Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I never said Corbyn should not be examined.

But so should Swinson.

She is putting herself front and centre and drawing her own red lines - but we shouldn't look at her record because she is anti- Brexit?? Her policies shouldn't be scrutinised because she is anti-Brexit??

We should ignore her voting record? Which shows her to have a supported the Tories consistently.

I, personally, think that is naive.

No one who aspires to be Prime Minister and set the agenda for a country - one we share a (potentially fractious) border with - should go unexamined. No matter who they are.

And by examined I mean a look at them - not a but whatabout this other party leader over there, which is what has been happening.

You're missing the point. Corbyn is untrustworthy on the subject of brexit. Until he proves trustworthy, nobody should be nominating him for caretaker PM. Swinson is just articulating that point of view. I find it quite a reasonable one. For all the reasons I have listed. And Swinson is not putting herself forward for the job. What's wrong with that?

Water John

Corbyn, following a slow, painful, meandering process, in his own head, has settled on negotiating a soft Brexit and putting that and Remain, in a Ref.
Maybe she wants for him to be more prescriptive, but that would seem to ba s good as she might get.
The Lib Dems can, at all times go into a GE having a clear policy of Remain.

prawnsambo wrote: »

You're missing the point. Corbyn is untrustworthy on the subject of brexit. Until he proves trustworthy, nobody should be nominating him for caretaker PM. Swinson is just articulating that point of view. I find it quite a reasonable one. For all the reasons I have listed. And Swinson is not putting herself forward for the job. What's wrong with that?

And you are both missing my point and providing an example of my point.

I wrote about Swinson - the woman who promised if her party gets a majority she will revoke Article 50 clearly targeting the 48% Remainers so don't be telling me she isn't ultimately after the Top Job and won't be campaigning to get that job when the GE is called- and you wrote about why Corbyn is unsuitable.

Why does Swinson get a free pass?

Varta

Bannasidhe wrote: »

And you are both missing my point and providing an example of my point.

I wrote about Swinson - the woman who promised if her party gets a majority she will revoke Article 50 clearly targeting the 48% Remainers so don't be telling me she isn't ultimately after the Top Job and won't be campaigning to get that job when the GE is called- and you wrote about why Corbyn is unsuitable.

Why does Swinson get a free pass?

She certainly shouldn't! At the end of their party conference she practically declared herself to be the next PM. She's playing party politics like the rest of them only she has a lot less to play with than she thinks.

A Dub in Glasgo

Having seen Swinson in action over the last 10 years, she is a Tory in Lib Dem clothing. She is as big a hypocrite as they come

jimmycrackcorm

Bannasidhe wrote: »

And you are both missing my point and providing an example of my point.

I wrote about Swinson - the woman who promised if her party gets a majority she will revoke Article 50 clearly targeting the 48% Remainers so don't be telling me she isn't ultimately after the Top Job and won't be campaigning to get that job when the GE is called- and you wrote about why Corbyn is unsuitable.

Why does Swinson get a free pass?

Sharon is largely irrelevant because of the British FPTP fake Bryson of democracy.

Might as well call it out as fake, when the last bulletin had a combined majority vote for brexit nominees but ended up with a lib dem remainer mp.

However, I doubt that could effectively translate across all constituencies.

NotToScale

reslfj wrote: »

The size of the Irish economy is fairly insignificant compared to the totalEurozone economy or indeed the EU27 economy.

Ireland has a smaller population than Greater Düsseldorf (Regierungsbezirk Düsseldorf) and its population is just under 1/17 of Germany's.

Ireland has a competitive business sector now. It will need to seek new markets and new transport routes from/to the continental EU27. But Ireland and a 'No Deal' Brexit are in itself unlikely to shake the EU27 or the Euro.

A 'No Deal' will be unpleasant for the EU27, but it will be extremely bad for the English industry incl auto and for UK farm+fish, where EU27 tariffs will stop or severely limit its export business.

Lars

Lars

,

I think that's really taking my entire post out of context and also underestimating the risks.

The Tories have made very direct threats to the Irish economy and have done so repeatedly. It's the equivalent of Canada threatening to blocade trade between Alaska and the rest of the USA. They wouldn't make a threat like that because they're not insane.

The size of the Irish economy didn't prevent a serious problem before when our banking system went into chaos. Our GDP is about 2.75 to 3% of the Eurozone total of about 13.669 trillion USD.

What I'm saying is that ireland is not so insignificant that the EU is going to allow a hostile 3rd country to do is damage. It's as an old arrogance that some Tories have and it's not likely to end well.

The Tories have constantly banked on the notion that we are so small it doesn't matter and that the EU will "throw us under a bus" at the slightest sign of trouble. All I'm saying is both because of genuine solidarity and also economic interconnectedness, that isn't going to happen.

To do so would all so undermine everything the EU is supposed to be about and cause lots of countries too reevaluate their relationship. So it's just Tory thinking applied to an organisation that doesn't think like right wing Tories.

There's also a weird and condensing attitude towards Ireland amongst those kinds of Tories. It's not something that exists in the real world and those hostilities and notions that we're somehow to be seen as inferior or not mattering don't exist outside that narrow bubble in that aspect of English nationalism. I genuinely don't think some of them see us as anything other than a rogue province that's refusing to do what it's told by its betters.

It's by no means all of the UK or all of England that thinks like that. It's a particular grouping.

I think they're just assuming that everyone thinks about Ireland like they do. It's been a rude awakening and reality check for them over the last couple of years.

Charles Babbage

Perhaps the Tories should look after their own economy

Varta wrote: »

She certainly shouldn't! At the end of their party conference she practically declared herself to be the next PM. She's playing party politics like the rest of them only she has a lot less to play with than she thinks.

Swinson is also playing that dangerous division card - albeit more subtly than Boris.

She has stated that should she become PM (and she clearly thinks she has a chance) then she will ignore those who want to Leave. Those same people who for the last 3 years have been fed hyperbole about the will of the people and democratic rights. Millions of people who are already angry and frustrated will be dismissed.

Swinson is not seeking consensus or to heal the divisions. She is exploiting them and hoping a (possible) shift to remain will sweep her to power.

Part of this tactic is to discredit Corbyn at every opportunity as it's Labour voters she needs to get on her side. The Tory remainers would already be inclined towards her as looking at her voting record in the HoC she's ideologically a conservative.
Swinson has to push the Corbyn is a lame duck message. The exact same message the right wing press is pushing. For this reason she cannot afford to back him as a caretaker PM. It would raise awkward questions later as to why it was ok for Corbyn to locum but not have the job full time.

She is playing politics as hard as anyone and of course she is trying to undermine her main opponent.
BUT... these are not normal times and it's a dangerous game she is playing to suit her agenda coming into the GE.

Swinson is campaigning when in fact she could be rid of Boris and his threats of No Deal next week - she has chosen not to to in order to further her own ambitions. Her excuse is 'Corbyn', her success in doing this is shown by how often when one questions her policies, tactics, agenda etc the response is 'but Corbyn...'

Capt'n Midnight

Bannasidhe wrote: »

And you are both missing my point and providing an example of my point.

I wrote about Swinson - the woman who promised if her party gets a majority she will revoke Article 50 clearly targeting the 48% Remainers so don't be telling me she isn't ultimately after the Top Job and won't be campaigning to get that job when the GE is called- and you wrote about why Corbyn is unsuitable.

Why does Swinson get a free pass?

The chances of her getting a majority and the top job are NIL unless the public overwhelmingly vote for the Lib Dems.

It could only happen if the electorate abandon right wing parties like Tories and BP and left wing like Labour and treat the election as a defacto referendum.

So if the Lib Dems get a majority they'll have the numbers AND the mandate to revoke.

Boris has neither for his actions.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Sharon is largely irrelevant because of the British FPTP fake Bryson of democracy.

Might as well call it out as fake, when the last bulletin had a combined majority vote for brexit nominees but ended up with a lib dem remainer mp.

However, I doubt that could effectively translate across all constituencies.

Sharon?

Spellcheck checked that I assume.

The DUP have an insignificant number of seats, less than the LibDems - yet look at the influence they were able to exert over May's government.

Over here the PDs were able to punch well about their electorate returns weight.

Swinson could be the 'kingmaker' after a GE.

Will she enable the return of Boris Johnson's No Deal Govt because she won't countenance Corbyn in no. 10?
Will she insist the LP ditch their democratically elected leader if they want her support? Does she want a say in who is the leader of another party??

Swinson is not 'insignificant'. She may well be after the next GE - or she may be the one who decides who the next PM is.

quokula

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Swinson is also playing that dangerous division card - albeit more subtly than Boris.

She has stated that should she become PM (and she clearly thinks she has a chance) then she will ignore those who want to Leave. Those same people who for the last 3 years have been fed hyperbole about the will of the people and democratic rights. Millions of people who are already angry and frustrated will be dismissed.

Swinson is not seeking consensus or to heal the divisions. She is exploiting them and hoping a (possible) shift to remain will sweep her to power.

Part of this tactic is to discredit Corbyn at every opportunity as it's Labour voters she needs to get on her side. The Tory remainers would already be inclined towards her as looking at her voting record in the HoC she's ideologically a conservative.
Swinson has to push the Corbyn is a lame duck message. The exact same message the right wing press is pushing. For this reason she cannot afford to back him as a caretaker PM. It would raise awkward questions later as to why it was ok for Corbyn to locum but not have the job full time.

She is playing politics as hard as anyone and of course she is trying to undermine her main opponent.
BUT... these are not normal times and it's a dangerous game she is playing to suit her agenda coming into the GE.

Swinson is campaigning when in fact she could be rid of Boris and his threats of No Deal next week - she has chosen not to to in order to further her own ambitions. Her excuse is 'Corbyn', her success in doing this is shown by how often when one questions her policies, tactics, agenda etc the response is 'but Corbyn...'

It's more clear by the day that the Lib Dems are more interested in trying to hijack the remain cause to get themselves more seats, than actually do anything to help.

They're so totally focussed on syphoning remain voters off of Labour, while refusing to work with other parties to stop the Tories, all of which makes a severe Brexit far more likely.

Given that her Westminster voting record is pretty much the opposite of the values she claims to hold, and she actually advocated having a referendum to leave the EU when trying to get elected over a decade ago, and she never campaigned for remain at all while she continually slates Corbyn for not campaigning enough, it's hard to see anything Swinson does as anything other than a cynical attempt at a power grab.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Having seen Swinson in action over the last 10 years, she is a Tory in Lib Dem clothing. She is as big a hypocrite as they come

quokula wrote: »

It's more clear by the day that the Lib Dems are more interested in trying to hijack the remain cause to get themselves more seats, than actually do anything to help.

They're so totally focussed on syphoning remain voters off of Labour, while refusing to work with other parties to stop the Tories, all of which makes a severe Brexit far more likely.

Given that her Westminster voting record is pretty much the opposite of the values she claims to hold, and she actually advocated having a referendum to leave the EU when trying to get elected over a decade ago, and she never campaigned for remain at all while she continually slates Corbyn for not campaigning enough, it's hard to see anything Swinson does as anything other than a cynical attempt at a power grab.

I must admit I knew absolutely nothing about Swinson and even less about current LibDem policies so I did a bit of research. Read all their fine words about equality and rolling back the Tory welfare cuts. Then I looked at Swinson's voting record in the HoC - and yup, I came to the conclusions she is a Tory. A wet Tory perhaps (no room for them in the BreToryxit Party) but still a Tory.
Her voting record is also at complete odds with her party's stated aims...

I consider that both worrying and telling.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I never said Corbyn should not be examined.

But you are busy telling everyone to examine Jo Swinson instead. It's the classic "look over there" tactic.

Here is the problem. Corbyn is uniquely unpopular. Labour is not going to win an election with him. And they need to win a majority. I have not worked out whether you are a Labour supporter or a Vorbyn supporter but right now across the board, the UK is suffering badly from failing political leadership. In fact the two most competent political leaders are in fact Swinson and Sturgeon. But neither is going to get a majority in Westminster.

If you care about the UK, you need to start considering how Corbyn comes across to the wider electorate because with competent leadership Labour could very easily win a majority. Its leadership is currently clueless and its acolytes are currently Wah Swinson.

It is not a good look. Reality is Johnson is the worst PM in history and Corbyn cannot beat him. Instead of examining Swinson, you have to examine Corbyn. Anything else is an admission that you do not want a Labour majority and you don't want to govern. Given Corbyn's political history and tendency to vote against the whip before he was leader, my guess is it suits him to whinge and not to have to make hard decisions. His EU policy of negotiate a deal and put it to a referendum may be seductive but it is also 3 years too late. He should have voted against thd article 50 notification and campaigned the 2017 election on the grounds that the Tories haf - at that point - thrown away the UK's negotiating advantage. They had.

So please, spare me the constant 'look at Jo Swinson'. She is right that Corbyn is not the right candidate. The Labour Party tore itself apart over Tom Watson last week. It is not on the high moral ground here at all. And it needs some sort of a leader. If Labour wants to win an election, that leader will not be Corbyn or any of his acolytes.

Enzokk

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I must admit I knew absolutely nothing about Swinson and even less about current LibDem policies so I did a bit of research. Read all their fine words about equality and rolling back the Tory welfare cuts. Then I looked at Swinson's voting record in the HoC - and yup, I came to the conclusions she is a Tory. A wet Tory perhaps (no room for them in the BreToryxit Party) but still a Tory.
Her voting record is also at complete odds with her party's stated aims...

I consider that both worrying and telling.

Are you looking at Swinson's votes before 2010 or after 2010? You need to be careful as she was part of the Lib Dems coalition and as such the voting records of those MPs form the Lib Dems from that time will look like Conservative votes.

Tell me how

UK talking about all the deals they could do, meanwhile, with the EU/Japan trade deal in place, this is what our foreign office is up to.

https://twitter.com/IrishEmbJapanEN/status/1177775343211433984?s=19

Excellent work. Viewed 5M times on social media so far and with the rugby game being most watched sporting event in Japan this year so far, we're strongly on their minds.

Tell me how wrote: »

UK talking about all the deals they could do, meanwhile, with the EU/Japan trade deal in place, this is what our foreign office is up to.

https://twitter.com/IrishEmbJapanEN/status/1177775343211433984?s=19

Excellent work. Viewed 5M times on social media so far and with the rugby game being most watched sporting event in Japan this year so far, we're strongly on their minds.

The department of foreign affairs have been doing fantastic work.

Enzokk wrote: »

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I must admit I knew absolutely nothing about Swinson and even less about current LibDem policies so I did a bit of research. Read all their fine words about equality and rolling back the Tory welfare cuts. Then I looked at Swinson's voting record in the HoC - and yup, I came to the conclusions she is a Tory. A wet Tory perhaps (no room for them in the BreToryxit Party) but still a Tory.
Her voting record is also at complete odds with her party's stated aims...

I consider that both worrying and telling.

Are you looking at Swinson's votes before 2010 or after 2010? You need to be careful as she was part of the Lib Dems coalition and as such the voting records of those MPs form the Lib Dems from that time will look like Conservative votes.

Saint No Swinson is eulogised by some cos of lib dems remain position. The pathological dislike of Corbyn, much of it based on tory lies, has a brought about this crazy situation where the leader of the largest party (by some distance) is deemed unfit for PM, temporary or otherwise. I've consistently said that the opposition should come together and install a PM to avoid a no deal Brexit. But Swinson would rather stick to her principles than doing what's necessary to avoid no deal.

woohoo!!! wrote: »

I've consistently said that the opposition should come together and install a PM to avoid a no deal Brexit. But Swinson would rather stick to her principles than doing what's necessary to avoid no deal.

So would Corbyn, it appears.

Calina wrote: »

woohoo!!! wrote: »

I've consistently said that the opposition should come together and install a PM to avoid a no deal Brexit. But Swinson would rather stick to her principles than doing what's necessary to avoid no deal.

So would Corbyn, it appears.

More Tory propaganda, way to go you

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Calina wrote: »

woohoo!!! wrote: »

I've consistently said that the opposition should come together and install a PM to avoid a no deal Brexit. But Swinson would rather stick to her principles than doing what's necessary to avoid no deal.

So would Corbyn, it appears.

More Tory propaganda, way to go you

Dude, I voted for Labour when I lived in the UK. Demand of Corbyn what you demand of Swinson and make Keir Starmer PM. Or Ken Clarke, or Harriet Harman. You have choices. But stop projecting Corbyn's behaviour onto Swinson and take a ling hard look at reality. If the UK does not have an agreement or extension by 31 Oct it is out of the EU regardless of what Westminster claims.

