’s legal “star chamber,” told the Standard that the Vienna Convention idea was a non-starter. He refers to the “Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros” case between Hungary and Slovakia where “the fall of the Soviet Union, disappearance of the Warsaw Pact and dissolution of Czechoslovakia were not sufficient to satisfy this ground.”

https://www.politico.eu/newsletter/london-playbook/politico-london-playbook-all-eyes-on-the-dup-last-night-in-the-commons-tory-agm-season/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And more on the DUP;

Money talks: The DUP is clear it wants to back a deal, and keen to keep talking. Pressure is reportedly mounting at home. The Sun reckons the Northern Irish unionists are under pressure from local businesses in Northern Ireland, with one source telling the newspaper: “The donors have turned off the taps.” The FT quotes a senior business figure who says businesses in Northern Ireland were “turning the screws” on the DUP “through every possible channel with all sorts of threats.”

Confidence and cash: The i newspaper hears that during talks, the DUP “pointed out that the current confidence and supply arrangement, which is propping up Mrs. May’s government, runs out in June,” raising suggestions “the party might be demanding more money from Downing Street [for Northern Ireland] in return for backing the prime minister’s Withdrawal Agreement.”

https://www.politico.eu/newsletter/london-playbook/politico-london-playbook-all-eyes-on-the-dup-last-night-in-the-commons-tory-agm-season/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, crashdog said:

The Speaker will go down in history 

His wife is better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asking EU members to rule out a delay so that pressure can be put on the EU in negotiations? lol

At least they've shown their true crash out colours.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sosoomii said:

Oh, and a 1.3 million majority is not noise, it’s the biggest margin of victory in any UK vote - bigger than the population of our second biggest city, Birmingham.

Really? What was the margin with 1975 referendum to join EU? 2011 alternative vote referendum? Are you using the Trump method of defining biggest?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pondering on about a second referendum, please do appreciate that a scarily vast number of people still haven't got a clue where the EU is, what the EU does, how trade agreements work, where bacon on the Tesco shelf comes from, still believes that Britain won 2 world-wars on its own .... and say "where was the EU' when our boys made the ultimate sacrifice",  (I think that is a cracker :-), think that whatever decline there is/was in UK manufacturing is the EU's fault, Japanese car manufacturers are upping sticks because diesel engines are in the naughty corner, and in general are convinced that the UK will become the 'world power' it was before joining in 1973. Let's forget about immigration, xenophobia & bigotry for the moment.

Only a few people that are directly affected 'may' be better informed since 2016, Joe Blogs certainly is not.

Not that whatever is spouted on F8ckbook is anything to go by but I do sometimes read the comments every time Nigel F or James Obrien have published their latest take on the matter.   Apart from the language, the view points/beliefs are shocking and I think that the majority of the posters weren't even born in 1973.

If the 1st one was tainted by a large element of a protest vote against the political establishment I do not think that this one will fare any better.

If it ever gets to a 2nd referendum, it will not only be the remain camp that gets re-energized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DEFCON happens to be a British game... (2006, Introversion Software)

"The World's first Genocide 'em up"
"Everybody Dies in DEFCON"

$2 right now on GOG.
Fun in good old multiplayer. You can't win but maybe loose the least. (Kind like Brexit...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Upp3 said:

Really? What was the margin with 1975 referendum to join EU? 2011 alternative vote referendum? Are you using the Trump method of defining biggest?

1975 referendum on staying in the EU: 'Yes' by 67.2% to 32.8%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Laser1 said:

If it ever gets to a 2nd referendum, it will not only be the remain camp that gets re-energized.

1

For that reason I think a 2bd referrendum would have to be...

Please state your order of preference for the following:

1: Leave the EU with no agreement on future co-operation

2: Leave the EU with a transition agreement as laid out in the "May Deal". Further negotiation on a co-operation agreement to be negotiated by the government following a general election.

3: Leave the EU with a transition agreement as laid out in the "May Deal". Further negotiation on a co-operation agreement to be negotiated by the government with out a general election.

4: Remain in the EU

5: Fuck off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, rgeek said:

For that reason I think a 2bd referrendum would have to be...

Please state your order of preference for the following:

1: Leave the EU with no agreement on future co-operation

2: Leave the EU with a transition agreement as laid out in the "May Deal". Further negotiation on a co-operation agreement to be negotiated by the government following a general election.

3: Leave the EU with a transition agreement as laid out in the "May Deal". Further negotiation on a co-operation agreement to be negotiated by the government with out a general election.

4: Remain in the EU

5: Fuck off

#5 would obtain 67.3% making it the biggest margin in the long and storied history of EU referendums

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, IPLore said:

#5 would obtain 67.3% making it the biggest margin in the long and storied history of EU referendums

And about the only thing that Joe Blogs can compute :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sosoomii said:

Oh, and a 1.3 million majority is not noise, it’s the biggest margin of victory in any UK vote - bigger than the population of our second biggest city, Birmingham

Statistically it would only require 700,000 people to vote in a different direction.......out of a population of 66,000,000

While Rees Mogg and his colleagues consider the implications of Article 62 of the Vienna Convention before deciding how they vote next week , I think we can say with some confidence that at least 700,000 of the voters did not fully contemplate the implications of the  “Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros” case  as they thoughtfully weighed up the pros and cons before casting their vote in the referendum. ;)    (Sarcasm font intended because the compete absurdity of the politicians dependence on arcane detail in order to take a broadly fundamental decision is now making the average punter look sensible in comparison.)

The politicians have to stop leaning on crutches and make up their own minds.  They have to decide based on the information they have on front of them, their own intelligence (ha Ha) and the analysis available whether a No Deal Brexit is a good thing or bad thing for the people of the UK.   They cannot lean on excuses like "the Vienna Convention" or "The will of the People"........the court of history will afford as much weight to "I was following the will of the people" as it did to "I was just following orders".     As an elected representative you are expected to know the difference between right and wrong.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites