nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

johnnyskeleton

This is the tenth incarnation of our Brexit discussion thread, so Ive copied ACDs comments from the last thread to here. Same warnings etc still apply:

As we are approaching the critical end of March October 2019 period, please bear the following in mind before posting:
Insults directed at popular figures are not acceptable in this forum
Please do not post memes, videos or comedy links here
Please do not be uncivil to other posters
Please use the report function to alert the mods when necessary

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Enzokk

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Leadership is to attract criticism of your positions and policies. Not being all things to all people

I agree that his positions on Brexit has been awful and takes some blame for this mess, but to ignore that he probably is a Brexiter but in charge of a Remain party is not easy. Yes he could resign but what does that solve for him or Labour? There are other reasons he is leader and they are not Brexit related, whether we agree with them or not.

So in the nuanced position that he is in, what is wrong with a neutral position in a second referendum? If he goes for Leave and they win and his voters get burned he will be blamed, if he goes for Remain and they lose he will be blamed as he was in 2016.

The only way he wins is if he picks the right side of the argument, and even that is not guaranteed. Ask Johnson if he feels like a winner right now. If he loses then he is sharing a shed with Cameron.

woejus

trellheim wrote: »

Boris is no fool.

Citation needed - he gunned for the job of PM, compromising all his positions in the process, got it at the worst possible time and painted himself into a corner and has no workable majority.

The next 6 weeks will be pressure upon pressure from large UK employers, D notices be damned. The opposition will force him or his agents to beg for an extension, the length of which will be determined by the EU.

All fairly foolish to the detached observer.

fash

trellheim wrote: »

Boris is no fool. RIGHT now the ground is being prepared for a high pressure WA2=NI backstop minus with no other option theres a number of twitter threads with this as focus currently. The numbers will be razor edge.

At the moment Barnier and Juncker are saying "nothing has been given to us" as they havent' been officially given anything. What I reckon has happened is they've been shown WA2 = NI backstop with some give from ROI .

My question at the mo is if we give up on backstop (and I keep on coming back to this ) the border issue cant be solved .

Personally Im of the view of sort it now or hard border it otherwise we will get shafted by UK down the line - and isnt this the line our govt has taken as well ? Interesting to watch Govt rhetoric on this as we roll toward a GE

Agreed: the Irish government/civil service was (from my perspective impressively) able to foresee that the UK plan was to agree everything else then throw a half assed border solution in the table at the last minute and pressure Ireland into agreeing it-and living with the consequences - hence including the backstop into the WA discussions. Ireland should accept nothing less- after a no deal, either the UK reasonably quickly comes back to the table (and for me reasonably quickly is 5 years or so) or the UK breaks up. A suboptimal last minute border solution is for ever - and should not be accepted under any circumstance.

ambro25

Enzokk wrote: »

Liz Truss

<...>

https://mobile.twitter.com/sarkenremainEU/status/1174070976344219649

Demonstrating as much integrity as just about every last Tory minister of the past 3 years.

The UK fully deserves its banana republic parliamentarian monarchy autocracy tag these days.

Enzokk

The Supreme Court case is hearing argument again, the Government representative is much better this morning than Lord Keen last night in his presentation at least. He sounds calm and in control and not like he isn't in control, which Lord Keen seemed to be yesterday afternoon. As GM228 noted there are a lot of arguments and valid ones that the UK government is providing. On whether the courts should intervene the argument does seem to be that it is up to parliament to act and not need for the courts.

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1174277996661944320?s=20

The question then is how does parliament act if it has very little time or it is prorogued? This is a question that is obviously on the minds of the justices as well. His answer seemed to be parliament needs to act in time before or by calling a VONC when they come back.

Akrasia

Enzokk wrote: »

The Supreme Court case is hearing argument again, the Government representative is much better this morning than Lord Keen last night in his presentation at least. He sounds calm and in control and not like he isn't in control, which Lord Keen seemed to be yesterday afternoon. As GM228 noted there are a lot of arguments and valid ones that the UK government is providing. On whether the courts should intervene the argument does seem to be that it is up to parliament to act and not need for the courts.

