Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Jim2007 · 28-03-2019 02:45AM

AllForIt wrote: »

I think the idea that there should be a referendum on the deal (if they ever agree on one) or no Brexit at all would be a complete disaster. The UK have to leave the EU and everything else that goes with it. The UK public voted for a complete disengagement with everything to do with the EU and I think that's what they should get whether they fully understand the implications of it or not.

You are ignoring the fundamental fact that the U.K. has a sovereign parliament not a sovereign people. After expressing an opinion in the referendum, the voters were given an opportunity to elect a parliament to carry it out and the failed to do so, they elected a hung parliament.

The only vote that has legal consequences in the U.K. is a GE and in the most recent election the public opinion was inconclusive. The argument that the opinion in an advisory referendum trumps a GE does no fly.

Peregrinus · 28-03-2019 03:04AM

A politics professor from the University of Leiden (in the Netherlands) has mapped the votes of each MP on the indicative vote options, like this:
https://twitter.com/alexandreafonso/status/1111042565107826690

As you can see, Parliament divides into

- a smaller group (about 25%) who vote for either or both of the "very hard brexit" options, shown in purple, and

- a larger group (about 75%) who vote either for second referendum/revocation (in pink) or something softer than the negotiated deal (in yellow).

Significantly, those who support softer brexit are very open also to supporting a second referendum, indicating perhaps that they think their favoured approach can command public support, while the very hard brexiters are not, indicating the opposite.

The purpose of the indicative votes is to get a sense of which options the Commons might be able to build a consensus for, and the answer is clear; a softer Brexit, possibly with the endorsement of a second referendum. Significantly, permanent customs union and second referendum both secured higher "Yes" votes than the negotiated deal has managed on either of its outings. To my mind the only thing that would prevent the Commons arriving at a consensus along these lines would be opposition from the leadership of one or both parties.

Lucy8080 · 28-03-2019 04:17AM

Dennis Skinner voted for a no deal brexit.

Corbyn is not a Europhile.

The D.U.P. don't seem to give a fcuk about N.I. business interests. As important as the D.u.p. seem now ,unless they invite in soft nationalists to the benefits of being in the Union (which seems to be perpetually beyond their grasp),they are actually,now, facilitating the break up of the U.K.

Demographics have their card marked. Ignorance of this is the time- clock they have fashioned for themselves

Scotland ,well ...they voted remain , and they now look on as Rees-Mogg and B.J. and the D.u.P. are the voices that speak for the U.K./leave side. (voices that can't even get on board with each-other).

The U.K. is having a "cold" Civil war.

mazwell · 28-03-2019 06:31AM

I've been a lurker in this (these) thread(s) for a while but I find that if I don't have a few hours to myself I get lost because Brexit is so fast moving I.e. a ****show. Can somebody explain to me why there isn't another vote on the WM until Monday? Apologies if I've got that wrong I skipped the last 10 pages because it was hurting my brain to read!

mazwell · 28-03-2019 06:35AM

mazwell wrote: »

I've been a lurker in this (these) thread(s) for a while but I find that if I don't have a few hours to myself I get lost because Brexit is so fast moving I.e. a ****show. Can somebody explain to me why there isn't another vote on the WM until Monday? Apologies if I've got that wrong I skipped the last 10 pages because it was hurting my brain to read!

Also what is wrong with the DUP?? I understand that they don't want to leave the union but how can they possibly want the north to be totally ****ed in the event of a hard border

riddles · 28-03-2019 06:56AM

mazwell wrote: »

Also what is wrong with the DUP?? I understand that they don't want to leave the union but how can they possibly want the north to be totally ****ed in the event of a hard border

The DUP has an ideological view that any deal that distinguishes NI as being different to the rest of the U.K. threatens their very existence. This ideology trumps any practical realities like trade and employment.

And in a real sense a significant amount of Brexit yes voters supported an ideological concept of what Britain should become again, linked to a romantic notion of what it was. As we are witnessing the process of marrying an ideology with practical reality is the real challenge. No more so than at any other time in history. Communism as an example.

