Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

bilston

trellheim wrote: »

theres 'resigned' and there's sacked but resigned for the good of the service ...see Garda Commissioners etc wonder which one this was

I don't think he was sacked, all the indications are that May fully backed him...but it wouldn't have been her call in about 3 weeks time.

We'll see who replaces him.

Johnson is already a weak Prime Minister and he isn't even Prime Minister yet.

Literally every political leader in the UK in the last 30 years has had a honeymoon period. Johnson will be getting from all sides from day one.

InTheShadows

He's done the right thing by going. If it happened here he'd brass neck it out until it was forgotten about. I greatly admire that about the UK political class unlike the cowards we have serving us here.

FrancieBrady

InTheShadows wrote: »

He's done the right thing by going. If it happened here he'd brass neck it out until it was forgotten about. I greatly admire that about the UK political class unlike the cowards we have serving us here.

Yes, like Theresa May...defeated many times but clung on and managed to wreck her party and probably did unfixable damage to the 'Union' in the process.

J Mysterio

InTheShadows wrote: »

He's done the right thing by going. If it happened here he'd brass neck it out until it was forgotten about. I greatly admire that about the UK political class unlike the cowards we have serving us here.

Haha. There's a lot to admire.

prawnsambo

InTheShadows wrote: »

He's done the right thing by going. If it happened here he'd brass neck it out until it was forgotten about. I greatly admire that about the UK political class unlike the cowards we have serving us here.

That might have been true twenty years or more ago in the UK, but the list of failing Ministers refusing to fall on their swords grows longer by the day. Chris Grayling would be a case in point. You would have to take your socks off to count the number of failures that he's presided over.

Shelga

I honestly don't think Johnson cares about the actual job of being PM.

He wants the validation and the praise that is coming his way from party members and sycophantic Tory colleagues throughout this process, but seems to have zero interest in the detailed intricacies of running a country.

It wouldn't surprise me if he calls a GE within weeks of taking office, as long as he can brag to his Eton mates that he was PM. Even if it's the shortest term in history- in fact that probably just adds to the zaniness and jolly japes of it all :rolleyes:

VinLieger

ambro25 wrote: »

I may well be connecting unconnectable dots here, but...

Oakeshott gets the leak and publishes it.

Oakeshott is a known accolyte of Farage (recent pics all over Twitter yesterday).

Farage is well ingrained with the Trumpian sphere Stateside.

Boris doesn't back up Sir Darroch last night, notwithstanding his own, well-publicised rethoric against Trump.

...Boris names Farage as UK ambassador to US?

Controversial, sure. Highly so. But too controversial for Boris? Mmm.

I can't see Farage taking on something like that where he would have to give up his EU paycheck along with the with the risk of being let go under any other PM or Labour winning a GE

MrMusician18

Silent Running wrote: »

Could well be that it's the same person.

It's unlikely to have been Johnson directly since the leak contained contents relating to the State visit. Johnson wasn't in the government at that point.

An Claidheamh

Enzokk wrote: »

Seems like the UK is still trying to negotiate even now.

https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/1148850634227113985


But as the next tweet points out that the conditions of the extension was that the withdrawal agreement would not be open for re-negotiation.

https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/1148851611936141312

I think Boris Johnson can get away with not knowing what was agreed by the government as he was not in government when it was agreed, but Hunt has no excuse. He was in the cabinet when this extension was agreed so with collective responsibility, he agreed to that position and should not even consider going to the EU to try and talk about the WA.

As for the article in the tweet, we have the Brexit secretary once again using us and a reason why the EU want to go back to the negotiating table.



The quotes part is from Stephen Barclay, more evidence that we are back at the start.

From reading the Independent.co.uk comments, it's good to see there are still some educated people left in Britain.

However, these comments, once again by a British politician are threats.

FG have to step up.

This isn't something they can blame on Sinn Féin, start wearing British poppies or hope the media will ignore.

1) Redirecting trade around Britain should be our main priority - as important as changing our tax structure in the 50's.
As important as our merchant navy during the Emergency.

2) FG must state they will support a border poll if Britain does not back down.
Tories know FG are their poodles.

3) Remind Britain, ruling the North and securing their borders/immigrants/paramilitaries will not be easy without the support of Ireland.
These should be made in no uncertain terms.
And we ought to join Schengen.
Good luck to John Bull and Steve Gammon getting the Gardaí to capture illegals for them.

4) And state these things publicly, too much of taking these things on the chin for fear of upsetting our histrionic neighbours.
It's cowardly.

I don't anticipate an Irish government will do this.

ambro25

VinLieger wrote: »

I can't see Farage taking on something like that where he would have to give up his EU paycheck along with the with the risk of being let go under any other PM or Labour winning a GE

Compared with the soft power and influence to be garnered and built up out of wheeling and dealing as a G7 (for now, still) ambassador in Washington DC, I think the paycheck variance is not exactly a deal-breaker (assuming the UK ambo earns less, and don't forget the perks, likely significantly better than those of an MEP: residence, staff, cooks, chauffeur, security...diplomatic IMMUNITY). But I may be wrong of course.

