Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

murphaph

Berserker wrote: »

Do people really buy this clutsy facade that Boris J. puts on? Not a chance in hell that Stewart or anyone else will outsmart him. Boris will be the next leader of the party. Stewart is mad to even consider running for leader at this moment in time. He can be another T.M. at best. Still can't see him getting the current deal through parliament.

But Stewart isn't saying "my way or the highway" like T. May did. He probably knows he can't get the deal through parliament. He has stated that if he cannot, that he will opt for a quickly convened citizens' assembly to chew the matter over and present their suggestion to parliament. He has also not ruled out a confirmatory referendum.

He understands the country is deeply split, right down the middle, over Brexit. He knows and is prepared to state that there will be know really satisfactory outcome for everyone because of this deep division.

Stewart is, IMO an honest politician (perhaps a rare thing) and Johnson is the antithesis of this. Johnson's past may well catch up with him if enough dirt starts to leak out before the Conservative Party members' vote takes place.

S.M.B.

I was at a Brexit debate back in April and Stewart was there representing May's deal with Hillary Benn on the opposite side. I'd have little respect for him if he did a full U-turn without any explanation.

Peregrinus

Stewart backs May's deal because he thinks - correctly - that given the negotiation position adopted by the UK (i.e. May's "red lines") it is the best deal that the UK could hope to get and, realistically, much better than the kind of deal they might have feared to get.

That analysis hasn't changed, and so Stewart hasn't changed his position on May's deal.

So far, so good. But of course it does mean that Steward accepts (a) that a decision to Brexit has been taken, and will not be reversed, and (b) that May's red lines are not going to be reconsidered. Whether he does this because he agrees with both of the, thinks they are correct and thinks they should not be reconsidered, or because he thinks it is simply too late to reconsider these matters or because he thinks that, politically, it is impossible to reconsider these matters, is not clear to me.

But in the end it means that Stewart, too, is a Brexiter, and indeed a hard Brexiter. Which means the range of options being offered to the Tory selectorate, and therefore to the country, is much narrower than it needs to be. You can choose any flavour of hard Brexit that you like.

Leroy42

Stewart has always said that Brexit must be carried out. So any votes in the HoC, the citizens assembly or even another ref, will be aimed at getting the 'best' Brexit.

That is not being honest. Being honest is saying that the realities of the situation are such that this Brexit is/has been such a mess that the best course of action is to pause and rethink. That the UK need to be better prepared. Take the time to work out some 'alternative arrangements' for the NI border.

Take some time to work out how to deal with a changing economy based on a significant move away from the EU.

First Up

Peregrinus wrote:

You're PM from the moment the Queen asks you (and you accept) until the Commons votes no confidence in you. That can be a while.

In the case of Boris and in the midst of the Brexit chaos, I'd give it about 45 minutes

Beechwoodspark

German foreign minister Roth says Germany will not tolerate any attempt by UK to substantially change the WA

woohoo!!!

murphaph wrote: »

Berserker wrote: »

Do people really buy this clutsy facade that Boris J. puts on? Not a chance in hell that Stewart or anyone else will outsmart him. Boris will be the next leader of the party. Stewart is mad to even consider running for leader at this moment in time. He can be another T.M. at best. Still can't see him getting the current deal through parliament.

But Stewart isn't saying "my way or the highway" like T. May did. He probably knows he can't get the deal through parliament. He has stated that if he cannot, that he will opt for a quickly convened citizens' assembly to chew the matter over and present their suggestion to parliament. He has also not ruled out a confirmatory referendum.

He understands the country is deeply split, right down the middle, over Brexit. He knows and is prepared to state that there will be know really satisfactory outcome for everyone because of this deep division.

Stewart is, IMO an honest politician (perhaps a rare thing) and Johnson is the antithesis of this. Johnson's past may well catch up with him if enough dirt starts to leak out before the Conservative Party members' vote takes place.

Stewart is pragmatic and understands that a deal is absolutely required. Tories used to known for their pragmatism and getting deals done, he's coming from side of Tories. As he still advocates Brexit, he's definitely still a Tory, and has no intention of joining lib dems.

Peregrinus

First Up wrote: »

In the case of Boris and in the midst of the Brexit chaos, I'd give it about 45 minutes

I duyno. May was numbered among the living dead for months because the one thing the Commons feared more than zombies was a general election. I'm not sure that the election of Johnson would do much to change that calculation.

murphaph

Leroy42 wrote: »

Stewart has always said that Brexit must be carried out. So any votes in the HoC, the citizens assembly or even another ref, will be aimed at getting the 'best' Brexit.