So in short the DUP (leadership) are fruit cakes but at least trying to understand where they are coming from is a starting point. I’m sure a significant majority of their supporters who are decent and hard working folks are now appalled at the lack of any kind of pragmatic thinking from their leadership.

Roanmore · 28-03-2019 06:59AM

Lucy8080 wrote: »

Dennis Skinner voted for a no deal brexit.

Corbyn is not a Europhile.

The D.U.P. don't seem to give a fcuk about N.I. business interests. As important as the D.u.p. seem now ,unless they invite in soft nationalists to the benefits of being in the Union (which seems to be perpetually beyond their grasp),they are actually,now, facilitating the break up of the U.K.

Demographics have their card marked. Ignorance of this is the time- clock they have fashioned for themselves

Scotland ,well ...they voted remain , and they now look on as Rees-Mogg and B.J. and the D.u.P. are the voices that speak for the U.K./leave side. (voices that can't even get on board with each-other).

The U.K. is having a "cold" Civil war.

I thought Arlene Foster's interview was very telling. Twice I think she mentioned the benefits of Brexit (no specifics of course) to NI and on both occasions she gave a nervous laugh as if she didn't believe what she was saying. Similar to the way Therese May's mouth goes crooked when she says something that's not true or she doesn't believe.
They've got themselves in right mess.

mazwell · 28-03-2019 07:07AM

riddles wrote: »

The DUP has an ideological view that any deal that distinguishes NI as being different to the rest of the U.K. threatens their very existence. This ideology trumps any practical realities like trade and employment.

And in a real sense a significant amount of Brexit yes voters supported an ideological concept of what Britain should become again, linked to a romantic notion of what it was. As we are witnessing the process of marrying an ideology with practical reality is the real challenge. No more so than at any other time in history. Communism as an example.

So in short the DUP (leadership) are fruit cakes but at least trying to understand where they are coming from is a starting point. I’m sure a significant majority of their supporters who are decent and hard working folks are now appalled at the lack of any kind of pragmatic thinking from their leadership.

I watched a programme a few weeks ago on rte called Brexit and the border as I'm sure many here did and there was one particular man in it that drove the ferry on carlinford lough who in one breath said a hard border would do him out of a job and in the next said he voted to leave because the UK would be a super power without the EU. I actually had to rewind the TV to check did I hear him properly! It would be sad if it wasn't so ridiculous!

I'm from right beside the border and its quite frightening that the UK has gone this far into madness.

woohoo!!! · 28-03-2019 07:12AM

So Monday is going to be interesting. But more important I think for how the EU react to an extension request. Must be something major for them to grant and everything points to a GE. Anyway Monday will tell also.

woohoo!!! · 28-03-2019 07:14AM

mazwell wrote: »

riddles wrote: »

The DUP has an ideological view that any deal that distinguishes NI as being different to the rest of the U.K. threatens their very existence. This ideology trumps any practical realities like trade and employment.

And in a real sense a significant amount of Brexit yes voters supported an ideological concept of what Britain should become again, linked to a romantic notion of what it was. As we are witnessing the process of marrying an ideology with practical reality is the real challenge. No more so than at any other time in history. Communism as an example.

So in short the DUP (leadership) are fruit cakes but at least trying to understand where they are coming from is a starting point. I’m sure a significant majority of their supporters who are decent and hard working folks are now appalled at the lack of any kind of pragmatic thinking from their leadership.

I watched a programme a few weeks ago on rte called Brexit and the border as I'm sure many here did and there was one particular man in it that drove the ferry on carlinford lough who in one breath said a hard border would do him out of a job and in the next said he voted to leave because the UK would be a super power without the EU. I actually had to rewind the TV to check did I hear him properly! It would be sad if it wasn't so ridiculous!

I'm from right beside the border and its quite frightening that the UK has gone this far into madness.

You cannot make a rationale argument vs an emotion, a feeling. Of course there is also the getting one over on the other side feeling also. There's no easy answers.