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1174277996661944320?s=20

The question then is how does parliament act if it has very little time or it is prorogued? This is a question that is obviously on the minds of the justices as well. His answer seemed to be parliament needs to act in time before or by calling a VONC when they come back.

So the Solution to the parliament being shut down to prevent them from stopping the horse from bolting, is to tell them that they can always shut the stable door later on when the horse is long gone.

This is why the Supreme court needs to rule against the government on this matter. If they accept the argument that the prime minister can shut down parliament on a whim and cannot be challenged by anyone except a parliament that has been shut down, it's a ludicrous state of affairs that could by abused by anyone tyrannical enough to dispose of the democratic institutions to push through their own personal agenda.

robinph

Enzokk wrote: »

The Supreme Court case is hearing argument again, the Government representative is much better this morning than Lord Keen last night in his presentation at least. He sounds calm and in control and not like he isn't in control, which Lord Keen seemed to be yesterday afternoon. As GM228 noted there are a lot of arguments and valid ones that the UK government is providing. On whether the courts should intervene the argument does seem to be that it is up to parliament to act and not need for the courts.

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1174277996661944320?s=20

The question then is how does parliament act if it has very little time or it is prorogued? This is a question that is obviously on the minds of the justices as well. His answer seemed to be parliament needs to act in time before or by calling a VONC when they come back.

Along the lines of someone dropping a brick from a bridge onto a train. The train driver (parliament) had the option of putting the brakes on and it's not the governments fault that they were hiding on the bridge with a brick.

Leroy42

Akrasia wrote: »

So the Solution to the parliament being shut down to prevent them from stopping the horse from bolting, is to tell them that they can always shut the stable door later on when the horse is long gone.

This is why the Supreme court needs to rule against the government on this matter. If they accept the argument that the prime minister can shut down parliament on a whim and cannot be challenged by anyone except a parliament that has been shut down, it's a ludicrous state of affairs that could by abused by anyone tyrannical enough to dispose of the democratic institutions to push through their own personal agenda.

Exactly. From my understanding, if the government were to win the case then effectively there is nothing to stop any PM from simply prorouging parliament on the 1st day of session until 5 years is up.

Of course many will say it could never happen, but the problem is (as I heard on a podcast) that the UK is governed by rules that were based on everyone behaving like gentlemen. Trump has shown that even a written constitution is not a full protection against someone who willfully rejects the conventions.

These things should be written into law. If it really is necessary to prorouge before a queens speech, and if it really is necessary to have a queens speech then formalise the whole thing. State the length of time, when for what reasons.

Enzokk

The Boris Johnson tour of the UK is going well, he went to a hospital and as you can imagine it turned out not too great for him.

https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1174293865471324161?s=20

The person confronting him is the parent of a sick child in hospital. He then has the audacity to try and tell him it is not a press opportunity as there is no press there, as you hear the clicking of camera's and the video is being taken.

The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.

Professor Moriarty

Leroy42 wrote: »

Exactly. From my understanding, if the government were to win the case then effectively there is nothing to stop any PM from simply prorouging parliament on the 1st day of session until 5 years is up.

Of course many will say it could never happen, but the problem is (as I heard on a podcast) that the UK is governed by rules that were based on everyone behaving like gentlemen. Trump has shown that even a written constitution is not a full protection against someone who willfully rejects the conventions.

These things should be written into law. If it really is necessary to prorouge before a queens speech, and if it really is necessary to have a queens speech then formalise the whole thing. State the length of time, when for what reasons.

