General British politics discussion thread

breezy1985

10000maniacs wrote: »

Labour were as much to blame for Brexit as the Tories. Corbyn hated the EU even more than Johnson but he couldn't say it in public. He never gave a straight answer to anything. Labours worst leader in living memory.
It was too easy for the Tories to pick chunks out of him. He had too much of a history of doing idiotic things.
And supporting causes like Palestine was never going to go down well with the Jewish contingent in the party.

"Never gave a straight answer" this is why Labour have such an uphill battle because the Tories give a straight answer on nothing but it's ok for them and they support killers all over the world but when Corbyn does it it's wrong. During the election Tories kept pushing his supposed love for the IRA which cost him and then jump into bed with the DUP and it cost them nothing.

Corbyn was never gonna win and if he was in Ireland he wouldn't even be in a big party but leading a small one and much like a small party he was able to put things on the agenda that were desperately needed in the UK

Again as a winning ticket he was a bad choice but manefesto Vs manefesto I would vote for his Labour over most political parties that have ever stood in an election I have voted in

PommieBast

Leroy42 wrote: »

Except that by being almost 100% SNP, and having very little chance of changing that, the Tories can effectively ignore it. A failure to provide for Scotland will not result in anything negative for the Tories (or it must be said Labour).

10-15 years down the line I can see the Conservative party accepting Scottish independence as the price worth paying for staying in office.

breezy1985

PommieBast wrote: »

10-15 years down the line I can see the Conservative party accepting Scottish independence as the price worth paying for staying in office.

Thing is Labour need them to get into power so it will probably be them to sign off on the next referendum and they will take all the blame for breaking the union because people are unable to actually think about it and realize that it was the Tories that drove people to take the chance that Scotland is better alone

beggars_bush

Labour were so foolish to even call an election

Joe_ Public

beggars_bush wrote: »

Labour were so foolish to even call an election

Did they have much choice? I think history will record that it was the lib dems, with the help of the snp, that facilitated Johnsons wish for a pre brexit election. Labour can be criticised for a lot but i dont think the election date was their wish or ultimate design.

PommieBast

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Did they have much choice? I think history will record that it was the lib dems, with the help of the snp, that facilitated Johnsons wish for a pre brexit election. Labour can be criticised for a lot but i dont think the election date was their wish or ultimate design.

Noises I hear from LibDem insiders is that the Euro-election result went to Jo Swinson's head, and that is why they broke ranks trying to stop an election.

Sam Russell

PommieBast wrote: »

Noises I hear from LibDem insiders is that the Euro-election result went to Jo Swinson's head, and that is why they broke ranks trying to stop an election.

If Corbyn accepted the offer of Ken Clarke as interim PM in a cobbled together temporary Gov to stop Art 50, and go for another referendum, then the whole mess could be sorted properly.

However, Corbyn .................

Leroy42

Sam Russell wrote: »

If Corbyn accepted the offer of Ken Clarke as interim PM in a cobbled together temporary Gov to stop Art 50, and go for another referendum, then the whole mess could be sorted properly.

However, Corbyn .................

If people had voted for what was actually in front of them there than getting carried away with jingoistic nonsense and actually held the Tory government to account.

However, people...............

And even then, the Tory party had the availability of a extended tranisation, could have planned things properly, could have made some concessions for the consideration of the country as a whole rather than stick to their ideology. It was the Tories that introduced the Internal Bill that looks to break the WA and international law.

Ther is plenty to blame Corbyn for, most notably the collapse in the Labour vote. but Brexit is what it is because of the Tories, 100%. Labour even tried to help TM with talks but even then the Tories raised against Labour having any say.

breezy1985

Sam Russell wrote: »

If Corbyn accepted the offer of Ken Clarke as interim PM in a cobbled together temporary Gov to stop Art 50, and go for another referendum, then the whole mess could be sorted properly.

However, Corbyn .................

Stopping Art 50 would have been wrong though. I voted against Brexit but I fully believe in respecting it. The best anyone anti Brexit could have really hoped for was Corbyns very soft Brexit

Joe_ Public

It works both ways surely. If the likes of Ken Clarke or lib dem mps or any others were really that determined to stop brexit, then pethaps they shouldn't have let their enmity of the opposition leader get in the way. Seems it was entirely up to corbyn to step aside because, well, people didnt like him and it would be all his fault when the whole thing came unstuck. Thinking back, i remember saying that I'd have liked if corbyn had found a way to take a back seat and put someone else forward but i understood too why it didnt happen. There was pride and stubbornness on both sides. He's a convenient scapegoat but thats a half truth at best.