Purgative · 28-03-2019 07:55AM

mazwell wrote: »

I watched a programme a few weeks ago on rte called Brexit and the border as I'm sure many here did and there was one particular man in it that drove the ferry on carlinford lough who in one breath said a hard border would do him out of a job and in the next said he voted to leave because the UK would be a super power without the EU. I actually had to rewind the TV to check did I hear him properly! It would be sad if it wasn't so ridiculous!

I'm from right beside the border and its quite frightening that the UK has gone this far into madness.

Saw a similar one of a fruit and veg dealer in Southern England. How he'd hoped to pass the business on to his kids and would soon be totally screwed. I was feeling really sorry for him and his family, until he said he'd voted leave.

It is madness that I just can't get.

joe35 · 28-03-2019 08:14AM

In that pragramme 'brexit and the border' there was a unionist farmer who voted leave. Said he'd be financially worse off but that some things were not about money. I taught it very odd and yet respected is honesty in saying it.

robinph · 28-03-2019 08:27AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

A politics professor from the University of Leiden (in the Netherlands) has mapped the votes of each MP on the indicative vote options, like this:
https://twitter.com/alexandreafonso/status/1111042565107826690

As you can see, Parliament divides into

- a smaller group (about 25%) who vote for either or both of the "very hard brexit" options, shown in purple, and

- a larger group (about 75%) who vote either for second referendum/revocation (in pink) or something softer than the negotiated deal (in yellow).

Significantly, those who support softer brexit are very open also to supporting a second referendum, indicating perhaps that they think their favoured approach can command public support, while the very hard brexiters are not, indicating the opposite.

The purpose of the indicative votes is to get a sense of which options the Commons might be able to build a consensus for, and the answer is clear; a softer Brexit, possibly with the endorsement of a second referendum. Significantly, permanent customs union and second referendum both secured higher "Yes" votes than the negotiated deal has managed on either of its outings. To my mind the only thing that would prevent the Commons arriving at a consensus along these lines would be opposition from the leadership of one or both parties.

Whoever it was that ticked Aye to both the no deal and 2nd referendum options probably needs some supervision.

Fr Tod Umptious · 28-03-2019 08:42AM

joe35 wrote: »

In that pragramme 'brexit and the border' there was a unionist farmer who voted leave. Said he'd be financially worse off but that some things were not about money. I taught it very odd and yet respected is honesty in saying it.

Yea I saw that.
I too respected his honest and also that he looked beyond the economics of it.
I don't agree with him but I respect him.

However he was a middle aged if not older man.

I'd imagine that the younger generation of that type of guy would be far more inclined to vote Remain.

Fr Tod Umptious · 28-03-2019 08:46AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

A politics professor from the University of Leiden (in the Netherlands) has mapped the votes of each MP on the indicative vote options, like this:
https://twitter.com/alexandreafonso/status/1111042565107826690

As you can see, Parliament divides into

- a smaller group (about 25%) who vote for either or both of the "very hard brexit" options, shown in purple, and

- a larger group (about 75%) who vote either for second referendum/revocation (in pink) or something softer than the negotiated deal (in yellow).

Significantly, those who support softer brexit are very open also to supporting a second referendum, indicating perhaps that they think their favoured approach can command public support, while the very hard brexiters are not, indicating the opposite.

The purpose of the indicative votes is to get a sense of which options the Commons might be able to build a consensus for, and the answer is clear; a softer Brexit, possibly with the endorsement of a second referendum. Significantly, permanent customs union and second referendum both secured higher "Yes" votes than the negotiated deal has managed on either of its outings. To my mind the only thing that would prevent the Commons arriving at a consensus along these lines would be opposition from the leadership of one or both parties.

I'm surprised that 75% went for something softer than the WA.

The Hardline ERG/DUP besides, I thought the reason many disliked the WA was because it was too soft.

gmisk · 28-03-2019 08:52AM

Purgative wrote: »

Saw a similar one of a fruit and veg dealer in Southern England. How he'd hoped to pass the business on to his kids and would soon be totally screwed. I was feeling really sorry for him and his family, until he said he'd voted leave.

It is madness that I just can't get.