Parliament would have to sit for one week a year to pass the Finance and Army legislation. Once they're done, MPs can be on hols for 51 weeks of the year.

lawred2

Enzokk wrote: »

The Boris Johnson tour of the UK is going well, he went to a hospital and as you can imagine it turned out not too great for him.

https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1174293865471324161?s=20

The person confronting him is the parent of a sick child in hospital. He then has the audacity to try and tell him it is not a press opportunity as there is no press there, as you hear the clicking of camera's and the video is being taken.

you can see the handlers were desperate to put that man back in his box

disgusting propaganda seeking cretins

Shelga

I don’t see the issue with Corbyn saying, essentially- our party is split on this issue, so we’re going to formulate a credible leave option and put it to the people, with the option to remain. He will be vilified no matter what he does at this point. Brexiters think he’s a Remainer and Remainers think he’s a Brexiter.

I agree that Brexit is completely stupid and there is an argument that he should campaign for what he believes (whatever that might be), but I believe there has to be a version of Brexit presented to the people, at this point. “This is what it looks like- do you want to do this, yes or no?” What’s wrong with that?

Jo Swinson’s policy is anathema to me. In the last week I think I’ve decided that if I still lived in the UK, I’d have gone from voting Lib Dem to Labour. Yes, a moot point, as this is a hypothetical vote

I also checked out her voting record and found it abysmal. Never mind her pushing for a referendum in 2008. I think I thought that I’d be able to move on from the Lib Dem coalition with the Tories, and focus on the fact that they’re a Remain party- but I don’t agree with revoking article 50 without a public vote, and I think she’s just a yellow Tory.

Kermit.de.frog

Peston has details of Johnsons plan for the border

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-09-17/hl-revealed-the-brexit-deal-johnson-wants-and-why-its-success-all-hinges-on-dublin-writes-peston/

Not good at all.

They want no deal.

briany

Shelga wrote: »

I don’t see the issue with Corbyn saying, essentially- our party is split on this issue, so we’re going to formulate a credible leave option and put it to the people, with the option to remain. He will be vilified no matter what he does at this point. Brexiters think he’s a Remainer and Remainers think he’s a Brexiter.

I agree that Brexit is completely stupid and there is an argument that he should campaign for what he believes (whatever that might be), but I believe there has to be a version of Brexit presented to the people, at this point. “This is what it looks like- do you want to do this, yes or no?” What’s wrong with that?

As JRM let slip the other week, people would probably vote Remain if it were presented again. Therefore a second referendum must be resisted at all costs.

But I think that voting to Remain wouldn't solve anything for the UK. The genie's out of the bottle. It's amazing political capital for someone like Nigel Farage, and if there's a Remain vote, his party will end up nicking seats off of LAB and CON, and he'll be the leader of a new 3rd party in the Commons. We'll all end up having to get ready for Brexit pt. II in a few years time.

Mefistofelino

lawred2 wrote: »

you can see the handlers were desperate to put that man back in his box

To be fair, I think the two people with Bojo were hospital staff - the woman on the left appears to be a nurse. Raised (adult) voices in a childrens' hospital are usually not appreciated.

Having said that, there does appear to be a shortage of actual handlers there. Perhaps they are trying to show that Boris is not running scared of the press (at least in a controlled environment)?

disgusting propaganda seeking cretins

Couldn't disagree with that bit

Sam Russell

Well the FTPA has removed the option of a sudden snap election - it now needs a 2/3 rds majority for it. The SC could rule that a prorogue can only be put in place be a HoC motion to that effect where the duration is clearly defined.

They did this for Art 50, so why not this matter? Parliament must not be silenced by the executive.

[Deleted User]

Enzokk wrote: »

The Boris Johnson tour of the UK is going well, he went to a hospital and as you can imagine it turned out not too great for him.

https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1174293865471324161?s=20

The person confronting him is the parent of a sick child in hospital. He then has the audacity to try and tell him it is not a press opportunity as there is no press there, as you hear the clicking of camera's and the video is being taken.

That is just bizarre. Also, I'm seeing more and more relevant Orwell quotes being posted online lately which is never a good thing.

BoJo, from the Incredible Hulk to this in the space of a few days...