...and then, there's the small matter of his EU paychecks very possibly coming to an abrupt end in 4 months' time.

Moreover, from Johnson's Conservative Party perspective, it would likely kill off Farage's Brexit Party vehicle, like UKIP was.

prawnsambo

An Claidheamh wrote: »

1) Redirecting trade around Britain should be our main priority - as important as changing our tax structure in the 50's.
As important as our merchant navy during the Emergency.

This has already been done. At EU level, Look up the North Sea Mediterranean corridor.

2) FG must state they will support a border poll if Britain does not back down.
Tories know FG are their poodles.

A border poll is solely in the gift of the SoS for NI. We have no role in deciding when it should happen or calling for it to happen. If we did, it would have the opposite effect on attitudes in NI than the one you seem to desire.

3) Remind Britain, ruling the North and securing their borders/immigrants/paramilitaries will not be easy without the support of Ireland.
These should be made in no uncertain terms.
And we ought to join Schengen.
Good luck to John Bull and Steve Gammon getting the Gardaí to capture illegals for them.
4) And state these things publicly, too much of taking these things on the chin for fear of upsetting our histrionic neighbours.
It's cowardly.

All of this can be done, but publicly? Totally counter productive.

Enzokk

ambro25 wrote: »

I may well be connecting unconnectable dots here, but...

Oakeshott gets the leak and publishes it.

Oakeshott is a known accolyte of Farage (recent pics all over Twitter yesterday).

Farage is well ingrained with the Trumpian sphere Stateside.

Boris doesn't back up Sir Darroch last night, notwithstanding his own, well-publicised rethoric against Trump.

...Boris names Farage as UK ambassador to US?

Controversial, sure. Highly so. But too controversial for Boris? Mmm.

Anything that has Oakeshott's name around it is fishy to me. I am sure it will come out later on who leaked it and she will still be invited onto the BBC when the likes of Carole Cadwalladr will be ignored. I don't think it is as elaborate as you put down, but I don't think you are too far wrong.

As an aside, Oakeshott also had one of her sources go to jail for a story she printed, James O'Brien pointed out she is as far as he knows the only journalist this has happened to.

prawnsambo

Enzokk wrote: »

As an aside, Oakeshott also had one of her sources go to jail for a story she printed, James O'Brien pointed out she is as far as he knows the only journalist this has happened to.

Whoever leaked to her must be absolutely bricking it right now. Especially in light of that information.

Professor Moriarty

prawnsambo wrote: »

Whoever leaked to her must be absolutely bricking it right now. Especially in light of that information.

If I were her, I'd be very concerned. You don't piss the Foreign Office off by doing a hatchet job on one of their own.

Lackadaisical

InTheShadows wrote: »

He's done the right thing by going. If it happened here he'd brass neck it out until it was forgotten about. I greatly admire that about the UK political class unlike the cowards we have serving us here.

The guy did absolutely nothing but his job. His communication channels were compromised and someone broke the Official Secrets Act and he has been bullied out of his position by a foreign power.

I think he should have stood his ground and forced the British government to remove him. It's the government who is acting as cowards if he has been pushed.

This is a diplomatic disaster for the UK and reduces them to puppet state status.

ambro25

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If I were her, I'd be very concerned. You don't piss the Foreign Office off by doing a hatchet job on one of their own.

According to Twitter noises (from reputable handles), the leak qualifies as an OSA breach; there's a goid chance Oakeshott wouldn't be able to rely on a public interest defence (so would go to jail with her source); and Sir Darroch has indicated that the Met is now involved...

...but then, we have to bear in mind how the Met has 'handled' the Electoral Commision findings and volumes of evidence to date. "Ah no, not us guv', not seen or heard nothing, we've been waiting on you".

Professor Moriarty

ambro25 wrote: »

According to Twitter noises (from reputable handles), the leak qualifies as an OSA breach; there's a goid chance Oakeshott wouldn't be able to rely on a public interest defence (so would go to jail with her source); and Sir Darroch has indicated that the Met is now involved...

...but then, we have to bear in mind how the Met has 'handled' the Electoral Commision findings and volumes of evidence to date. "Ah no, not us guv', not seen or heard nothing, we've been waiting on you".

They might not just depend on the police. The Foreign Office would be well acquainted with a lot of spooks.

Enzokk

Nick Boles, now independent MP is not holding back on this affair.

https://twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1148928540395614209

https://twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1148929897722798080

https://twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1148932212525608960

That is some criticism of Johnson. He has no chance of a easy time in Westminster. He could dare to call a GE, but with Brexit not delivered yet it will be suicide for the Tories. They could do it after they have left, but since the referendum that has been their only purpose and they have not succeeded. They will get hammered by the Brexit Party and if Labour is smart they will easily win a majority. But then again it is Labour of Corbyn so I expect them to mess it up as well.

trellheim

Lets imagine for the moment that one role of ambassadors is to give their warts and all impressions back to the Government ( as Darroch was doing ).

Now , its become evident that expediency means hanging you out by your unmentionables if you do just that for short term political gain.

