Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

rock22

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

.....


They are a Remain party. The large majority of the membership is pro EU. The lack of Remain enthusiasm from Labour was Corbyn's fault. Remember that the large majority of Labour MPs didn't support him.


...

Do you know this? And is it reflected in the majority of Labour voters.
Labour has traditionally been anti EU (anti EEC) and twice promised to hold referenda to leave . While their position , in the parliamentary party, might have changed over the years it might not have reflected the wider party and Corbyn clearly came from the anti EU tradition of the party.

But it is always the governments job to get its own program through parliament and the Tories failed miserably because May consistently tried to please the hard Brexiteers. A softer Brexit could have found support from Labour but she was unwilling to countenance the idea of working with the opposition, seeing it almost as a matter of principle.

Britain was never happy in the EU ( or EEC) and to be honest, the EU is really better off without them. They would always be opposed to any closer integration feeling always that they would be happy to lead Europe but not to work together. It is why May was happier to lose you position rather than countenance working with the opposition. UK political practice and philosophy never attempted to work in partnership with others and the whole EU project was anathema to them. Right now, after 12 days of riots in northern Ireland, Johnson is resisting calls from Martin to hold an intergovernmental conference , for the same reason, i.e. that English politicians don't' work with people the work against others.

johnnyskeleton

Leroy42 wrote: »

To try to blame it on remainers, or Labour, is not only bizarre put points to just how disastrous this actual deal is.

Basically, Brexiteers are now claiming that Brexit is only as awful as it is because Labour didn't sort it out.

Well maybe some are but the point bring discussed is whether they carry some responsibility. The Conservatives carry the main responsibility, but Labour are certainly nit blameless in all this

Professor Moriarty

rock22 wrote: »

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Do you know this? And is it reflected in the majority of Labour voters.
Labour has traditionally been anti EU (anti EEC) and twice promised to hold referenda to leave . While their position , in the parliamentary party, might have changed over the years it might not have reflected the wider party and Corbyn clearly came from the anti EU tradition of the party.

But it is always the governments job to get its own program through parliament and the Tories failed miserably because May consistently tried to please the hard Brexiteers. A softer Brexit could have found support from Labour but she was unwilling to countenance the idea of working with the opposition, seeing it almost as a matter of principle.

Britain was never happy in the EU ( or EEC) and to be honest, the EU is really better off without them. They would always be opposed to any closer integration feeling always that they would be happy to lead Europe but not to work together. It is why May was happier to lose you position rather than countenance working with the opposition. UK political practice and philosophy never attempted to work in partnership with others and the whole EU project was anathema to them. Right now, after 12 days of riots in northern Ireland, Johnson is resisting calls from Martin to hold an intergovernmental conference , for the same reason, i.e. that English politicians don't' work with people the work against others.

In Dec 2018, 88% of Labour members said they would vote Remain in a second referendum. 71% of Labour voters said they would vote Remain, 20% said they would not vote Remain and 9% were undecided.

Strazdas

Leroy42 wrote: »

Once also has to remember the nationalistic vitriol around at the time.

Anybody even suggesting that Brexit, and a hard brexit, wasn't the greatest thing ever was a traitor

ERG, JRM himself, voted no confidence in TM. There was no way TM deal was ever going to go through.

To try to blame it on remainers, or Labour, is not only bizarre put points to just how disastrous this actual deal is.

Basically, Brexiteers are now claiming that Brexit is only as awful as it is because Labour didn't sort it out.

The mood was ugly as early as autumn 2016. The Daily Mail and others had already started their "enemies of the people" spiel, saying anyone who was opposed to Brexit being implemented was a traitor. It's not clear if the UK could have extracted a more sensible solution in that insane atmosphere.

Leroy42

Yes, exactly. The atmosphere was that UK was good, EU was bad and anybody that even tried to suggest a compromise was a traitor.

TM was called a traitor. This revisionism that somehow Labour should have stood up and done something. They did try something. They said that they need to review the a deal and look to renegotiate a better one.

They were decimated in the GE. Labour tried, very badly it has to be said, to point out the myriad problems and the people in the UK didn't want to listen.

The only people, apart of course for the majority of the blame being on the Tories themselves, that are to blame in this are the UK voters themselves. They allowed this to happen. They got to the point that any deal, no matter what type, seemed to be ok with them, just the notion of 'getting Brexit done' was enough for them.

johnnyskeleton

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yes, exactly. The atmosphere was that UK was good, EU was bad and anybody that even tried to suggest a compromise was a traitor.

I think we must have been observing two different realities these last 5 years. The UK was deeply divided from almost the day after the referendum right up to the result of the December, 2019 election. During that time, there was a very vocal pro Europe, pro remain voce in the UK. There were stop Brexit protests, Facebook campaigns and, crucially, there were three political parties who opposed Brexit consistently and unreservedly throughout - the Lib Dems, the SNP and the Greens.

Obviously if you've been reading the outrageous Daily Mail headlines etc you might think that anybody who suggested a compromise was a traitor, but that was just the daily mail.

This revisionism that somehow Labour should have stood up and done something.

Well its not revisionism insofar as people were criticising Labour at the time for not having a clear policy on Brexit during this period.

They did try something. They said that they need to review the a deal and look to renegotiate a better one.

At the time we were talking about, namely the May deal, they hadn't even crystalised their view into the negotiate a new deal and have a referendum on it.

They were on the 6 point test, which was a combination of vague, irrelevant and impossible criteria, my favourite of which was "Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the single market and customs union?".

So Labour's ultimate plan, when they were finally forced to pin their colours to their mast, was to go back to Europe and negotiate a withdrawal agreement that delivers the "exact same benefits" as members? Then they would have a second referendum on it? And this was only thought up in the run up to the Dec 2019 referendum, 3.5 years after the Brexit vote?

If that is them trying, I'd hate to see Labour half heart something.

They were decimated in the GE. Labour tried, very badly it has to be said, to point out the myriad problems and the people in the UK didn't want to listen.

The only people, apart of course for the majority of the blame being on the Tories themselves, that are to blame in this are the UK voters themselves. They allowed this to happen. They got to the point that any deal, no matter what type, seemed to be ok with them, just the notion of 'getting Brexit done' was enough for them.

So the people in the U.K. are to blame, but Labour are ideologically pure? Do you not think it's possible that, given that the margins were always fine but many opinion polls showed a slight remain preference, and the Tories were making such a mess of it, that maybe, just maybe, Labour might have shown some actual leadership and offered a viable alternative?

No, they flip flopped from one to the other, and where they needed to beat the LDs or SNP they were firmly remain, and where they needed to beat the Tories they were staunchly pro leave. Where they had a safe seat, they largely sat back and ignored Brexit, because it was more hassle for them than it was worth.

James O'Brien often quoted Yeats during this whole sorry saga, and I agree with him entirely:

The Second Coming wrote:

The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.

The reality, whether Labour supporting Remainers want to hear it or not, is that they half hearted the referendum, bungled the aftermath, naively (being charitable) voted to trigger Article 50, dithered during all the negotiations and debate, and then came up with a vague plan that was very late in the day, and lacking any real leadership or guidance.

Again, and I won't repeat myself anymore, the fact that the Tories bear primary responsibility does not mean that Labour are blameless. And trying to blame the voters rather than allow that Labour did anything wrong is....well, I'm sorry to say, but it's undemocratic and exaggerated

Leroy42

Not just the Daily Mail. ERG, JRM, Francois and even Johnson himself all called out TM and her deal.

Johnson resigned over it, as did Davis. Have you forgotten all of that?

Johnson said no PM could ever accept the deal.

It was divided evenly. People were told to accept the result, back Britain, stop being an EU stooge.

Ollie Robbins was completely castigated by the ERG and the likes.

The ERG said they weren't going to accept paying the financial settlement. No Deal was a clear destination they pursued. They never wanted compromise.

Also remember that Corbyn did agree to help TM through discussions. Unfortunately TM had completely ignored both Labour and in fact anyone that disagreed with Brexit.

He got nowhere, as the Tories were not actually looking for compromise

johnnyskeleton

Leroy42 wrote: »

Not just the Daily Mail. ERG, JRM, Francois and even Johnson himself all called out TM and her deal.