That is not being honest. Being honest is saying that the realities of the situation are such that this Brexit is/has been such a mess that the best course of action is to pause and rethink. That the UK need to be better prepared. Take the time to work out some 'alternative arrangements' for the NI border.

Take some time to work out how to deal with a changing economy based on a significant move away from the EU.

We live outside the Brexit bubble. To us it's obvious that they are making a huge mistake. Huge swathes of the UK electorate simply don't believe the catastrophe that no deal would be. You can tell them until you are blue in the face and they vote for the snake oil salesman that promises them the sunlit uplands.

Stewart understands this key issue.

54and56

Leroy42 wrote: »

Stewart has always said that Brexit must be carried out. So any votes in the HoC, the citizens assembly or even another ref, will be aimed at getting the 'best' Brexit.

That is not being honest. Being honest is saying that the realities of the situation are such that this Brexit is/has been such a mess that the best course of action is to pause and rethink. That the UK need to be better prepared. Take the time to work out some 'alternative arrangements' for the NI border.

Take some time to work out how to deal with a changing economy based on a significant move away from the EU.

Your logic may be sound but it simply won't fly politically. Brexit if firmly a Tory issue and if the Tory's don't get it resolved ASAP Farage will capture all the hard Brexit votes and moderate Tories will move to the Lib Dems thus destroying the very existence of the party.

Self preservation trumps everything else.

The Tories have no choice but to implement Brexit if they want to survive as a party and they need to do so ASAP before a general election.

There is national (and international) fatigue with Brexit. A lot of otherwise clear thinking people just want Brexit, any form of Brexit, done and dusted so they (think they) can move on but the reality of course is that if they end up with a No Deal Brexit they will be swapping one form of multi year frustration for an entirely worse form of multi year frustration.

Leroy42

Yes I agree with all that, but this line that he is being honest need to be seen in that very context. He is being more honest than the others but he is being far from honest.

First Up

Peregrinus wrote:

I duyno. May was numbered among the living dead for months because the one thing the Commons feared more than zombies was a general election. I'm not sure that the election of Johnson would do much to change that calculation.

May was tolerated because the cliff edge was still some distance away. It isn't now.

The Tory faithful will back Boris for purely domestic reasons; he'll out-Brexit Farage and he's more likeable than Corbyn.

I expect him to win and who better to lead them over the abyss. He is probably waffling enough to keep the DUP on board too.

But when its obvious to even the dumbest that he can't part the Red Sea any better than May, I'd expect some significant re-alignment and a GE fairly soon.

I think the other candidates for PM understand this and are playing a longer game.

Hurrache

This is breathtakingly hypocritical from Leadsom.

https://twitter.com/theousherwood/status/1140887558383112194

Leroy42

Listening to JRM on Sky yesterday, he stated that the reason he backed Johnson was because he felt Johnson was the best bet at him being able to retain his seat (this admission that the Tories are first and foremost concerned with their own party rather than the country is apparently a SHOCK to the Express!).

So I would wager that many of the Tory party know that a GE is not long away. What the ERG and many others are hoping for is that Brexit is delivered (in the terms of a leaving date) before they have to hold that election.

Boris is not being voted for because they believe he can deliver a better deal, he is the same as Raab and others in that respect and on that criteria alone surely Gove would be doing much better as the other leading Brexiteer, it is because they believe he has the best change to hold off the challenge of Farage.

Peregrinus

First Up wrote: »

May was tolerated because the cliff edge was still some distance away. It isn't now.

I dunno. Brexit Day was orginally to be 29 March, and the first extension was only granted on 21 March. That was pretty close to the cliff-edge. But even though parliament did some pretty unusual things around that time, it did not shaft May precisely because it could not contemplate a GE.

First Up wrote: »

The Tory faithful will back Boris for purely domestic reasons; he'll out-Brexit Farage and he's more likeable than Corbyn.

I expect him to win and who better to lead them over the abyss. He is probably waffling enough to keep the DUP on board too.

But when its obvious to even the dumbest that he can't part the Red Sea any better than May, I'd expect some significant re-alignment and a GE fairly soon.

I think the other candidates for PM understand this and are playing a longer game.

You can always rely on Boris to let you down.

The one person who could change the UK's Brexit position and possilbly, just possibly, get away with it is Boris. The party cannot complain, because they elect him knowing that he is lying to them and will betray them. True, they don't know exactly how he will betray them but, when he does, they can hardly complain about the betrayal, because they knew all along it was coming.

I'm not saying that he will do this, but one left-field possibilty is that Boris could avoid no-deal by accepting the WA, or by calling a second referendum (and getting an extension to do so) and then, basically, daring the ERG to bring the government down, face the public at a GE and destroy the Tory party. I think, if he did that, even the ERG might blink.

Leroy42

Hurrache wrote: »

This is breathtakingly hypocritical from Leadsom.

But the real issue that people have with Johnson is that rather than stand up for his new found position, which I would have no problem with a politicians should be able to change their minds, rather than make the case that he now believed in he ran away to avoid having to have any position.

A true leader!

Berserker

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

German foreign minister Roth says Germany will not tolerate any attempt by UK to substantially change the WA

Would expect them to say that at this moment in time. No reason to say otherwise.

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Stewart is pragmatic and understands that a deal is absolutely required. Tories used to known for their pragmatism and getting deals done, he's coming from side of Tories. As he still advocates Brexit, he's definitely still a Tory, and has no intention of joining lib dems.

I disagree with him and you regarding the necessity for a deal but have no issue with the other points. He is a proper Tory and I would be shocked to see him jumping ship.

Stop moaning ffs

I think it was Hesiltine said of Boris the other day ‘he sees the direction the crowd of people are running, runs in front of them and says ‘follow me!’’
Which is what most politicians do but it’s not leadership.
But with the country so divided which way to run?
He has notions of Churchill so I’d like to think he wouldn’t be of the ‘party first, country distant second’ thinking. Let’s see though.

First Up

Part of me looks forward to watching the faces as Boris comes back from Brussels with the same result and I'll be interested to see the next act in the farce.

But from what I see, few MPs are thinking that far ahead. Some are hoping to flatter their way into a Boris cabinet and the rest are looking over their shoulders in their consituencies.

LeinsterDub

Can anyone explain one nation Tory? And what are the alternatives?

Hurrache

Leroy42 wrote: »

But the real issue that people have with Johnson is that rather than stand up for his new found position, which I would have no problem with a politicians should be able to change their minds, rather than make the case that he now believed in he ran away to avoid having to have any position.

A true leader!

The point moreso is with Leadsom advocating that someone should be able to change their mind once the full facts etc are available, but the electorate voted for Brexit with lies all over the place, but now that they know better, they're still not getting another shot, Brexit is Brexit.

murphaph

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yes I agree with all that, but this line that he is being honest need to be seen in that very context. He is being more honest than the others but he is being far from honest.

He has publicly stated that no deal would be a catastrophe. He said he would likely vote with Labour against his own government to prevent that if it came to it.

Russman

murphaph wrote: »

We live outside the Brexit bubble. To us it's obvious that they are making a huge mistake. Huge swathes of the UK electorate simply don't believe the catastrophe that no deal would be. You can tell them until you are blue in the face and they vote for the snake oil salesman that promises them the sunlit uplands.

Stewart understands this key issue.

This is the bit I just cannot get my head around. How can maybe 30% of a population not believe the consequences of a no-deal ? There's no metric I can see that justifies any part of Brexit but surely they can't really believe in the unicorns and sunlit uplands, can they ?


As for whether the HoC wants an election now, which is best (or worst) for them: an election now and the Tories get hammered by the Brexit Party ? or an election after a no-deal and they get hammered anyway ?

Sam Russell

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Can anyone explain one nation Tory? And what are the alternatives?

Google is your friend.

The Tories are divided into 'One Nation' which favours paternalist type social policies designed to be universally accepted by all classes in British society, particularly designed to appeal to the working class.

The other wing could be described as 'Free Market' capitalist who want to be driven by the 'market'. Margaret Thatcher was one of these as are the ERG.

Labour is equally divided into the 'Union' wing who fight for workers and workers rights or in extreme, pure Socialism - as in the Gov should own the wealth generators in the economy - or to put it another way - nationalise the economy. Blairites are more centrists and want a more middle ground approach so that they appeal to the middle classes.


Brexit is another division the adds chaos to these views.

Cryptopagan

Peregrinus wrote: »

I dunno. Brexit Day was orginally to be 29 March, and the first extension was only granted on 21 March. That was pretty close to the cliff-edge. But even though parliament did some pretty unusual things around that time, it did not shaft May precisely because it could not contemplate a GE.


You can always rely on Boris to let you down.

The one person who could change the UK's Brexit position and possilbly, just possibly, get away with it is Boris. The party cannot complain, because they elect him knowing that he is lying to them and will betray them. True, they don't know exactly how he will betray them but, when he does, they can hardly complain about the betrayal, because they knew all along it was coming.