##Mod Snip##

No Memes please

WomanSkirtFan8

robinph wrote: »

Along the lines of someone dropping a brick from a bridge onto a train. The train driver (parliament) had the option of putting the brakes on and it's not the governments fault that they were hiding on the bridge with a brick.

I'd put it more like a train trying to cross a bridge which is just about to collapse.

LeinsterDub

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318249460281346

Laura Kuenssberg with some award winning investigative journalism here. She is been torn apart in the the replies

Fionn1952

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318249460281346

Laura Kuenssberg with some award winning investigative journalism here.

Her follow up is even worse

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318564397985793?s=19

murphaph

Yikes. Kuenssberg is way out of line there.

Professor Moriarty

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Her follow up is even worse

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318564397985793?s=19

Well...she gave Johnson a very hard time in an interview last week. Also, here is her original tweet on the hospital encounter:

Another very, very awkward encounter for PM - taken to task by a parent on a children’s ward in London where he says repeatedly the ‘NHS has been destroyed’ - Johnson like rabbit in headlights

VinLieger

If he had gone there specifically to confront the PM with no other reason to be at the hospital then yeah i could see how him being a labour activist is relevant but the fact his 7 year old daughter is being treated at a hospital Johnson rocked up to for a photo op completely negates his role as an activist and anyone trying to egg the online nutjobs into bullying and harassing him and his family like Laura K is doing is a fvcking disgrace of a human being.

weemcd

Will Johnson stick at it much longer? He has had a kicking virtually every day he's been PM, and HOC hasn't even been sitting for the majority of that time.

I can't help but think his natural inclination do drop everything and walk away whistling must be screaming internally. It's hardwired into his DNA.

robinph

You then see people criticise him on twitter for using his daughter being in hospital for political gain.

WTF did they think Johnson was doing at a children's hospital if not to use the images of sick children for political gain?

beggars_bush

Surely the BBC will have to consider her position

lawred2

beggars_bush wrote: »

Surely the BBC will have to consider her position

Unlikely.

Strazdas

murphaph wrote: »

Yikes. Kuenssberg is way out of line there.

It makes her sound like a member of the Brexit Party or UKIP. The guy's daughter is sick in hospital.

robinph

WomanSkirtFan8 wrote: »

robinph wrote: »

Along the lines of someone dropping a brick from a bridge onto a train. The train driver (parliament) had the option of putting the brakes on and it's not the governments fault that they were hiding on the bridge with a brick.

I'd put it more like a train trying to cross a bridge which is just about to collapse.

Only if Boris was hidden behind a nearby tree with his hand on the detonator for the explosives on the bridge.

Enzokk

murphaph wrote: »

Yikes. Kuenssberg is way out of line there.

She doesn't help her image of being biased at all with this tweet, she has more than 1 million followers and directed them all to him. Why would she do that? What journalistic purpose is there for her followers to know who he is without context, just a "there he is guys", not a message to his daughter to get better even.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Well...she gave Johnson a very hard time in an interview last week. Also, here is her original tweet on the hospital encounter:

Another very, very awkward encounter for PM - taken to task by a parent on a children’s ward in London where he says repeatedly the ‘NHS has been destroyed’ - Johnson like rabbit in headlights

She is following the Andrew Neill book then I suppose, right wing but fair in interviews. Will use her personal social media accounts to do her attack work but get to keep her job as one of the most influential journalists out there.

VinLieger wrote: »

If he had gone there specifically to confront the PM with no other reason to be at the hospital then yeah i could see how him being a labour activist is relevant but the fact his 7 year old daughter is being treated at a hospital Johnson rocked up to for a photo op completely negates his role as an activist and anyone trying to egg the online nutjobs into bullying and harassing him and his family like Laura K is doing is a fvcking disgrace of a human being.

According to his tweet she is 7 days old, not 7 years. Either way we are now debating Laura Kuenssberg instead of Johnson lying in front of a member of the public when the evidence is a few feet away. That is how far the rabbit hole with Johnson we have gone, he lies so casually all the time.