Are you suggesting that the ERG can be blamed for voting against May's deal, but that Labour cannot? Seems a little partisan. Also, ERG wanted as thin a deal as possible, and they got it, so they achieved their aims. To this day, I am still not entirely clear what Labour's end goal actually was.

Also remember that Corbyn did agree to help TM through discussions. Unfortunately TM had completely ignored both Labour and in fact anyone that disagreed with Brexit.

He got nowhere, as the Tories were not actually looking for compromise

More vague egoism I'm afraid. Corbyn agreed to help her with discussions? What does that even mean? If it was the case that Labour voted against the May deal because of specific reason X, then we could at least discuss whether they were right to vote against it for reason X or not. But all evidence indicates that they voted against it solely because it was Theresa May's deal and not a Labour deal. It was naked party politics and they understandably suffered their greatest electoral defeat in decades as a result.

Jizique

FT reporting that the EU and the UK are edging towards accord on trade rules for Northern Ireland

Gerry T

Jizique wrote:

FT reporting that the EU and the UK are edging towards accord on trade rules for Northern Ireland

Isn't that the NI protocol.
But seriously, the EU has said when the UK first implements the NI protocol then the EU will sit down, haven't read the article but what is it specifically saying

Jizique

Gerry T wrote: »

Isn't that the NI protocol.
But seriously, the EU has said when the UK first implements the NI protocol then the EU will sit down, haven't read the article but what is it specifically saying

Didn’t read, just saw FTEurope on Twitter - suspect it is U.K. agreeing to provide the data it was suppose to on trade flows

schmoo2k

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Are you suggesting that the ERG can be blamed for voting against May's deal, but that Labour cannot? Seems a little partisan. Also, ERG wanted as thin a deal as possible, and they got it, so they achieved their aims. To this day, I am still not entirely clear what Labour's end goal actually was.



More vague egoism I'm afraid. Corbyn agreed to help her with discussions? What does that even mean? If it was the case that Labour voted against the May deal because of specific reason X, then we could at least discuss whether they were right to vote against it for reason X or not. But all evidence indicates that they voted against it solely because it was Theresa May's deal and not a Labour deal. It was naked party politics and they understandably suffered their greatest electoral defeat in decades as a result.

Had Mays deal gone through and the UK were now part of the CU, the Brexitiers would have even more vitriol against the remainers for ruining their hard Brexit and keeping them under the EU rules...

Enzokk

So it seems like the story about the talks going on will be around the UK implementing the NIP and then the EU looking at ways to ease any problems there may be. But how can you know where to show flexibility if the agreement isn't even being operated as it should?

EU, UK officials working to resolve NI Protocol issues

I will quote the relevant sections,

EU and UK officials are embarking on a process of technical and political talks which could result in a new joint document on resolving the outstanding issues around the Northern Ireland Protocol, RTÉ News understands.

Diplomats have told RTÉ News that technical talks have been inching forward positively and that the process could be given a political boost by the UK's lead minister David Frost and his EU counterpart Maros Sefcovic as early as this week.

...

While the Commission believes it fell short on some points, there was a view that the UK was serious about implementing the protocol.

The UK government has demanded a large degree of flexibility from the EU, but EU diplomats say that if London continues to show it is implementing the protocol, then flexibility would be forthcoming.

dogbert27

That would mean the UK government will have to tell the DUP to get in line with the program and stop inciting Loyalists to threaten the customs infrastructure.

IT still has not been implemented in full to determine what problems are there

CelticRambler

The Johnsonian indoctrination seems to be working. From a Bloomberg article:

A new Bloomberg poll shows support for Brexit has grown since the historic 2016 referendum, and almost two-thirds of adults believe that being outside the EU helped the U.K.’s vaccination program to succeed.

In the survey of 2,002 people conducted online by JL Partners for Bloomberg, 67% of respondents said the EU has behaved in a “hostile” way toward Britain in the dispute over vaccine supplies. Just 13% said the bloc had acted like an “ally and a friend.”

...

The shift in attitudes can be seen among people who voted to stay in the bloc in the referendum, as well as those who opted to leave. It’s even visible in some of the most staunchly pro-EU parts of the country.

...

Almost one in five of those who voted to remain in the EU in 2016 would choose to stay out now, according to the poll. By contrast, only 9% of 2016 leave voters want to re-join.

When respondents who declined to back either side are removed, the equivalent of 54% of adults now say they would vote to stay out of the bloc in a repeat referendum, and 46% say they would re-join. That’s a wider margin than the 52%-48% split in 2016.

Should these figures be confirmed by other polls, it supports Leroy42's argument that the ultimate blame for Brexit lies with the voters rather than any particular party (or sect within a party): at the end of the day, it's easier to believe that British is Best and blame anyone-but-Boris, rather than apply critical thinking.

Leroy42

dogbert27 wrote: »

That would mean the UK government will have to tell the DUP to get in line with the program and stop inciting Loyalists to threaten the customs infrastructure.

IT still has not been implemented in full to determine what problems are there

IMO, that should be the first point of discussion before they go any further.

Johnson needs to stop the lies, stand up and actually lay out the reality to the UK. Stop blaming the EU for the NIP, for the EU being intransigent (they may well be and I'm sure there is plenty to be annoyed about but fighting in public helps nobody).

Tell everyone that the deal, including the WP, is the democratic will of the people of the UK. That it is going to be implemented in full, while the rougher edges will be sorted through discussion and mutual cooperation.

ONly then will the UK accept their part in this and that this isn't some plot by the EU, Ireland, Biden, China or whatever is the latest reason.

Unless they do that I can't ever see this working out as soon as they sort these issues, a whole load of new ones will emerge and the cycle starts again.

schmoo2k

Leroy42 wrote: »

IMO, that should be the first point of discussion before they go any further.

Johnson needs to stop the lies, stand up and actually lay out the reality to the UK. Stop blaming the EU for the NIP, for the EU being intransigent (they may well be and I'm sure there is plenty to be annoyed about but fighting in public helps nobody).

Tell everyone that the deal, including the WP, is the democratic will of the people of the UK. That it is going to be implemented in full, while the rougher edges will be sorted through discussion and mutual cooperation.

ONly then will the UK accept their part in this and that this isn't some plot by the EU, Ireland, Biden, China or whatever is the latest reason.

Unless they do that I can't ever see this working out as soon as they sort these issues, a whole load of new ones will emerge and the cycle starts again.

How on earth will that benefit the UK Government and media?

I told ya

There are a lot of things Johnson needs to do. Going on past form he won't. IMO, he doesn't care and there's no consequences for his actions or lack of actions.

He's not being held to account, by the opposition, the media in general, his own party and throw in his HofC majority. The Guardian and Channel 4 try but they're not getting much traction, if any.

He appeared outside No 10 on Friday to announce the death of Prince Philip, to the UK and by extension to world, and he couldn't be arsed to comb his hair.

IMO, he simply doesn't care.

The hair is more of a statement "The barber shops are shut, I can't get a haircut either!", just to avoid being called a hypocrite when it comes to covid rules.
But, then again it was always a carefree style, like his premiership.

I told ya

Deleted User wrote: »

The hair is more of a statement "The barber shops are shut, I can't get a haircut either!", just to avoid being called a hypocrite when it comes to covid rules.
But, then again it was always a carefree style, like his premiership.

Granted, but he could have combed it, given the occasion.

He has no respect for anyone or anything thing.

Professor Moriarty

Deleted User wrote: »

The hair is more of a statement "The barber shops are shut, I can't get a haircut either!", just to avoid being called a hypocrite when it comes to covid rules.
But, then again it was always a carefree style, like his premiership.

It's a carefully constructed persona. Affable, disorganised, cheerful. Behind it lies ruthless egotism.

yagan

I told ya wrote: »

Granted, but he could have combed it, given the occasion.

He has no respect for anyone or anything thing.

He doesn't believe in anything, which makes him the perfect conduit for a political movement based on nostalgia for a misremembered past. He is all things to all Brexiters.

The DUP campaigned for Brexit because that's how they saw a hard border in Ireland being reestablished, they never factored in that the English Tory voter no longer cared about NI.

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

The hair is more of a statement "The barber shops are shut, I can't get a haircut either!", just to avoid being called a hypocrite when it comes to covid rules.
But, then again it was always a carefree style, like his premiership.

No, the blustering and sloppy persona has been a staple of his for a long time. I recall an interview with a special advisor whose name I have long forgotten who claimed that he deliberately ruffled his hair and untucked his shirt prior to making public appearances.

CelticRambler

Leroy42 wrote: »

Johnson needs to stop the lies ...

So that's that plan scuppered then!

While Johnson remains in office, I doubt there is any point in counting on the British government to willingly do anything constructive to improve relations with the EU. Rather, the EU should reinforce it's application of third-country rules to GB, and accelerate as much as possible the ending of unilateral transitional concessions. As far as NI is concerned, the message from the EU should be consistent and persistent: do what was agreed, before we start talking about "flexibility".

I would not be opposed to the EU applying significant pressure on the UK to re-harmonise with the EU in areas such as SPS - if it's done quickly - as that would remove a lot of the conflict for NI and for cross-Channel trade, but I would expect Johnson to put pride before pragmatism. This could become a critical point for the UK, as it's the SPS rules that have proven to be the killer for the most media-hogging Scottish industries. The longer Johnson chases his American Dream, the greater is the incentive for Scottish food exporters to vote for closer alignment with their biggest market ... and if that means separating from England, so be it.

Leroy42

The point being that unless Johnson , and the government as a whole, accept reality what is the point of talks?

Even if some issues will be resolved, we all known Johnson will claim it a victory over the EU and onwards to more victory, we have them on the run now!

This acquisence by the EU, to be seen to be the bigger party, counts for nothing. The UK will just pocket it and move on to the next item

redcup342

I told ya wrote: »

Granted, but he could have combed it, given the occasion.

He has no respect for anyone or anything thing.

His appearance is to convey he is too busy with matters of national importance to take care of things like that.

Strazdas

CelticRambler wrote: »

The Johnsonian indoctrination seems to be working. From a Bloomberg article:



Should these figures be confirmed by other polls, it supports Leroy42's argument that the ultimate blame for Brexit lies with the voters rather than any particular party (or sect within a party): at the end of the day, it's easier to believe that British is Best and blame anyone-but-Boris, rather than apply critical thinking.

Proof that the public are totally in thrall to the right wing media. The EU-AstraZeneca row was literally a spat between the EU and a private pharma company, with the UK barely even mentioned and yet it is the easiest thing in the world for the propagandists to convince the public it was an attack on Britain and a hostile action.

Johnson must be rubbing his hands with glee at how easy it is to manipulate the British public.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

No, the blustering and sloppy persona has been a staple of his for a long time. I recall an interview with a special advisor whose name I have long forgotten who claimed that he deliberately ruffled his hair and untucked his shirt prior to making public appearances.

What is what I said, the look is deliberate.

murphaph

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It's a carefully constructed persona. Affable, disorganised, cheerful. Behind it lies ruthless egotism.

Yep, even his "public" name, Boris, is not what he is known as privately.

From his Wiki:

Johnson gained a King's Scholarship to study at Eton College, the elite independent boarding school near Windsor in Berkshire.[40] Arriving in the autumn term of 1977,[41] he began using as his given name Boris rather than Alex, and developed "the eccentric English persona" for which he became famous.[42] He abandoned his mother's Catholicism and became an Anglican, joining the Church of England.[43] School reports complained about his idleness, complacency and lateness,[44] but he was popular and well known at Eton.

All carefully constructed for a future life in politics. He's a total fraud.

Nody

Damn it, why does those EU bureaucrats insist on holding UK to what they agreed to?

The European Parliament has again refused to set a date to ratify the EU-UK Brexit trade deal, amid concerns about whether the UK is implementing it properly.

Party group leaders had been expected to announce the deal would be ratified at a sitting in late April, but following a meeting said they would wait for reassurances from Boris Johnson's government.

Outrageous I tell you, outrageous!