I'm not saying that he will do this, but one left-field possibilty is that Boris could avoid no-deal by accepting the WA, or by calling a second referendum (and getting an extension to do so) and then, basically, daring the ERG to bring the government down, face the public at a GE and destroy the Tory party. I think, if he did that, even the ERG might blink.

Given Johnson at one point backed May’s deal, and prior to the referendum vacillated between declaring for Remain or Leave, I don’t think that’s an outlandish scenario. As bad as he is, a duplicitous careerist is preferable to getting some Brexit True Believer.

Peregrinus

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Can anyone explain one nation Tory? And what are the alternatives?

It's an old label in the Tory party - goes back to Disraeli, who was a Tory PM in the 1860s. He argued that the Tories should be conservative, in that they should seek to preserve established institutions (the church, the monarchy, existing social and economic relationshiops, etc) but at the same time should encourage those institutions to develop in a way that mean they would serve the welfare of the whole nation, and not just of the dominant classes. Basically, it was a response to universal male voting rights, which the UK had from 1867 onwards. Toryism had to sell itself not just to the propertied classes and business owners, who were its mainstay, but to the broad masses. So he opposed the (growing) division of the country into rich and poor, and favoured political action which would improve the lives of ordinary people, provide social support and protect the working class.

Since then there has a been a see-saw within the Tory party between one-nation Tories on the left (not always called that - in the Thatcher period they were called the "wets") who favour social cohesion and solidarity, and more ideological hardliners on the right, who favour free markets, opportunity, the interests of business and capital.

At the risk of over-simplifying, the austerity policies implemented by the Tory government since 2010 are the work of the latter faction, which has been dominant in the party in recent years. Since austerity is unpopular - duh! - it is currently seen as advantageous for ambitious Tories to try to identify themselves with the other faction. It's in this context that the "one nation" label has been revived.

20silkcut

Peregrinus wrote: »

I dunno. Brexit Day was orginally to be 29 March, and the first extension was only granted on 21 March. That was pretty close to the cliff-edge. But even though parliament did some pretty unusual things around that time, it did not shaft May precisely because it could not contemplate a GE.


You can always rely on Boris to let you down.

The one person who could change the UK's Brexit position and possilbly, just possibly, get away with it is Boris. The party cannot complain, because they elect him knowing that he is lying to them and will betray them. True, they don't know exactly how he will betray them but, when he does, they can hardly complain about the betrayal, because they knew all along it was coming.

I'm not saying that he will do this, but one left-field possibilty is that Boris could avoid no-deal by accepting the WA, or by calling a second referendum (and getting an extension to do so) and then, basically, daring the ERG to bring the government down, face the public at a GE and destroy the Tory party. I think, if he did that, even the ERG might blink.

If he sold out the DUP and accepted a border in the Irish Sea,obviously triggering an election ,would he not be in a stronger position going in to that election on the deliverable promise of securing a Canada style agreement, if given a majority, post election.

Stop moaning ffs

That’s telling. 54% of the party would rather see the party destroyed if it meant getting brexit.

https://twitter.com/yougov/status/1140885369476587521?s=21

Harry Palmr

The acceptable price of Brexit for a majority of Tories party members

They might as well tie a union jack St George scarf around their collective head and go out blazing in a divine wind.



https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1140885358231609345

farmchoice

Russman wrote: »

This is the bit I just cannot get my head around. How can maybe 30% of a population not believe the consequences of a no-deal ? There's no metric I can see that justifies any part of Brexit but surely they can't really believe in the unicorns and sunlit uplands, can they ?


As for whether the HoC wants an election now, which is best (or worst) for them: an election now and the Tories get hammered by the Brexit Party ? or an election after a no-deal and they get hammered anyway ?

this pretty much encapsulates the rot at the heart of english politics and society at the moment. 30% of the population are in thrall to a kind of crazy nostalgia.
by and large they are people who were born in the 20 years after the war, they grew up on stories of their nations greatness, a greatness in their eyes now gone.

Their England is now gone, in truth it was only ever an England of their imagination, England between the wars.
they are desperate to believe stories of their own greatness, so they believe farage and the rest.
they dont fear no deal because they have been told and believe that no deal hurts the eu more then it hurts them. that they will be fine because they are Britian and any way if they survived the war they can survive this ( they didn't survive the war their parents did, parents who if they are still alive almost certainly voted remain).


how this came to pass is hard to know. the media play a part as does the education system and the political class but to a large degree i believe it goes beyond those.
it is a type of PSTD resulting from the collapse of Empire. this was probably the last opportunity for a whole section of English society to assert its belief in its own greatness. comfortable in retirement or close to it or cast on the scrapheap of an industrial past, either way, nothing to lose.