Sam Russell

Stopping Art 50 was a gift from the ECJ. It was a surprise that the found the way they did.

Stopping Art 50 was necessary because while the clock kept ticking, time was running out. Having a second referendum was necessary so that a true, clear question was put to the people, and the lies, and false statements were balanced. It would also give the remain side to educate people of all the benefits that the EU brought to the UK, the good, powerful, place the UK held within the EU, and the poor place they would occupy in the WTO world they are now heading for.

There is no disrespect to the voters who voted to leave by having a second, better worded, referendum. There has been huge disrespect to the voters that voted to remain. They have been ignored and vilified.

If the vote was so certain, why not put the question - 'now that you have decided to leave, what sort of relationship do you want with the EU?'

For nearly 100 years, the UK has been governed by minority governments that do not command the majority of the popular vote. The Con/LibDem coalition is the only exception.

(No single party government has been formed by a party that commanded a majority of the popular vote since 1932).

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

If people had voted for what was actually in front of them there than getting carried away with jingoistic nonsense and actually held the Tory government to account.

However, people...............

And even then, the Tory party had the availability of a extended tranisation, could have planned things properly, could have made some concessions for the consideration of the country as a whole rather than stick to their ideology. It was the Tories that introduced the Internal Bill that looks to break the WA and international law.

Ther is plenty to blame Corbyn for, most notably the collapse in the Labour vote. but Brexit is what it is because of the Tories, 100%. Labour even tried to help TM with talks but even then the Tories raised against Labour having any say.

Brexit is not 100% the Tories at all. Labour supported the bill to hold a referendum and they supported the bill to honour the result of the referendum.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-32863749
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/07/labour-three-line-whip-to-force-mps-to-back-unamended-brexit-bill

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

Brexit is not 100% the Tories at all. Labour supported the bill to hold a referendum and they supported the bill to honour the result of the referendum.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-32863749
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/07/labour-three-line-whip-to-force-mps-to-back-unamended-brexit-bill

So you think that it would a winning strategy to vote against giving people a vote and accepting the democratic decision?

How do you think that would have been played out, given how 'Remoaners' have been called traitors?

There is no problem either having a vote, or carrying out the result. It was how both of them were done, and continue to be done. Refusing to extend the transition period, just one example, will go down as one of the most political cynical decisions ever taken. For Give to stand up in the HoC and point out how unready everyone actually was and yet he had no intention of ever-extending is the real problem.

If there had been a more competent Labour party maybe none of this would have happened, but you are blaming them for not stopping the Tories rather than blaming the tories themselves.

But fine, maybe not 100%. 75% then.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

So you think that it would a winning strategy to vote against giving people a vote and accepting the democratic decision?

How do you think that would have been played out, given how 'Remoaners' have been called traitors?

There is no problem either having a vote, or carrying out the result. It was how both of them were done, and continue to be done. Refusing to extend the transition period, just one example, will go down as one of the most political cynical decisions ever taken. For Give to stand up in the HoC and point out how unready everyone actually was and yet he had no intention of ever-extending is the real problem.

If there had been a more competent Labour party maybe none of this would have happened, but you are blaming them for not stopping the Tories rather than blaming the tories themselves.

But fine, maybe not 100%. 75% then.

Labour voted for the referendum, they then voted in favour of inacting article 50.

They then voted against every deal put in front of the house of commons in the hope that they could cause enough confusion and discord that they could get in to power.

It failed miserably with the only success in bringing down Theresa May's government and handing power to Johnson.

Corbyn and his games have resulted in Brexit being managed by a bunch of idealists.

Labour are 50/50 responsible for Brexit and 75% responsible for where we are today.

breezy1985

Aegir wrote: »

Labour voted for the referendum, they then voted in favour of inacting article 50.

They then voted against every deal put in front of the house of commons in the hope that they could cause enough confusion and discord that they could get in to power.

It failed miserably with the only success in bringing down Theresa May's government and handing power to Johnson.

Corbyn and his games have resulted in Brexit being managed by a bunch of idealists.

Labour are 50/50 responsible for Brexit and 75% responsible for where we are today.

75% responsible what an absolute joke of a statement. More responsible than the crowd in charge through out the whole affair and the Tories and only the Tories put Johnson in charge no other party. If someone punches you and you fail to block it that doesn't make it 75% your fault for being bad at blocking.

Where Labour and many parties in the UK failed in regards to the EU is a complete lack of education on the matter. People only ever hear about the EU when it's some ECJ law that is "stealing freedom" and never all the good stuff like the RDF and this is where Brexit won a long time ago by making British people oblivious to the EU in a way that we haven't here

Joe_ Public

Voting for a referendum is not the same as voting for brexit. And voting to invoke A50 is certainly not the same as voting for the shambles that has unfolded. That is on tories. 100 per cent.

From the very start labours position was for a customs union with protections for workers and other rights and the complete ruling out of a no deal scenario. It is all set out clearly in their 2017 manifesto. They were consistent in arguing that position along with, to a lesser degree, the case for a second vote.

Sam Russell

Aegir wrote: »

Labour voted for the referendum, they then voted in favour of inacting article 50.

They then voted against every deal put in front of the house of commons in the hope that they could cause enough confusion and discord that they could get in to power.

It failed miserably with the only success in bringing down Theresa May's government and handing power to Johnson.

Corbyn and his games have resulted in Brexit being managed by a bunch of idealists.

Labour are 50/50 responsible for Brexit and 75% responsible for where we are today.

I think that is a partisan view.

The blame for the referendum being put lies with Cameron and his inability to lead the Tories against the internal cabal of anti-EU fundamentalists, and their extreme right wing views. He should have run them out of the party, the way Johnson did his opponents.

His inability to set up the vote to favour the remain side, which he favoured, shows his total lack of leadership. He was railroaded into a weak position, which is what happens to a weak leader.

His attempt to screw from the EU a few more exceptions for the exceptionist UK, shows more poor leadership qualities. You do not go to the EU and say we would like to stay so give us a few more exceptions. Having failed to get a few baubles, then go to the country with the line 'We have a great deal, even though we go no more exceptions'. It is a losers line. Surprise, he lost.

Having had the vote and lost, he ran for the hills. He should have called a GE.
What can anyone say about that?

What happened after that piece of cowardice was the Tories under May not even trying to get consensus within the HoC. She NEVER approached the opposition to get agreement on what Brexit actually meant, and her own rebels within her own party continued to move the goal posts, looking for more and more extreme interpretations of Brexit.

Corbyn had no power in any of this as he was useless. He had his own rebels that he could not control and commanded little to no respect within his own party.

He also was a useless leader, but he was not PM. He had no constitutional power, only to oppose. No matter what Labour did, or did not do, the Tories alone hold responsibility for the shambles that currently make up Brexit.

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

Labour voted for the referendum, they then voted in favour of inacting article 50.

They then voted against every deal put in front of the house of commons in the hope that they could cause enough confusion and discord that they could get in to power.

It failed miserably with the only success in bringing down Theresa May's government and handing power to Johnson.

Corbyn and his games have resulted in Brexit being managed by a bunch of idealists.

Labour are 50/50 responsible for Brexit and 75% responsible for where we are today.

And the ERG? TM suffered the heaviest defeats in HoC history. Johnson resigned over it.

You are basically blaming others for not stoping the Tories being complete and utter shambles. Farage has to take a very large shareo= of the blame. Even at the last GE, he could have had a massive impact on the Tory majority yet he pulled out, only to then condemn the WA later.

ArmaniJeanss

Assigning 75% of the blame to a party that hasn't been in government for over 10 years

breezy1985

Outside of having very little rational understanding of Europe another thing the UK was pretty virgin to pre Cameron was referendums.

The idea here is the government want to change something and hold a referendum for a positive outcome where as Cameron is the only guy I know of that held 3 referendums all of which he then campaigned against

breezy1985

breezy1985 wrote: »

75% responsible what an absolute joke of a statement. More responsible than the crowd in charge through out the whole affair and the Tories and only the Tories put Johnson in charge no other party. If someone punches you and you fail to block it that doesn't make it 75% your fault for being bad at blocking.

At a time when Parliament should have been working together, Labour were voting for one thing and then voting against the logical outcome of that vote. They were trying to appease the Brexit side of their support whilst also trying to appease the strong and very young element in Labour that got Corbyn into power in the first place.

It was a party where pro EU supporters voted in a pro Brexit leader. He knew what he wanted to do, but didn't want to upset the very people who put him there in the first place.

If he had put aside party politics and concentrated on achieving what the country had told him clearly they wanted to achieve,

Labour's games and horrendously garbled messages gave many people only one option in the election and this resulted in them effectively handing a huge majority to the Tories, so yes, I put 75% of the blame on them.

Just at a time when the country desperately need a decent opposition, they failed.

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Voting for a referendum is not the same as voting for brexit. And voting to invoke A50 is certainly not the same as voting for the shambles that has unfolded. That is on tories. 100 per cent.

So they voted for it, twice. Even invoked the three line whip, but aren't responsible?

They voted against every proposed eal they could with the sole objective of frustrating the entire process, but aren't responsible?

That's some pretty impresive mental gymnastics there.

Joe_ Public wrote: »

From the very start labours position was for a customs union with protections for workers and other rights and the complete ruling out of a no deal scenario. It is all set out clearly in their 2017 manifesto. They were consistent in arguing that position along with, to a lesser degree, the case for a second vote.

and how would a customs union have gone down with their support?

And don[t start on the ruling out a no deal rubbish, that is the negotiating equivalent of dropping your trousers and touching your toes. You always have to have a walk away postion.

breezy1985

Aegir wrote: »

At a time when Parliament should have been working together, Labour were voting for one thing and then voting against the logical outcome of that vote. They were trying to appease the Brexit side of their support whilst also trying to appease the strong and very young element in Labour that got Corbyn into power in the first place.

It was a party where pro EU supporters voted in a pro Brexit leader. He knew what he wanted to do, but didn't want to upset the very people who put him there in the first place.

If he had put aside party politics and concentrated on achieving what the country had told him clearly they wanted to achieve,

Labour's games and horrendously garbled messages gave many people only one option in the election and this resulted in them effectively handing a huge majority to the Tories, so yes, I put 75% of the blame on them.

Just at a time when the country desperately need a decent opposition, they failed.




So they voted for it, twice. Even invoked the three line whip, but aren't responsible?

They voted against every proposed eal they could with the sole objective of frustrating the entire process, but aren't responsible?

That's some pretty impresive mental gymnastics there.



and how would a customs union have gone down with their support?

And don[t start on the ruling out a no deal rubbish, that is the negotiating equivalent of dropping your trousers and touching your toes. You always have to have a walk away postion.

Not stopping something never ever makes you more to blame than the man pulling the trigger. Culpable but never more to blame. Neville Chamberlain isn't more to blame for the Holocaust than Hitler

Joe_ Public

Aegir wrote: »

At a time when Parliament should have been working together, Labour were voting for one thing and then voting against the logical outcome of that vote. They were trying to appease the Brexit side of their support whilst also trying to appease the strong and very young element in Labour that got Corbyn into power in the first place.

It was a party where pro EU supporters voted in a pro Brexit leader. He knew what he wanted to do, but didn't want to upset the very people who put him there in the first place.

If he had put aside party politics and concentrated on achieving what the country had told him clearly they wanted to achieve,

Labour's games and horrendously garbled messages gave many people only one option in the election and this resulted in them effectively handing a huge majority to the Tories, so yes, I put 75% of the blame on them.

Just at a time when the country desperately need a decent opposition, they failed.




So they voted for it, twice. Even invoked the three line whip, but aren't responsible?

They voted against every proposed eal they could with the sole objective of frustrating the entire process, but aren't responsible?

That's some pretty impresive mental gymnastics there.



and how would a customs union have gone down with their support?

And don[t start on the ruling out a no deal rubbish, that is the negotiating equivalent of dropping your trousers and touching your toes. You always have to have a walk away postion.

You are seriously criticising an opposition party for, um....opposing? Its not labours fault that neither the tory leave side or other leavers outlined what brexit actually was ("brexit means brexit" etc) and they were perfectly entitled to outline their own vision after the vote which they did and consistently argued for. I find it a bit amusing that others here are arguing that labour didnt do enough to stop brexit while you are suggesting they didnt do enough to support it. That just shows the really invidious position they were in quite frankly. Yes, they were deeply split over brexit and if there was a better election position they could have taken, then I've yet to hear it.

The no deal cliff edge maximum leverage position is working out really well, isnt it? EU should be caving in....any minute now....

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think that is a partisan view.

The blame for the referendum being put lies with Cameron and his inability to lead the Tories against the internal cabal of anti-EU fundamentalists, and their extreme right wing views. He should have run them out of the party, the way Johnson did his opponents.

