Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Shelga

Young Leave guy on the panel on QT retorts “but the EU is bad too” when an audience member pointed out that the British empire caused untold evils around the world.

Please can they just leave. They are ignorant of their own history, uncooperative, arrogant and rude to an extreme degree. I’m sick to the back teeth of them.

Frank Bullitt

https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1146902512437514241

It's going well on Question Time so. Getting the plank from Guideo Fawks on...no wonder the place is a mess.

hometruths

If BoJo who wins the Tory leadership, I think he is capable of breaking the impasse, one way or the other. This is how think it may pan out...

For all his buffoonery, Johnson is well above average intelligence. He knows there is no way out of the current situation whilst the DUP are propping up the Tory party. The only way to be free of them is a general election. With that in mind I'd say he is watching the polls closely and will be delighted with the rise of the Brexit party.

Broadly speaking, this is a continuation of the trend we have seen over the past few months of a movement away from two-party politics and towards a fairly even four-way split between Labour, Conservative, Lib Dems and the Brexit Party.

Source: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/07/04/voting-intention-labour-falls-4th-place

I think Johnson will ask Parliament to vote for a snap General Election - which they will.

If Johnson convincingly campaigns on "I will deliver Brexit, deal or no deal, the EU won't know what hit them" - he should get the core Tory vote and pick up a big chunk of the Tory Brexit party vote, who when push comes to shove won't vote for a single issue party in a GE.

Labour with Corbyn will be decimated, they won't campaign convincingly on either Leave or Remain, hence their strong Brexit votes will go to Brexit party and strong Remain votes to Lib Dems.

I think Johnson will back himself to get a majority under these circumstances, and he'll be able to whip the party into agreeing to put the customs border down the Irish sea. The EU will agree to this. The DUP will go ballistic but nobody will give a damn about them once their Westminster votes count for nothing.

In this scenario Johnson will be PM, saved the Tories, and delivered the will of the people. Job done in his eyes.

If he fails to get a majority he can make a confidence/supply deal with Lib Dems, price being a second referendum, dress it up as uniting the country.

Offer the Lib Dems a second referendum with Revoke and Remain as an option. And agree a WA variation type deal that the Lib Dems committed to support if Leave won that referendum again. Realistically this would be something akin to the current WA, probably again with the customs border down the Irish Sea.

Lib Dems would have to say yes, as it is the only chance they'd have of potentially stopping Brexit.

Then put it to the people:

Vote either:

Revoke Article 50 and Remain in the EU
or
Leave the EU - NB if our coalition WA is rejected by the EU, we will leave with No Deal.

If remain wins referendum Johnson will be PM, have 5 years of the fixed term parliament act to save the Tories and delivered the will of the people. Job done.

If leave wins referendum Johnson will be PM, saved the Tories and delivered the will of the people. Job done.

I suspect Johnson is considering an election thinking that the only way it is not his best option, is if suddenly someone like Starmer/Cooper/Benn becomes Labour leader. But there is no way they'll have the time to replace Corbyn.

The snap Tory election failed for May, but Johnson will be a far better campaigner, and like him or loathe him, a proven election winner.

If Johnson becomes Tory leader I am expecting a GE in the UK to be announced within weeks.

Lackadaisical

The problem is they don’t have anything like a consensus in the UK. The EU isn’t preventing them from leaving. The entire time it has been facilitating a smooth exit. It can’t magic real practical issues out of existence and you can’t snap your fingers and just make everything alright.

The British are fighting with themselves and they will tear themselves apart. There’s no parliamentary mandate for leaving without a trade deal and the Brexit referendum was only won by a few percent and was highly contentious.

None of those issues are ever going to go away.

View

schmittel wrote: »

If BoJo who wins the Tory leadership, I think he is capable of breaking the impasse, one way or the other. This is how think it may pan out...

For all his buffoonery, Johnson is well above average intelligence. He knows there is no way out of the current situation whilst the DUP are propping up the Tory party. The only way to be free of them is a general election. With that in mind I'd say he is watching the polls closely and will be delighted with the rise of the Brexit party.




Source: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/07/04/voting-intention-labour-falls-4th-place

I think Johnson will ask Parliament to vote for a snap General Election - which they will.

If Johnson convincingly campaigns on "I will deliver Brexit, deal or no deal, the EU won't know what hit them" - he should get the core Tory vote and pick up a big chunk of the Tory Brexit party vote, who when push comes to shove won't vote for a single issue party in a GE.

Labour with Corbyn will be decimated, they won't campaign convincingly on either Leave or Remain, hence their strong Brexit votes will go to Brexit party and strong Remain votes to Lib Dems.

I think Johnson will back himself to get a majority under these circumstances, and he'll be able to whip the party into agreeing to put the customs border down the Irish sea. The EU will agree to this. The DUP will go ballistic but nobody will give a damn about them once their Westminster votes count for nothing.

In this scenario Johnson will be PM, saved the Tories, and delivered the will of the people. Job done in his eyes.

If he fails to get a majority he can make a confidence/supply deal with Lib Dems, price being a second referendum, dress it up as uniting the country.

Offer the Lib Dems a second referendum with Revoke and Remain as an option. And agree a WA variation type deal that the Lib Dems committed to support if Leave won that referendum again. Realistically this would be something akin to the current WA, probably again with the customs border down the Irish Sea.

Lib Dems would have to say yes, as it is the only chance they'd have of potentially stopping Brexit.

Then put it to the people:

Vote either:

Revoke Article 50 and Remain in the EU
or
Leave the EU - NB if our coalition WA is rejected by the EU, we will leave with No Deal.

If remain wins referendum Johnson will be PM, have 5 years of the fixed term parliament act to save the Tories and delivered the will of the people. Job done.

If leave wins referendum Johnson will be PM, saved the Tories and delivered the will of the people. Job done.

I suspect Johnson is considering an election thinking that the only way it is not his best option, is if suddenly someone like Starmer/Cooper/Benn becomes Labour leader. But there is no way they'll have the time to replace Corbyn.

The snap Tory election failed for May, but Johnson will be a far better campaigner, and like him or loathe him, a proven election winner.

If Johnson becomes Tory leader I am expecting a GE in the UK to be announced within weeks.

There is absolutely no evidence that Johnson is “well above average intelligence” - the evidence of his time in office contradicts that.

And, the Lib Dem’s aren’t going to trust any promises from the Conservative about another referendum. They haven’t forgotten their experience with the vote reform one, where they first got landed with an AV one and then shafted during that referendum campaign by the Conservatives.

10000maniacs

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1146902512437514241

It's going well on Question Time so. Getting the plank from Guideo Fawks on...no wonder the place is a mess.

That guy keeps cropping up as a Brexit talking head. James O'Brien had him virtually reduced to anger and tears a few months ago. He seems to be very emotionally unstable.

hometruths

View wrote: »

And, the Lib Dem’s aren’t going to trust any promises from the Conservative about another referendum. They haven’t forgotten their experience with the vote reform one, where they first got landed with an AV one and then shafted during that referendum campaign by the Conservatives.

If that scenario in fact arose the Lib Dems would be right to be cautious and sure to seek cast iron assurances but I believe they could not refuse.

They campaign in a general election saying a vote for us is a vote for a second referendum, and then the Tories offer them one, you think they would say “no thanks, we haven’t forgotten the AV fiasco”?

I think that unlikely. Particularly if Johnson says “fine, if I cannot get my confidence and supply deal with the Lib Dems by promising a second referendum, I’ll have a chat to the Brexit party and see what they want.”

Kermit.de.frog

Hard not to notice that as the US celebrates it's independence day today we are having ours taken from us.

I don't recall Irish people seeking a European army, anthem, flag, centralisation of decision making in Brussels, a parliament, a president...

We are on the wrong course.

The UK will be sovereign, we won't be after Brexit. This fact is slowly dawning and we just saw France and Germany divy out the spoils of power in EU for themselves.

This is only going to get a lot worse.

I know people find it hard to understand what is happening because it is being done by stealth.

The new president of the EU commission is adamant the EU army is being created.

Will this be the straw that breaks it for Irish people when it dawns on them?

We are in the head in the sand phase.

listermint

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Hard not to notice that as the US celebrates it's independence day today we are having ours taken from us.

I don't recall Irish people seeking a European army, anthem, flag, centralisation of decision making in Brussels, a parliament, a president...

We are on the wrong course.

The UK will be sovereign, we won't be after Brexit. This fact is slowly dawning and we just saw France and Germany divy out the spoils of power in EU for themselves.

This is only going to get a lot worse.

I know people find it hard to understand what is happening because it is being done by stealth.

The new president of the EU commission is adamant the EU army is being created.

Will this be the straw that breaks it for Irish people when it dawns on them?

We are in the head in the sand phase.

Go to bed Kermit


You've been proven wrong on all these points multiple times. The country doesn't have any appetite for your irexit guff.

I suggest you close your Facebook account and the twitter one too. The circles you are moving in have your outlook hilariously polarised. And you don't even know it .


Frightening.

MrMusician18

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Hard not to notice that as the US celebrates it's independence day today we are having ours taken from us.

I don't recall Irish people seeking a European army, anthem, flag, centralisation of decision making in Brussels, a parliament, a president...

We are on the wrong course.

The UK will be sovereign, we won't be after Brexit. This fact is slowly dawning and we just saw France and Germany divy out the spoils of power in EU for themselves.

This is only going to get a lot worse.

I know people find it hard to understand what is happening because it is being done by stealth.

The new president of the EU commission is adamant the EU army is being created.

Will this be the straw that breaks it for Irish people when it dawns on them?

We are in the head in the sand phase.

Ireland was asked. It has voted for the treaties that has established the anthem, commission, parliament etc. You are wrong. If it's being done by stealth, why do we get to vote on this stuff?

In case you missed it, the German choice for commission president, Timmermans, did not succeed. Scuppered in no small part by Varadkar seemingly.

An EU army is not on the cards as so many member states do not want it because they're either fundamentally against the proposal or feel it will undermine NATO.

Irexit guff indeed.

Kermit.de.frog

listermint wrote: »

Go to bed Kermit


You've been proven wrong on all these points multiple times. The country doesn't have any appetite for your irexit guff.

I suggest you close your Facebook account and the twitter one too. The circles you are moving in have your outlook hilariously polarised. And you don't even know it .


Frightening.

My view is backed up by evidence. Yours seems to be emotion.

Let's pick one.

Tell us about the new Commission president and her view on how the EU armed forces are being created.

Is she a total liar? The battlegroups are just ineffective window dressing is it?

The embryo of the EU armed forces is already there for those who care to acknowledge it.


I don't have any social media accounts. I judge the evidence as it exists and form my own view. I suggest you try and do the same.

MrMusician18

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

My view is backed up by evidence. Yours seems to be emotion.

Let's pick one.

Tell us about the new Commission president and her view on how the EU armed forces are being created.

Is she a total liar? The battlegroups are just ineffective window dressing is it?

The embryo of the EU armed forces is already there for those who care to acknowledge it.


I don't have any social media accounts. I judge the evidence as it exists and form my own view. I suggest you try and do the same.

Thank god for that. At least when you try and peddle that nonsense here you'll get challenged.

Kermit.de.frog

That's your opinion. I have formed my own and I am perfectly entitled to share my concerns.

10000maniacs

10000maniacs wrote: »

That guy keeps cropping up as a Brexit talking head. James O'Brien had him virtually reduced to anger and tears a few months ago. He seems to be very emotionally unstable.

Link?

fash

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

My view is backed up by evidence.
.

Clearly it is not because you think "Ireland wasn't asked". We were asked - I voted yes repeatedly.

And as for the nonsense about having a scary scary "flag": every 2 bit operation has a flag 6 my school had its own flag. Here is a list of international trade organisations with flags and anthems:
list of trade organisations with flags and anthems


Seriously, how cheap and crappy an organisation would you need to be not to have a flag and anthem - the economic community of West African states has one - why would we not have one?

Peregrinus

View wrote: »

And, the Lib Dem’s aren’t going to trust any promises from the Conservative about another referendum. They haven’t forgotten their experience with the vote reform one, where they first got landed with an AV one and then shafted during that referendum campaign by the Conservatives.

Well, it wouldn't be just a promise from the Tories. For this to work the UK would have to seek an extension of the Art 50 period to allow the referendum to be held. That would have to happen, obviously, before 31 October. The extension would be pretty short; just about long enough to conduct the referendum. So this wouldn't be a case of the Tory party committing to the LibDem party to hold a referendum; it would be a case of the UK government committing to the EU to hold a refeferendum by a specified, and quite near, date. If the Tories were going to welch on that commitment, we would all know pretty well immediately, and the government would collapse pretty instantly.

And while Johnson could then look for support from the Brexit Party to avoid a general election, he'd have damaged his stock with Brexiters pretty badly by seeking and obtaining an extension beyond 31 October, an act for which they would certainly have denounced him in ringing terms.

So I can't see that Johnson would gain anything by this. If he wants to make an agreement for government with the Brexit party, he can do that; he doesn't have to take the long way around via a failed agreement for government with the Lib Dems which collapses because of his evident bad faith. The only reason that he would make an agreement with the Lib Dems for a second referendum is if he actually intends to hold one.

murphaph

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

My view is backed up by evidence. Yours seems to be emotion.

Let's pick one.

Tell us about the new Commission president and her view on how the EU armed forces are being created.

Is she a total liar? The battlegroups are just ineffective window dressing is it?

The embryo of the EU armed forces is already there for those who care to acknowledge it.


I don't have any social media accounts. I judge the evidence as it exists and form my own view. I suggest you try and do the same.

There is no European army but I for one would welcome the idea. We currently rely on the mood swings of Donald J. Trump should Vladimir Putin become aggressive towards us. That is not a good situation to find ourselves in. We should be able to defend ourselves in the EU.

McGiver

Kermit.de.frog wrote:

I know people find it hard to understand what is happening because it is being done by stealth.

Treaty of Rome, 1957, establishing the EEC

Treaty establishing the European Economic Community

HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF THE BELGIANS, THE PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY, THE PRESIDENT OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC, HER ROYAL HIGHNESS THE GRAND DUCHESS OF LUXEMBOURG, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF THE NETHERLANDS,

DETERMINED to establish the foundations of an ever closer union among the European peoples,

DECIDED to ensure the economic and social progress of their countries by common action in eliminating the barriers which divide Europe,

General direction towards Federal Europe has always been the idea so any incremental move to that direction is not a surprise at all. All subsequent EU treaty changes were agreed by all the member states. There's nothing done by stealth.

One's Failure to follow political developments and or lack of political engagement does not mean anything was done by stealth.

McGiver

murphaph wrote:

There is no European army but I for one would welcome the idea. We currently rely on the mood swings of Donald J. Trump should Vladimir Putin become aggressive towards us. That is not a good situation to find ourselves in. We should be able to defend ourselves in the EU.

Especially if you claim "neutrality" while outsourcing your defence to the UK, a country which previously ruined Ireland (with consequences until today), and also ruined many of other countries. The English government generally (at any time) cannot be trusted.

So you have:
Increasingly hostile Russia
Isolationist and unstable USA
The rise of China
Lack of own defence capability
Outsourcing defence to untrustworthy partner

Very bad idea to be showing off as 'neutral' and undermining attempts for moves towards the EU army.

Neutrality is possible but with high military engagement and spending, such country needs to be able to defend itself, see Switzerland. Ireland is in no such place.

hometruths

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, it wouldn't be just a promise from the Tories. For this to work the UK would have to seek an extension of the Art 50 period to allow the referendum to be held. That would have to happen, obviously, before 31 October. The extension would be pretty short; just about long enough to conduct the referendum. So this wouldn't be a case of the Tory party committing to the LibDem party to hold a referendum; it would be a case of the UK government committing to the EU to hold a refeferendum by a specified, and quite near, date. If the Tories were going to welch on that commitment, we would all know pretty well immediately, and the government would collapse pretty instantly.

And while Johnson could then look for support from the Brexit Party to avoid a general election, he'd have damaged his stock with Brexiters pretty badly by seeking and obtaining an extension beyond 31 October, an act for which they would certainly have denounced him in ringing terms.

So I can't see that Johnson would gain anything by this. If he wants to make an agreement for government with the Brexit party, he can do that; he doesn't have to take the long way around via a failed agreement for government with the Lib Dems which collapses because of his evident bad faith. The only reason that he would make an agreement with the Lib Dems for a second referendum is if he actually intends to hold one.

Agreed. And the only reason he would have to do a deal with Lib Dems would be if he failed to get a majority in the GE, and before he did so he would have the chance to assess which way wind was blowing.

I suppose the point of my previous post is that in a GE, whichever the way the cards fall, Johnson has the chance of delivering Brexit with the border down the Irish sea, and he is well capable of spinning that as a big win for the UK and Northern Ireland, despite the fact that it was what EU suggested in the first place.

Zubeneschamali

McGiver wrote: »

Neutrality is possible but with high military engagement and spending, such country needs to be able to defend itself, see Switzerland. Ireland is in no such place.

Swiss people I have spoken with laughed at the idea that their part time army of weekend warriors defends the country.

The banks defend Switzerland.

CelticRambler

McGiver wrote: »

So you have:
Increasingly hostile Russia
Isolationist and unstable USA
The rise of China
Lack of own defence capability
Outsourcing defence to untrustworthy partner

Veering off on the EU-Army tangent now, but all of the above applies to France and the French army too, which is currently in such dire straits that soldiers on duty in Africa are frequently left without proper food rations. The suggestion that the "great nations" of Europe might club together to create a more cost-efficient and militarily appropriate European Army is nothing more than common sense. And if some citizens of the not-so-great nations want to join up, so what?

It's rather ironic that the US (see DT's 4th-of-July Phallic Display) and the UK (see Trident and Aircraft Carrier Saga) are so proud of their military might, yet their democratic institutions have been so thoroughly infiltrated and manipulated in recent years by more devious and intelligent players on the world stage.

Kermit.de.frog

The argument put forward here appears to say that people in EU countries want a Federal Europe because a couple of countries were "asked" (and all ignored) with text put before their populations.

Of course even if views were not ignored most people are not diplomats so presenting them with 100's of pages of diplomatic text is never right.

Ireland only voted yes the second time out of fear with people knowing the economy was in trouble.

This will all end in tears.

Next to go in my view is Italy. Almost cast iron guaranteed. The eastern bloc of countries really are not going to last in the EU either.

It's when the UK is successful, and they will be, the edifice will crumble because especially the bigger countries will see that and want that.

I would not have wanted to leave up until recently but I'm angered by the attitude and dismissal of those of us in Ireland and across the EU with real concerns about the direction of travel.

I don't believe a majority in Ireland or Europe want a Federal EU at all. It's mind boggling imbecility to persue something like that against the will of the public.

Only thing to do is have Europe wide referendum in each country asking whether they want a Federal Europe.

Otherwise the EU will be broken up as countries leave anyway.

J Mysterio

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1146902512437514241

It's going well on Question Time so. Getting the plank from Guideo Fawks on...no wonder the place is a mess.

Wow, looks like we've really crossed the Rubicon. Where was this episode of QT - Coventry? The audience actually applauding. Theres little hope for them now. Unbelievable.

Podge_irl

A federal Europe is not happening, so your entire point is somewhat irrelevant.

Of course even if views were not ignored most people are not diplomats so presenting them with 100's of pages of diplomatic text is never right.

Indeed. This is why national parliament's exist in the first place.

Zubeneschamali

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Ireland only voted yes the second time out of fear with people knowing the economy was in trouble.

We have voted more than twice:

1973: Accession.
1987: Single European Act.
1992: Maastricht.
1998: Amsterdam
2001: Nice 1
2002: Nice 2
2008: Lisbon 1
2009: Lisbon 2
2012: Fiscal Compact

Zubeneschamali

J Mysterio wrote: »

The audience actually applauding. Theres little hope for them now. Unbelievable.

The QT audience is fixed.

Professor Moriarty

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The argument put forward here appears to say that people in EU countries want a Federal Europe because a couple of countries were "asked" (and all ignored) with text put before their populations.

Of course even if views were not ignored most people are not diplomats so presenting them with 100's of pages of diplomatic text is never right.

Ireland only voted yes the second time out of fear with people knowing the economy was in trouble.

This will all end in tears.

Next to go in my view is Italy. Almost cast iron guaranteed. The eastern bloc of countries really are not going to last in the EU either.

It's when the UK is successful, and they will be, the edifice will crumble because especially the bigger countries will see that and want that.

I would not have wanted to leave up until recently but I'm angered by the attitude and dismissal of those of us in Ireland and across the EU with real concerns about the direction of travel.

I don't believe a majority in Ireland or Europe want a Federal EU at all. It's mind boggling imbecility to persue something like that against the will of the public.

Only thing to do is have Europe wide referendum in each country asking whether they want a Federal Europe.

Otherwise the EU will be broken up as countries leave anyway.

Well, one of the main reasons why the Visegrad group was set up was to integrate those four countries further into the EU. Pro EU sentiment in Italy has increased by 5% in the past year. Britain will be a basket case economically, politically and socially for many years because of Brexit.

But let's say that Britain, Italy and the Visegrad nations leave. It would still be in Ireland's interest to be further integrated in a reduced EU comprising Germany, France, Spain, Benelux and Scandinavia.

mrbrianj

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Ireland only voted yes the second time out of fear with people knowing the economy was in trouble.

This is not true.

You raise some valid points, some I agree with some I dont, but to run the Brexit line on the intelligence of our electorate is wrong.

CelticRambler

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It's when the UK is successful ...

Successful in what way? Do you mean they win WW3 without the help of the Americans? Or they win the World Cup three times in a row? Or that they succeed in swapping two new brown immigrants for every pale Caucaisan they've pushed out?

So please: define the parameters by which we can judge the UK's success in the future and acknowledge your perspicacity in years to come.