I saw an interview with a guy who owned a flower shop in UK a few weeks back, had been going for 15+ years I think. He voted leave previously. To take back the borders etc..
He was really worried his place would have to shut down etc etc.
How would he vote again...leave.

Honestly what can you say to people like this?

FWIW I think if there is another ref or people vote I think it will be a remain but not a landslide by any means possible 55/45 max.

Peregrinus · 28-03-2019 08:53AM

robinph wrote: »

Whoever it was that ticked Aye to both the no deal and 2nd referendum options probably needs some supervision.

Mm. Could be somebody who thinks:

(a) no deal is the only option that satisifies the referendum mandate, but

(b) it's a shockingly bad idea, and therefore

(c) the referendum mandate ugently needs to be superseded by a new mandate, which

(d) can only be done by a second referendum.

Here in the real world, the MP concerned is Huw Merriman, who has only been in Parliament since 2015 and who sits for the absurdly safe Tory seat of Bexhill and Battle. He was a remainer during the referendum campaign, and has I think kept a low profile on this issue since then. Whether his thinking is as outlined above, I cannot say.

Peregrinus · 28-03-2019 08:56AM

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I'm surprised that 75% went for something softer than the WA.

The Hardline ERG/DUP besides, I thought the reason many disliked the WA was because it was too soft.

I think a lot of people dislike the negotiated deal because of the backstop, on which a great deal of discontent has focussed.

But of course the backstop is only as intrusive as it is because May is targetting a hard Brexit. If you dislike the backstop then targetting a softer Brexit makes much sense. (Plus of course there are economic reasons for favouring a softer Brexit.)

prawnsambo · 28-03-2019 09:07AM

mazwell wrote: »

I've been a lurker in this (these) thread(s) for a while but I find that if I don't have a few hours to myself I get lost because Brexit is so fast moving I.e. a ****show. Can somebody explain to me why there isn't another vote on the WM until Monday? Apologies if I've got that wrong I skipped the last 10 pages because it was hurting my brain to read!

Sorry, what's the WM? On Monday they are going to vote again on the most popular motions that went through the indicative vote process yesterday. I assume there'll be a process for this, but not sure what it is or when it will be carried out. As far as I know, the house is not sitting on Friday.

RobMc59 · 28-03-2019 09:09AM

It seems to me that the MP's seem unwilling to disregard the referendum leave result and are hoping events conspire to put the decision into the hands of the people-which is preferable to the current total confusion.

Igotadose · 28-03-2019 09:13AM

prawnsambo wrote: »

Sorry, what's the WM? On Monday they are going to vote again on the most popular motions that went through the indicative vote process yesterday. I assume there'll be a process for this, but not sure what it is or when it will be carried out. As far as I know, the house is not sitting on Friday.

Why are they waiting till Monday? Don't days matter? (I know, these are rhetorical questions.) MP's looking bad nation- and world-wide isn't a thing anymore, they couldn't look worse.

I mean, if they've voted *all* the motions down, is the thinking that reducing the number of motions will change the verdicts? Or will they institute some sort of proportional vote, so MP's choose their most favorite, 2d, 3rd, 4th, etc.

Just a farce. They could've been crashing out tomorrow had the PM's self-imposed deadline of 29 March held, instead, still waffling about just what they want to do.

Joe_ Public · 28-03-2019 09:18AM

As i understand it the WA has to pass this week or it’s game over, as per eu conditions for the extensions. So pm would have to move MV3 either today or tomorrow assuming an emergency house sitting. From Monday, assuming her deal is finally out of the picture, they have 12 days to either crash out or find a means of negotiating a longer extension to pursue an alternative path.

54and56 · 28-03-2019 09:29AM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

As i understand it the WA has to pass this week or it’s game over, as per eu conditions for the extensions. So pm would have to move MV3 either today or tomorrow assuming an emergency house sitting. From Monday, assuming her deal is finally out of the picture, they have 12 days to either crash out or find a means of negotiating a longer extension to pursue an alternative path.