It maybe is a partisan view. I have been very disappointed in Labour pretty much since Blair stepped down. Certainly after they elected the wrong brother as leader. They have gone back to their 1970s philosophies which didn't work in the 1970s and certainly work today.

Leroy42 wrote: »

And the ERG? TM suffered the heaviest defeats in HoC history. Johnson resigned over it.

You are basically blaming others for not stoping the Tories being complete and utter shambles. Farage has to take a very large shareo= of the blame. Even at the last GE, he could have had a massive impact on the Tory majority yet he pulled out, only to then condemn the WA later.

well Farage gets blame of course, he started the whole idea of leaving the EU. He has only ever been noise though and the inaction of both major parties has a big part to play in the growth of UKIP.

breezy1985 wrote: »

Not stopping something never ever makes you more to blame than the man pulling the trigger. Culpable but never more to blame. Neville Chamberlain isn't more to blame for the Holocaust than Hitler

ignoring the obvious Godwin moment, that is a good argument. I would say it was more akin to the Treaty of Versaille being responsible for the rise in power of the NAzi party though. Cause and effect and all that.

Joe_ Public

Joe_ Public wrote: »

You are seriously criticising an opposition party for, um....opposing?

But that's it. They didn't oppose the referendum bill of the actual Brexit bill, but started to cherry pick what they were and weren't going to oppose.

Joe_ Public

Aegir wrote: »

But that's it. They didn't oppose the referendum bill of the actual Brexit bill, but started to cherry pick what they were and weren't going to oppose.

I dont understand your contention. Are you suggesting there was some sort of moral compunction on labour to facilitate the tories hard brexit fantasies just because they voted for a referendum?
When you had the likes of gove and johnson changing their minds every 5 minutes, the erg supporting TMs agreement one day and opposing it the next. And the dup....god help us. The pm couldnt get her own party to agree to brexit and somehow you appear to be suggesting that is labours fault. Or am i picking that up wrong?

breezy1985

Aegir wrote: »

It maybe is a partisan view. I have been very disappointed in Labour pretty much since Blair stepped down. Certainly after they elected the wrong brother as leader. They have gone back to their 1970s philosophies which didn't work in the 1970s and certainly work today
ignoring the obvious Godwin moment, that is a good argument. I would say it was more akin to the Treaty of Versaille being responsible for the rise in power of the NAzi party though. Cause and effect and all that.

Blair's Labour is way more to blame for where we are now than Corbyns. His vacant politics left huge sections of UK society previously receptive to Labour either ambivalent or hostile to the party and like most PMs only used the EU as an excuse for bad decisions and never the good ones.

And as for Versailles and not stopping someone does not force their hand to do it.
Labour didn't do a good enough job stopping a hard Brexit does not by some law of nature mean that the Tories then have to do it it was still the Tories choice what to do

breezy1985

breezy1985 wrote: »

Blair's Labour is way more to blame for where we are now than Corbyns. His vacant politics left huge sections of UK society previously receptive to Labour either ambivalent or hostile to the party and like most PMs only used the EU as an excuse for bad decisions and never the good ones.

They did, they were also to blame for Murdoch really getting his claws in to British Politics. The Sun switching allegiance to Blair was pretty much because Major wanted nothing to do with them and Blair agreed that the UK would never enter the euro.

breezy1985 wrote: »

And as for Versailles and not stopping someone does not force their hand to do it.
Labour didn't do a good enough job stopping a hard Brexit does not by some law of nature mean that the Tories then have to do it it was still the Tories choice what to do

no, but my point is that the actions of the Labour (and in fairness, most of the parties) during May's time as PM created the environment that became pretty binary and the only winner was going to be the hard liners.

blackwhite

Aegir wrote: »

well Farage gets blame of course, he started the whole idea of leaving the EU. He has only ever been noise though and the inaction of both major parties has a big part to play in the growth of UKIP.

Don't give that waste of oxygen any more credit than he is due. Farage didn't even found UKIP

The Tories have had a not insignificant Euro-sceptic wing in their midst for a long time, well before UKIP.

Farage simply realised he could grow support for his Euro-sceptic views by linking the EU to the immigration bogeyman that the red-tops had been pushing for years.

PommieBast

Sam Russell wrote: »

The blame for the referendum being put lies with Cameron and his inability to lead the Tories against the internal cabal of anti-EU fundamentalists, and their extreme right wing views. He should have run them out of the party, the way Johnson did his opponents.

In turn that is due to an unwillingness of business to speak up due to blind support of the Conservative party.