Therefore any new ambassador will tell their masters what they want to hear , nullifying one of their major roles and making it harder for HMG to do its job

(Imagine the UK ambassadors to the French and German govts being asked "So what will they do about the backstop" ... answer "they'll roll over and give us whatever we want, fill your boots" /s ... thats now the way forward if you want to keep the post )

Theres not a bad case for whoever leaked this as treason as it is actually damaging to the UK State

mickoneill31

InTheShadows wrote: »

He's done the right thing by going. If it happened here he'd brass neck it out until it was forgotten about. I greatly admire that about the UK political class unlike the cowards we have serving us here.

Jesus, have you been watching the political class in the UK over the last couple of years. Any time I think ours are idiots I just look over there and think we could have it so much worse.

Admittedly I think you're correct about his resignation. His job was untenable because of the toddler. Unfortunately for the UK they're so screwed that they can't really give out to the US about it too much. The UK now needs to keep Trump happy (part of that taking back control)

Water John

Alan Duncan really lets Boris have it:
Sir Alan Duncan, a Foreign Office minister, said Johnson had thrown Darroch “under the bus to serve his own personal interests ” and accused him of “contemptible negligence”.

Duncan told the BBC: “I’m upset and angry. And there are a lot of people here in the Commons who are very, very angry and feel he has lost so much respect for having done what he’s done. His disregard for Sir Kim Darroch and his refusal to back him was in my view pretty contemptible, but also not in the interests of the country he’s trying to lead.”

DOCARCH

Seems a bit crazy to be having these public/televised debates, between the Tory leader candidates, after some Tory members have already voted!

VinLieger

DOCARCH wrote: »

Seems a bit crazy to be having these public/televised debates, between the Tory leader candidates, after some Tory members have already voted!

Exactly what Boris wanted and why he refused the earlier debates

BluePlanet

So Britain wants to torpedo the economy here.

I disagree with Coveney's mealy-mouthed, 'fudge' on having border checks offsite somewhere, away from the actual border. This only strengthen's Brexiteer's POV about the need for the border, and will likely inject inefficiencies in the transit of goods, will also add additional circumvention of controls.

Eventually our EU partners may balk at this fudge, imagine the fallout when something gets exposed (like the horsemeat scandal) and our inspection regime is revealed as inadequate. Not good.

This is why we should go big: clear and unambiguous defense of the SM, with clear border infastructure and no fudging. This will also carry the added benefit of physically isolating NI which will drive unification.

Professor Moriarty

BluePlanet wrote: »

So Britain wants to torpedo the economy here.

I disagree with Coveney's mealy-mouthed, 'fudge' on having border checks offsite somewhere, away from the actual border. This only strengthen's Brexiteer's POV about the need for the border, and will likely inject inefficiencies in the transit of goods, will also add additional circumvention of controls.

Eventually our EU partners may balk at this fudge, imagine the fallout when something gets exposed (like the horsemeat scandal) and our inspection regime is revealed as inadequate. Not good.

This is why we should go big: clear and unambiguous defense of the SM, with clear border infastructure and no fudging. This will also carry the added benefit of physically isolating NI which will drive unification.

That's a fair way of looking at it. I suppose the 'abandoning" of nationalists wouldn't play out too well though. Even if the long term gain might be a UI.

Sam Russell

What do you think the American Ambassador to the Court of St James is sending to the US State Dept about what is going on in Westminster?

Maybe Trump should leak a few of those telegrams.

A Dub in Glasgo

DOCARCH wrote: »

Seems a bit crazy to be having these public/televised debates, between the Tory leader candidates.

Should have just put a fullstop there

It is surreal to me that 160k Tories are going to decide yet the TV companies are broadcasting this guff to the public as if they can decide

Stop moaning ffs

Listened to it again today. Moderator was woeful. She went really hard on Hunt and let Johnson run riot. She never even chased him to answer the questions. He didn’t answer a single one directly.

Such a pointless excercise all in all

BluePlanet

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That's a fair way of looking at it. I suppose the 'abandoning" of nationalists wouldn't play out too well though. Even if the long term gain might be a UI.

It's perfectly ok as nationalists in NI already feel abandoned by the Republic and carry open disdain for the FG party in particular.
FG are in way, perfectly positioned to absorb their scorn.

Strazdas

BluePlanet wrote: »

So Britain wants to torpedo the economy here.

I disagree with Coveney's mealy-mouthed, 'fudge' on having border checks offsite somewhere, away from the actual border. This only strengthen's Brexiteer's POV about the need for the border, and will likely inject inefficiencies in the transit of goods, will also add additional circumvention of controls.

Eventually our EU partners may balk at this fudge, imagine the fallout when something gets exposed (like the horsemeat scandal) and our inspection regime is revealed as inadequate. Not good.

This is why we should go big: clear and unambiguous defense of the SM, with clear border infastructure and no fudging. This will also carry the added benefit of physically isolating NI which will drive unification.

I think Coveney was being deliberately vague here. Use the words "hard border" and they would instantly be seized upon by the Brexiteers and the British press and they would even claim they were blameless and it was Ireland putting up the hard border.