Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Enzokk

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Three months. If that's the case then I've no doubt the new members are hardcore Brexiteers. Anyone pro EU wouldn't bother joining them.

There was a definite missed opportunity for Remainers to influence who the next leader is as the membership is so small you wouldn't need too many to have an influence.

BonnieSituation

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Three months. If that's the case then I've no doubt the new members are hardcore Brexiteers. Anyone pro EU wouldn't bother joining them.

You need to be an FG member for two years before you can vote in their leadership elections and even then the weighting would not be in your favour unlike the Tories.

Professor Moriarty

Enzokk wrote: »

There was a definite missed opportunity for Remainers to influence who the next leader is as the membership is so small you wouldn't need too many to have an influence.

Indeed. If the Tiggers Chukas Thingymebobs were strategic they would have followed your advice.

Professor Moriarty

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You need to be an FG member before you can vote in their leadership elections and even then the weighting would not be in your favour unlike the Tories.

You need to be a Tory member for three months to get a vote. Dunno about FG?

BonnieSituation

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

You need to be a Tory member for three months to get a vote. Dunno about FG?

Ha. I actually omitted the part that was the crux of my post. Oops. Fixed now.

Professor Moriarty

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Ha. I actually omitted the part that was the crux of my post. Oops. Fixed now.

Ah! That says it all. Two years versus three months. No doubt that many disaffected UKIP voters joined up well before the first Brexit date of 29th March so that they could start deselecting pro EU MPs and agitating within the Tory party. A leadership vote will be a big bonus.

Laois_Man

I'm starting to believe Rory Stewart COULD win this - if he can get to Tuesday's debate and put in a great performance at it

He was interesting on Sunday morning on Farage's LBC show. See the question from a Belfast caller, he is the first UK politician I have seen with any understanding of the border issue

From just under 1hr, 36 minutes in

Of course, not sure how realistic his answer is - no hard border or border down the Irish sea - the UK wide backstop getting thru the HoC is the only way to achieve this when he readily admits they are not getting a new deal from Brussels. But he is a million miles ahead of the others just by having a basic understanding!

Lackadaisical

Laois_Man wrote: »

I'm starting to believe Rory Stewart COULD win this - if he can get to Tuesday's debate and put in a great performance at it

Unfortunately, that's unlikely. He's standing for election in the Tory Party and up against one of the most bizarre times in British politics. In normal times or if he were hypothetically standing in Ireland, he'd have a very good chance, but standing up for election in the Tory Party at peak Brexit, I would generally think he hasn't a hope.

He could, however, end come back in a few years time after the Tories have destroyed themselves though as a potential future leader. It's not going to happen now though.

trellheim

One of the first things rory stewart did was walk along the Irish Border if I recall

BonnieSituation

Lackadaisical wrote: »

Unfortunately, that's unlikely. He's standing for election in the Tory Party and up against one of the most bizarre times in British politics. In normal times or if he were hypothetically standing in Ireland, he'd have a very good chance, but standing up for election in the Tory Party at peak Brexit, I would generally think he hasn't a hope.

He could, however, end come back in a few years time after the Tories have destroyed themselves though as a potential future leader. It's not going to happen now though.

He's running this time around to win next time around. If the Tories exist by then.

It's essentially the Varadkar play*. I just don't think Boris is as shrewd as Enda to bring him close.










*Varadkar didn't run in 2010 obviously but he made himself be such a thorn for Enda that he had to be brought into front bench/cabinet. Without him sidiing with Bruton that day he wouldn't be Taoiseach now.

trellheim

there was a very funny tweet this morning

1 - Boris (earlier) "fk business" (Suggesting that mere commercial concerns did not outweigh the will of the people yadda yadda)

2. Matt Hancock (when running against Boris ) 'fk "fk business"' (suggesting that (1) above was outlandish and that business mattered very much)

3. Now that Matt Hancock has thrown in behind Boris 'fk 'fk 'fk business'''

Blowfish

So, I'm shamelessly stealing this from Reddit, but this, similar to Barnier's 'red lines' diagram, is a great visualisation of the issue, none of them actually have a solution:

Quin_Dub

Blowfish wrote: »

So, I'm shamelessly stealing this from Reddit, but this, similar to Barnier's 'red lines' diagram, is a great visualisation of the issue, none of them actually have a solution:

To be fair to him - At least Rory Stewart is accepting the reality that May's deal is the only viable option.