As I understand it the Letwin motion returns on Monday to focus minds and boil down the 8 options voted on (and rejected) yesterday into one which commands a majority but this will only happen if TM's WA hasn't been passed via MV3 before then.

Have I the right end of the stick?

FrancieBrady · 28-03-2019 09:29AM

Igotadose wrote: »

Why are they waiting till Monday? Don't days matter? (I know, these are rhetorical questions.) MP's looking bad nation- and world-wide isn't a thing anymore, they couldn't look worse.

I mean, if they've voted *all* the motions down, is the thinking that reducing the number of motions will change the verdicts? Or will they institute some sort of proportional vote, so MP's choose their most favorite, 2d, 3rd, 4th, etc.

Just a farce. They could've been crashing out tomorrow had the PM's self-imposed deadline of 29 March held, instead, still waffling about just what they want to do.

Yes. There was a lot of 'negative voting going on' because MP's knew this was a two day process, i.e. that the best of the motions would be back again.

woohoo!!! · 28-03-2019 09:32AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

robinph wrote: »

Whoever it was that ticked Aye to both the no deal and 2nd referendum options probably needs some supervision.

Mm. Could be somebody who thinks:

(a) no deal is the only option that satisifies the referendum mandate, but

(b) it's a shockingly bad idea, and therefore

(c) the referendum mandate ugently needs to be superseded by a new mandate, which

(d) can only be done by a second referendum.

Here in the real world, the MP concerned is Huw Merriman, who has only been in Parliament since 2015 and who sits for the absurdly safe Tory seat of Bexhill and Battle. He was a remainer during the referendum campaign, and has I think kept a low profile on this issue since then. Whether his thinking is as outlined above, I cannot say.

More likely that someone ticked the wrong box by mistake because they did not pay attention. A lot of these guys also just go with one herd or another without actually working things out for themselves.

Russman · 28-03-2019 09:49AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes. There was a lot of 'negative voting going on' because MP's knew this was a two day process, i.e. that the best of the motions would be back again.

It could be that, but I reckon there's a fair proportion who just don't get that any deal, no matter what it is, is going to be a downgrade on their current arrangement (i.e. full membership with some opt outs and special conditions). They'd really like Brexit to be all the good bits with no obligations.

Some of them realise that a Norway type deal or some form of SM/CU wouldn't be too bad (relatively speaking), but then they think about it some more and just can't get past the idea of abiding by rules they would have no part in creating (a bit like what the media have portrayed the EU to be currently), so they don't want that either. The notion that the current status is by far the best just doesn't cut it with them.

I've no idea how this all plays out now, its really gone beyond a farce at this stage. There's just about enough sane ones in the HoC to stop a crash out, yet there's enough crazies to stop any sane ideas gaining traction. Would a GE help ? Not sure tbh. Maybe give them a long extension & ignore them until they come up with a plan or until all inward investment in their country has stopped.

nc6000 · 28-03-2019 09:51AM

Roanmore wrote:

I thought Arlene Foster's interview was very telling. Twice I think she mentioned the benefits of Brexit (no specifics of course) to NI and on both occasions she gave a nervous laugh as if she didn't believe what she was saying. Similar to the way Therese May's mouth goes crooked when she says something that's not true or she doesn't believe. They've got themselves in right mess.

It's crazy really that she's getting so much coverage considering she isn't even an MP.

Shelga · 28-03-2019 09:57AM

What would they even put on the ballot paper in a second referendum?

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta · 28-03-2019 10:01AM

Shelga wrote: »

What would they even put on the ballot paper in a second referendum?

As it stands at the moment, nothing as the amendment didn't pass, but if it were to pass at some stage the general consensus is a choice between May's deal or no Brexit.

lawred2 · 28-03-2019 10:02AM

nc6000 wrote: »

It's crazy really that she's getting so much coverage considering she isn't even an MP.

Well she's the leader of the DUP - just like Nicola Sturgeon is leader of the SNP. She doesn't have a seat in Westminster either as her seat is in Holyrood.

Mary Lou McDonald is leader of SF - her seat is in Dail Eireann.

Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments