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 XI (Please read OP before posting)

Quin_Dub

This is the eleventh incarnation of our Brexit discussion thread,

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

robinph

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

Seen my first brexit ad on tv today from HM Government ’ about leaving on the 31st oct.

I think it was on the history channel or something

Saw a Brexit notice on the motorway this morning. Where it would usually tell you X minutes to Junction Y, or in some extreme situations that there isn't any diesel at the next service station. Today the signs were telling us to make sure we had import permits ready for Nov 1st.

Strazdas

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I agree, there is money and influence behind their stance.

But on our own turf, there is still a total reluctance to state FACTS regarding immigrants and asylum seekers and Travellers, and so called homeless, etc. because it is not allowed. Ever. We cannot debate it in the open anymore.

We are muzzled by a left wing media really, be it TV, radio, newspaper or whatever.

We are not allowed to voice our views anymore. Am I overreacting to balance in reportage or what?

There are definitely right wing commentators out there : Niall Boylan, George Hook and Eilis O'Hanlon spring to mind

A right wing Irish press sounds nightmarish to me though. They'd probably be telling us that Brexit was a great idea, Donald Trump was a good guy, we should introduce strict immigration rules and ditch neutrality etc

A Shropshire Lad

Tropheus wrote: »

Don't forget the Daily Express. Viz is more factual.

The Daily Express has to use capital letters to make its point in news stories.

Clearly a paper for the 'hard of understanding' types.

A Shropshire Lad

Strazdas wrote: »

A right wing Irish press sounds nightmarish to me though. They'd probably be telling us that Brexit was a great idea, Donald Trump was a good guy, we should introduce strict immigration rules and ditch neutrality etc

I dont think having stricter immigration rules in Ireland should automatically be dismissed as extreme right wing thinking.

Strazdas

A Shropshire Lad wrote: »

The Daily Express has to use capital letters to make its point in news stories.

Clearly a paper for the 'hard of understanding' types.

I read a stat that UK tabloids are written with the vocabulary of that of an average 12 year old.

road_high

A Shropshire Lad wrote: »

I dont think having stricter immigration rules in Ireland should automatically be dismissed as extreme right wing thinking.

No it would be totally logical.

Strazdas

A Shropshire Lad wrote: »

I dont think having stricter immigration rules in Ireland should automatically be dismissed as extreme right wing thinking.

In theory, yes, but once you start going into that line of debate, you run the risk of stoking anti-immigrant feelings.

Anything that describes immigrants as a 'problem' or a 'burden' is fuel for the far right. It's a subject that needs to be debated sensitively and cautiously.

CelticRambler

Strazdas wrote: »

I read a stat that UK tabloids are written with the vocabulary of that of an average 12 year old.

Standards have come on, then! :pac: I went to a "writing for professionals" seminar way back in the 90s - a course on how (as a professional) to write information leaflets, newsletters, etc for customers. We were invited to guess the average reading age of the average English Joe, and being the "high achievers" that we were, we all got it wrong. 10, we were told, and reminded that as an average, that meant a good proportion of our customer base would struggle to understand even that level.

I must say, it was a real pleasure to listen to the broadcast of the Supreme Court proceedings, and (apart from the pointless repetition of irrelevant niceties :rolleyes: ) to hear the Queen's English being correctly used in coherent sentences containing numerous words of at least four syllables!

Irish Praetorian

Strazdas wrote: »

In theory, yes, but once you start going into that line of debate, you run the risk of stoking anti-immigrant feelings.

Anything that describes immigrants as a 'problem' or a 'burden' is fuel for the far right. It's a subject that needs to be debated sensitively and cautiously.

Yeah I'm led towards the opposite view; one can't escape the overriding evidence that so much of the rise of UKIP was fostered by the lack of a proper debate on migration within the UK, and the migrant crisis managed to aggravate existing conservative attitudes towards migration.

I think there's a pretty convincing case to be made (and I'm looking at the Danish and Italian examples here) that when the issue of immigration is answered, a lot of the anti-EU bluster that accompanies it tends to lose its lustre.

Headshot

I'm surprised Tom Watson hasn't walked away from labour at this point. It's an absolute disgrace that Corbyn supporters are doing just to force Tom out of the party.

You have to laugh how a party can sabotage themselves so much while the Tory's have never been so weak and falling a part but nope good old Corbyn and his cronies are more interested in being the opposition rather than be in Government.

What was supposed to be a conference to bring unity to Labour instead it's bitterness and spiteful all caused by Corbyn and his cronies

Labour is having it's own brexit chaos and it's turning into Tory level madness.

Wake up Labour and smell the coffee, Corbyn will never win an election and he's destroying your party.

CelticRambler

Headshot wrote: »

You have to laugh how a party can sabotage themselves so much while the Tory's have never been so weak and falling a part

It's all part of the "unfit for purpose"-ness of the English political system. Labour in the UK is not like Labour in Ireland. It'd be closer to an umbrella coalition of the (Irish) Labour party, PeopleBeforeProfit, the Anti-Austerity Alliance, Sinn Féin and a few independents.

Back in the good ol' days of a two-party state and FPTP, the only way anyone vaguely left-ward leaning could hope to get a seat in Westminster was to align themselves with the Labour label.

Now, we're seeing the complete breakdown of that old cohesion - on both sides of the right-left divide. There's nothing particularly peculiar about Labour "sabotaging" themselves in the face of the Tory disintegration - because both pseudo-parties come from the same obsolete tradition, and are subject to the same disruptive external forces.

Strazdas

CelticRambler wrote: »

It's all part of the "unfit for purpose"-ness of the English political system. Labour in the UK is not like Labour in Ireland. It'd be closer to an umbrella coalition of the (Irish) Labour party, PeopleBeforeProfit, the Anti-Austerity Alliance, Sinn Féin and a few independents.

Back in the good ol' days of a two-party state and FPTP, the only way anyone vaguely left-ward leaning could hope to get a seat in Westminster was to align themselves with the Labour label.

Now, we're seeing the complete breakdown of that old cohesion - on both sides of the right-left divide. There's nothing particularly peculiar about Labour "sabotaging" themselves in the face of the Tory disintegration - because both pseudo-parties come from the same obsolete tradition, and are subject to the same disruptive external forces.

Indeed. For the same reason, the Tory Party has so many hard right lunatic MPs is because it was the only available option for them to get into Parliament.

Predictably, the entire political system is collapsing under Brexit. It could only remain cohesive if politics was stable enough : Brexit has split the country in two (and is most appealing to the extremists of the left and right).

A Shropshire Lad

Is one of the reasons a lot of these MP's can be so beligerant that they know they will never lose their seat with the current system ?

I mean who keeps voting in the likes of Mogg and Johnson every time !

WomanSkirtFan8

Headshot wrote: »

I'm surprised Tom Watson hasn't walked away from labour at this point. It's an absolute disgrace that Corbyn supporters are doing just to force Tom out of the party.

You have to laugh how a party can sabotage themselves so much while the Tory's have never been so weak and falling a part but nope good old Corbyn and his cronies are more interested in being the opposition rather than be in Government.

What was supposed to be a conference to bring unity to Labour instead it's bitterness and spiteful all caused by Corbyn and his cronies

Labour is having it's own brexit chaos and it's turning into Tory level madness.

Wake up Labour and smell the coffee, Corbyn will never win an election and he's destroying your party.

yep. couldn't agree more with that analysis. Corbyn has already become a major liability to Labour as far as I can see. He hasn't got a hope in hell of winning any election and will probably end up destroying Labour completely. One only has to consider the amount of Labour MPs who have already defecting to the Lib Dems because of the toxicity of being associated with Corbyn. It's like two steps forward and ten steps backwards for them at the moment.:rolleyes:

Capt'n Midnight

A Shropshire Lad wrote: »

Is one of the reasons a lot of these MP's can be so beligerant that they know they will never lose their seat with the current system ?

I mean who keeps voting in the likes of Mogg and Johnson every time !

"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in.
- Douglas Adams

briany

Headshot wrote: »

I'm surprised Tom Watson hasn't walked away from labour at this point. It's an absolute disgrace that Corbyn supporters are doing just to force Tom out of the party.

You have to laugh how a party can sabotage themselves so much while the Tory's have never been so weak and falling a part but nope good old Corbyn and his cronies are more interested in being the opposition rather than be in Government.

What was supposed to be a conference to bring unity to Labour instead it's bitterness and spiteful all caused by Corbyn and his cronies

Labour is having it's own brexit chaos and it's turning into Tory level madness.

Wake up Labour and smell the coffee, Corbyn will never win an election and he's destroying your party.

A lot of Corbyn's decisions have been decidedly lacklustre, but at least his current strategy of denying the Conservatives a GE, if he wants to stop a no-deal Brexit. He's correct not to trust Johnson on the election date, and the last thing the HoC needs to do with the last precious few days before Brexit is to be messing around with a VoNC and the chaos of trying to form some sort of new consensus.

Anyway, Labour's confused position is no surprise. It's a reflection of the fact that their base is quite split on the matter of Brexit, and that split not only manifests among the wider party, but among the leaders. This is the problem of Brexit for both parties in a nutshell. The Conservatives have reacted to this by enacting a purge, basically. Labour haven't gotten quite that far..... yet.

Leroy42

But Labours members are overwhelmingly in favour of remain aren't they?

I thought they had voted at the last convention that way, no?

But, even so, the country is currently split 52/48. Tories and BP have fully backed the 52, Labour seem to think they can win be also backing the 52!

Enzokk

WomanSkirtFan8 wrote: »

yep. couldn't agree more with that analysis. Corbyn has already become a major liability to Labour as far as I can see. He hasn't got a hope in hell of winning any election and will probably end up destroying Labour completely. One only has to consider the amount of Labour MPs who have already defecting to the Lib Dems because of the toxicity of being associated with Corbyn. It's like two steps forward and ten steps backwards for them at the moment.:rolleyes:

I read the thought that the move to oust Watson was much more to do with the future than anything. If Labour loses out in the next election then Corbyn will have to resign and if Watson is still Deputy then he becomes leader until a new one is elected. Momentum wants to remove him and have a left leaning deputy in charge to continue the pull to the left, forgetting that Labour is a broad church as others have mentioned.

So what we are seeing is the internal squabblings of a party that knows it has a busted flush with Corbyn as he is not liked by the majority of non-Labour voters out there. But in their haste to shore up the future they are screwing up the present, and breaking any momentum they may have. Well done Momentum.

woohoo!!!

Whilst the EU may well grant an extension, it's impossible to see anything passing HoC (post election) such is the level of division. More cunning plans from the squabbling clowns is far more likely, plans that just further weaken the UK.

Zubeneschamali

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Whilst the EU may well grant an extension, it's impossible to see anything passing HoC (post election) such is the level of division.

There are two ways out: the Tories get a big majority, then the week before the new Brexit Day (Jan 31 2020 for example) they put May's deal to the house of commons and say Deal or No Deal. This was Johnson's plan for October, but he didn't have the numbers for it to work. It could work get a deal through with a big enough majority, or it could get No Deal Brexit finally done.

The other way out is Labour/LibDems/SNP have the numbers for a Unity government which gets in and holds a referendum, May's deal vs. Remain, Remain wins and they revoke A50, or Leave wins again and they ratify May's deal.

CelticRambler

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

There are two ways out: the Tories get a big majority, then the week before the new Brexit Day (Jan 31 2020 for example) they put May's deal to the house of commons and say Deal or No Deal.

A 'big' Tory majority won't be enough for that to work, though: most of the soft 'no-dealers' are on the Tory side, and they can't be relied upon to vote for May's WA because it keeps Britain as a supposed vassal state until further notice.

Under May's WA, the all-UK backstop remains in force until a new FTA is put in place, one which resolved the NI problem, which even the thickest of no-dealers must surely realise now is going to take more than the two years provided for by the WA.

VinLieger

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in.
- Douglas Adams

I always loved this, but i never realised how much of an allegory it was for FPTP and british politics. Like i knew Adams was poking fun at them but this just perfectly reflects the way they got to the current situation with the likes or mogg francois etc being part of the tory party with pretty much guranteed seats

Joe_ Public

Enzokk wrote: »

I read the thought that the move to oust Watson was much more to do with the future than anything. If Labour loses out in the next election then Corbyn will have to resign and if Watson is still Deputy then he becomes leader until a new one is elected. Momentum wants to remove him and have a left leaning deputy in charge to continue the pull to the left, forgetting that Labour is a broad church as others have mentioned.

So what we are seeing is the internal squabblings of a party that knows it has a busted flush with Corbyn as he is not liked by the majority of non-Labour voters out there. But in their haste to shore up the future they are screwing up the present, and breaking any momentum they may have. Well done Momentum.

Thats definitely one analysis, if Corbyn was to be replaced for whatever reason, under current rules that would put Watson in charge and that is something a majority of labour members could not countenance. I guess that could be read as hinting the members are losing faith in the leader or perhaps just the level of dissatisfaction that exists about Watson and his recent behaviour.

Problem for Labour is when you have a leader that is so popular among the membership (still running near 60% i think which is down on his recent highs but running around same level as when he was elected) but lacks the support of a majority of the PLP. Watson made a commitment in his campaign to be deputy leader that he would support and be loyal to the leader and, frankly, he has not lived up to that promise. Hence the anger. At the same time, Corbyn has a history (albeit from the backbenches) of not being exactly loyal to party leader, so i think it would be good all round if he tried to come across as a peacemaker at this time. Listening to him on Marr right now and he's not particularly following that line!

I still believe that as much criticism as he gets, the more the media come out against him, the more his membership will rally around him. Could be wrong, be interesting to see the polls next week.

[Deleted User]

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has told Sophy Ridge on Sunday that a 'No-deal Brexit' will mean a hard border on the island of Ireland.

Is that Junker saying times up to Ireland, we have tried to stand by you but now its time you moved on the Backstop.

Silent Running

Deleted User wrote: »

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has told Sophy Ridge on Sunday that a 'No-deal Brexit' will mean a hard border on the island of Ireland.

Is that Junker saying times up to Ireland, we have tried to stand by you but now its time you moved on the Backstop.

I think it's just Junker stating the blindingly obvious. The single market has to be protected. It was ever thus.

Enzokk

Deleted User wrote: »

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has told Sophy Ridge on Sunday that a 'No-deal Brexit' will mean a hard border on the island of Ireland.

Is that Junker saying times up to Ireland, we have tried to stand by you but now its time you moved on the Backstop.

No, it was always the reality that a no-deal would mean a border on the island eventually. The question in a no-deal would be how long before we start putting up infrastructure. The plan would be that the chaos in Dover would make the UK move long before we start preparations for physical infrastructure.

Enzokk

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Thats definitely one analysis, if Corbyn was to be replaced for whatever reason, under current rules that would put Watson in charge and that is something a majority of labour members could not countenance. I guess that could be read as hinting the members are losing faith in the leader or perhaps just the level of dissatisfaction that exists about Watson and his recent behaviour.

Why? Watson was elected the same time as Corbyn initially in 2015 and he received more than 40% of first preferential votes in the 1st round. That doesn't shout out someone who is unpopular and the way they have tried to remove him would surely sting with a few members as well. Add to his strong Remain stance in contrast to Corbyn, I cannot see how he has lost too much support in the party.

VinLieger

[Deleted User] wrote: »

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has told Sophy Ridge on Sunday that a 'No-deal Brexit' will mean a hard border on the island of Ireland.

Is that Junker saying times up to Ireland, we have tried to stand by you but now its time you moved on the Backstop.

Thats nothing new, weve known for a long time that no deal brexit absolutely requires a border. Our place in the Single Market is far more important to our survival from brexit related problems than having no border.

Joe_ Public

Enzokk wrote: »

Why? Watson was elected the same time as Corbyn initially in 2015 and he received more than 40% of first preferential votes in the 1st round. That doesn't shout out someone who is unpopular and the way they have tried to remove him would surely sting with a few members as well. Add to his strong Remain stance in contrast to Corbyn, I cannot see how he has lost too much support in the party.

True, we can't say anything for certain until such a time it happens and we gauge the reactions. But the depth of anger among very many labour members towards watson seems pretty clear to me, just judging from twitter reactions anyway. I was a bit surprised myself at the scale of it, but it is definitely there. Of course he has his supporters, and brexit has to be a complication, but the membership remains pro-corbyn, that i can see, and i dont see that immediately changing. Watson becoming leader, if even temporarily, would be hugely divisive and, at a minimum, cause a huge rift. Now, not saying the move against him was necessarily right or even prudent, but given his unquestionably provocative behaviour in recent months, i dont believe we should be all that shocked to see it all finally come to a head.

listermint

[Deleted User] wrote: »

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has told Sophy Ridge on Sunday that a 'No-deal Brexit' will mean a hard border on the island of Ireland.

Is that Junker saying times up to Ireland, we have tried to stand by you but now its time you moved on the Backstop.

I mean after all this time.

All this time week in week out.

How do individuals still think this is new , a revelation or a change in direction.

Media consumption has alot to answer for.