The fact that no one else seems to be capable of grasping that isn't really his fault.

swampgas

From the comments section in The Guardian, an interesting point about how any negotiations with the EU will go if they crash out with no deal.

Blue_Lobster in the Guardian wrote:

TheEconomist wrote:

So far Brexit negotiations have come under Article 50, allowing a deal to be agreed by a majority of eu governments and approved only by the European Parliament. Once Britain is a third country, any negotiations would fall under a different provision, probably Article 218, which requires not just unanimous agreement but also ratification by all national and several regional parliaments. After Britain had repudiated the negotiated withdrawal agreement, the temptation for one of these bodies to reject any replacement deal would be large.

The above is from current issue of The Economist.

For those morons who think it is far easier to negotiate with the EU after defaulting to the WTO, it should be noted that currently during A50, a deal only requires EU Parliament's agreement. After A50 expires, a deal requires regional parliament's agreement in addition agreements.

So, in a few months time, if the UK continues on its current trajectory, it could find itself in an even weaker position than it is now when trying to negotiate a trade deal with the EU. I've run out of superlatives to describe how shambolic the UK is right now.

AlmightyCushion

swampgas wrote: »

From the comments section in The Guardian, an interesting point about how any negotiations with the EU will go if they crash out with no deal.



So, in a few months time, if the UK continues on its current trajectory, it could find itself in an even weaker position than it is now when trying to negotiate a trade deal with the EU. I've run out of superlatives to describe how shambolic the UK is right now.

And there is no way in hell, that we'll agree to any trade deal while there is a physical border with the north. So, to get a trade deal, the very least they'll need to do is accept the backstop. If they just accept it now and go with the withdrawal agreement, it saves them so much hassle in the long run.

Quin_Dub

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

And there is no way in hell, that we'll agree to any trade deal while there is a physical border with the north. So, to get a trade deal, the very least they'll need to do is accept the backstop. If they just accept it now and go with the withdrawal agreement, it saves them so much hassle in the long run.

This is the thing that has always utterly baffled me.

How can anyone in the UK believe that they'll somehow get better/different terms from the EU in a post Brexit no-Deal scenario?

KildareP

Quin_Dub wrote: »

This is the thing that has always utterly baffled me.

How can anyone in the UK believe that they'll somehow get better/different terms from the EU in a post Brexit no-Deal scenario?

Because we (EU) need them (UK) more than they need us - apparently.

They seem to think EU will come running to them within days of them leaving desperate to sign a deal on any terms.

Leroy42

Always baffles me too. They have sold this narrative that they were effectively sidelined and ignored within the EU, bullied into making laws against the UK wishes etc. Yet they seem to think that the best way to counteract that is to remove themselves from the room and now become direct competitors to the EU rather than a partner.

Infini

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

And there is no way in hell, that we'll agree to any trade deal while there is a physical border with the north. So, to get a trade deal, the very least they'll need to do is accept the backstop. If they just accept it now and go with the withdrawal agreement, it saves them so much hassle in the long run.

Likely the price for settling the issue of the North will go up too because if theres ultimately a shift to Unification then there's gonna be bills to be settled too to satify all the Unionists who got shafted by Brexit and its consequences.

MrMusician18

Laois_Man wrote: »

I'm starting to believe Rory Stewart COULD win this - if he can get to Tuesday's debate and put in a great performance at it

He was interesting on Sunday morning on Farage's LBC show. See the question from a Belfast caller, he is the first UK politician I have seen with any understanding of the border issue

From just under 1hr, 36 minutes in

Of course, not sure how realistic his answer is - no hard border or border down the Irish sea - the UK wide backstop getting thru the HoC is the only way to achieve this when he readily admits they are not getting a new deal from Brussels. But he is a million miles ahead of the others just by having a basic understanding!

This I think it's symptomatic of the kind of problems we face today. Rory Stewart hasn't a hope in hell and is almost certainly to be the next candidate eliminated. When you surround yourself with biased media, social or otherwise, it can distort our perceptions.

To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if Rory polls smaller next time around as the voters consolidate around the real contenders.

Call me Al

KildareP wrote: »

Because we (EU) need them (UK) more than they need us - apparently.

They seem to think EU will come running to them within days of them leaving desperate to sign a deal on any terms.

Don't forget their 39billion. Apparently the EU needs the UK money. (I'm not getting into the conspiracy theory about this all being a desperate gamble in trying to lock the UK and their contributions into the EU). And by golly one will consider giving them this money when they come begging for a trade deal. All on British terms of course.

Lackadaisical

They're not great at understanding scale. That's 39 billion over ten years if I recall correctly. So worth a whopping €8.70 per capita per year to the remaining EU members. We'll be rich!!

Then when you take away the fact that it's paying for services used by the UK / pensions etc and wind down of membership. We probably get 0.00.

bilston

MrMusician18 wrote: »

This I think it's symptomatic of the kind of problems we face today. Rory Stewart hasn't a hope in hell and is almost certainly to be the next candidate eliminated. When you surround yourself with biased media, social or otherwise, it can distort our perceptions.

To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if Rory polls smaller next time around as the voters consolidate around the real contenders.

I've seen at least 4 MPs who were previously supporting other candidates announce they are now backing him.

He'll need a lot more than that to get to 33, but if he does it would be great to see him taking on Boris.

Sam Russell

Blowfish wrote: »

So, I'm shamelessly stealing this from Reddit, but this, similar to Barnier's 'red lines' diagram, is a great visualisation of the issue, none of them actually have a solution:

That unicorn assigned to Rory Stewart is unfair. The only way that is a unicorn is an aspiration the HoC has not voted for it (yet). There are only three choices open to the HoC if the EU do not grant an extension (or is not asked).

1: Crash out, which they have passed legislation to prevent before and could do so again.

2: Vote for the WA agreement which has been rejected by historic margins on three occasions, but could be reconsidered again with a different result if the realisation seeps through that it is the only way of leaving the EU.

3: Revoke Art 50, which although constitutionally possible, is considered politically impossible.

However, all three options are politically impossible.

So Rory has zero unicorns, and gets my vote. Wait, I do not have a vote.

johnnyskeleton

bilston wrote: »

I've seen at least 4 MPs who were previously supporting other candidates announce they are now backing him.

He'll need a lot more than that to get to 33, but if he does it would be great to see him taking on Boris.

The best we could realistically expect is that he would be in the last two, frame it as deal vs no deal, Boris wins hugely amongst the Tory membership and then Rory gets to say he told them so! That is the best result that reason and level headedness can hope to achieve in the UK at the moment.

Mezcita

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Rory Stewart hasn't a hope in hell

Course he does. Stewart is now 2nd favourite at 16/1 to win (In from 33/1) last week.

https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-prime-minister

Now that's obviously an indication of where the money is going on this and how the bookies have priced the market. But to suggest that he hasn't got a chance is wrong. Boris just needs to say the wrong thing and he has literally years of experience doing just that.

Stewart is unlikely to win. But he certainly has a chance if/when Boris messes up. Tuesday debate should be interesting.

Water John

Rory's first hurdle is, getting on the debate.

swampgas

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

And there is no way in hell, that we'll agree to any trade deal while there is a physical border with the north. So, to get a trade deal, the very least they'll need to do is accept the backstop. If they just accept it now and go with the withdrawal agreement, it saves them so much hassle in the long run.

I agree.

The problem for the UK is that accepting the backstop forces them to acknowledge that they simply cannot satisfy all of their red lines. It's impossible to resolve the border in a way that will satisfy Ireland/EU, and the DUP, and the hard Brexiters, which is why they are so desperate to have the backstop removed or time-limited.

Something's got to give to avoid a no-deal Brexit. They just can't face the embarrassment of admitting it yet.

devnull

This tells you why Stewart won't win
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1140563122358497285?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1140563122358497285&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Flive-another-johnson-no-show-as-tory-leadership-hopefuls-face-journalists-11743193

The Tory party prefer unicrons to realism.

Professor Moriarty

devnull wrote: »

This tells you why Stewart won't win
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1140563122358497285?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1140563122358497285&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Flive-another-johnson-no-show-as-tory-leadership-hopefuls-face-journalists-11743193

The Tory party prefer unicrons to realism.

68% for Raab. Depressing.