Calina wrote: »

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Calina wrote: »

woohoo!!! wrote: »

I've consistently said that the opposition should come together and install a PM to avoid a no deal Brexit. But Swinson would rather stick to her principles than doing what's necessary to avoid no deal.

So would Corbyn, it appears.

More Tory propaganda, way to go you

Dude, I voted for Labour when I lived in the UK. Demand of Corbyn what you demand of Swinson and make Keir Starmer PM. Or Ken Clarke, or Harriet Harman. You have choices. But stop projecting Corbyn's behaviour onto Swinson and take a ling hard look at reality. If the UK does not have an agreement or extension by 31 Oct it is out of the EU regardless of what Westminster claims.

Whether it's Corbyn or someone else, the next pm, temporary or otherwise, has to be from labour if you don't want a Tory one. I don't really rate Corbyn either but until Labour change him, he's far better than Johnson.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

And you are both missing my point and providing an example of my point.

I wrote about Swinson - the woman who promised if her party gets a majority she will revoke Article 50 clearly targeting the 48% Remainers so don't be telling me she isn't ultimately after the Top Job and won't be campaigning to get that job when the GE is called- and you wrote about why Corbyn is unsuitable.

Why does Swinson get a free pass?

Because the chances of he LibDems getting an overall majority in the HoC are vanishingly small. I didn't address it because it would be ludicrous to entertain it. They wouldn't even get enough seats to be the majority party in a coalition. I don't think they're even a national party. So that's why I didn't address it. But you can consider it addressed now.

devnull

Latest policy being flouted is a reform of the Supreme Court with all judges to be nominated by the Government and to be vetted by Parliament in order to make sure that they are biased towards the government, sorry, I mean accountable for their actions.

It is believed that the Conservative Party will base such system on the one in the United States, which CERTAINLY is a very democratic country, along with Poland where a right wing party, Law and Justice, has blurred the lines between politics and the court system for political gain.

Closer and closer to a dictatorship the UK looms.

devnull wrote: »

Latest policy being flouted is a reform of the Supreme Court with all judges to be nominated by the Government and to be vetted by Parliament in order to make sure that they are biased towards the government, sorry, I mean accountable for their actions.

It is believed that the Conservative Party will base such system on the one in the United States, which CERTAINLY is a very democratic country, along with Poland where a right wing party, Law and Justice, has blurred the lines between politics and the court system for political gain.

Closer and closer to a dictatorship the UK looms.

It's dangerous stuff alright. But as long as it's a major minority government of busted flush Tories saying it, it will go nowhere. And everyone with a functioning cerebral cortex knows why they are looking for this.

Igotadose

Was there a vote about adjourning Parliament for the Tory conference? And did it fail? Because that's what now, like 9 votes the Government's failed to get through Parliament? Has the Government successfully proposed a motion and had it pass ?

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Saint No Swinson is eulogised by some cos of lib dems remain position. The pathological dislike of Corbyn, much of it based on tory lies, has a brought about this crazy situation where the leader of the largest party (by some distance) is deemed unfit for PM, temporary or otherwise. I've consistently said that the opposition should come together and install a PM to avoid a no deal Brexit. But Swinson would rather stick to her principles than doing what's necessary to avoid no deal.

Based on objective observation in my case. All you need to know is that he has promoted a 'jobs first' brexit. The more sardonic amongst us would say that that means jobs will be first to go. But this nonsense continues to be peddled. There is no such thing. All possible brexits will cost jobs.

Robert McGrath

cml387 wrote: »

If you have the time, do watch on Youtube the BBC series from 1996 called "The Poisoned Chalice" which covers the entire history of the UK's relationship with Europe right back to the coal and steel agreement between France and Germany up to the mid nineties.

It demonstrates how this moment was always coming, how anti-eu feeling runs deep within the race memory of very many in the UK on the left and the right, and has the benefit of interviewing people now dead, Ted Heath, Enoch Powell (a particularly scary piece) and the EU founder members.

Thanks for this recommendation. I’ve watched two of the four episodes and it’s really fascinating. Some of the parallels between the UK’s entry to the EU and today are really striking - the splits in the main parties, the cross-party co-operation to get a pro-EU programme over the line, the accusations of a parliamentary coup, the debate over the value of a referendum - really, really fascinating. Highly recommended