Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

sondagefaux · 21-10-2019 07:36PM

spacecoyote wrote: »

You may well be right, but one word in your statement is pertinent, English

Polling in Wales, Scotland & NI shows they don't want Brexit, with even the Welsh starting to talk independence. In depth data reviews showed that Welsh speaking areas voted strongly to remain, with the Wales vote skewed by older English who have moved there.

So basically England dragging everyone down with them

Apart from London, and many, not all, towns and cities with universities.

For example, both Newcastle and Durham city (both with universities) voted majority Remain while the rest of the north-east of England (including Sunderland and Middlesborough, which both have universities) voted majority Leave.

Liverpool also voted Remain, partially down to the fact that most newsagents etc in the city don't stock The Sun.

If England outside of London left the UK, the rest of the UK could remain in the EU.

I don't think England minus London's wealth and Scotland's oil would have much of a chance economically...

Professor Moriarty · 21-10-2019 07:36PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

He also said discussions would have to be entered in to with the Irish government.

i.e veiled threat to unionists.

Yeah you could read it either way. It could be a threat or an inducement.

Kermit.de.frog · 21-10-2019 07:40PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Yeah you could read it either way. It could be a threat or an inducement.

Or it could be for the DUP as well...

- 'you guys are trying to screw our Brexit deal, we'll remember'

trashcan · 21-10-2019 07:46PM

Call me Al wrote: »

There was speculation in the last week or two (after he visited schools there) that he was going to run in Dominic Grieve's constituency. His own seat was at risk.. This seemed a safer bet.

If he does have to switch constituency the opposition should be able to make all sorts of hay with that - Boris running away from facing his electorate etc. Mind you, if it's a safe Tory seat no doubt he'd get elected anyway. These people don't do critical thinking.

robinph · 21-10-2019 07:47PM

devnull wrote: »

He'll be parachuted into another seat if that's a danger.

Whilst that might save Johnsons seat in Parliament, it would be a disaster for the party nationally that the PM can't even safely get elected in their current constituency.

Letwin_Larry · 21-10-2019 08:14PM

sondagefaux wrote: »

Apart from London, and many, not all, towns and cities with universities.

For example, both Newcastle and Durham city (both with universities) voted majority Remain while the rest of the north-east of England (including Sunderland and Middlesborough, which both have universities) voted majority Leave.

Liverpool also voted Remain, partially down to the fact that most newsagents etc in the city don't stock The Sun.

If England outside of London left the UK, the rest of the UK could remain in the EU.

I don't think England minus London's wealth and Scotland's oil would have much of a chance economically...

most of these poorer areas voted LEAVE.
these areas have been ignored and neglected for decades, certainly since Thatcher destroyed them.
so along comes the referendum and for the first time in ages they have come out and engage with the political process and vote, but the REMAIN side is desperate to ignore/twart their vote.

it's no wonder they are cheesed off.

A Dub in Glasgo · 21-10-2019 08:19PM

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

most of these poorer areas voted LEAVE.
these areas have been ignored and neglected for decades, certainly since Thatcher destroyed them.
so along comes the referendum and for the first time in ages they have come out and engage with the political process and vote, but the LEAVE side is desperate to ignore/twart their vote.

it's no wonder they are cheesed off.

I think you mean the Remain side? If not, I agree the Leave side are ignoring their plight and twisting their vote to suit their own ends

Letwin_Larry · 21-10-2019 08:27PM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I think you mean the Remain side? If not, I agree the Leave side are ignoring their plight and twisting their vote to suit their own ends

yes of course i meant the REMAIN side.

btw i happen to think Leaving the EU is a crazy decision. but if you dont like the answer, then it's best not to ask the question. Eh Mr. Cameron?

GM228 · 21-10-2019 08:47PM

Rjd2 wrote: »

GM228 wrote: »

You have to admire Bercow, he is well able for what is thrown at him and gives well reasoned replies unlike others in the HoC, he will be missed when he goes.

Until their is an investigation into those bullying allegations aimed at Bercow, I really wish people would stop putting him on a pedestal.

Innocent until proven guilty and all that....

Whatever about any allegations against him it does not take away from the point I made, he's an excellent speaker, is well able to handle what is thrown at him and seems to be very fair in the chamber.

GM228 · 21-10-2019 08:58PM

Some light reading.

The Withdrawal Agreement Bill.

There's loads to pick out, but first thing which really stands out is the lack of an ability for Parliament to request an extension to the transition period.

Strazdas · 21-10-2019 09:00PM

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

most of these poorer areas voted LEAVE.
these areas have been ignored and neglected for decades, certainly since Thatcher destroyed them.
so along comes the referendum and for the first time in ages they have come out and engage with the political process and vote, but the REMAIN side is desperate to ignore/twart their vote.

it's no wonder they are cheesed off.

That was an anti-Tory vote though and yet the Tories and their enablers in the right wing press are claiming to be on the side of the 17.4m.

It stands to reason that millions of Leave voters despise the Conservatives, Westminster and the elite of the Daily Telegraph.

looksee · 21-10-2019 09:01PM

I think he is great (edit: Bercow) but he can be a bit abrasive or patronising. He reminds me of the slagging that used to go on in the Prison forum here (when the prison forum was entertaining).

Joe_ Public · 21-10-2019 09:11PM

Been scratching my head for a while at the extreme brexiteer carryon of Labour mp Caroline Flint and this thread sheds some light. Not only was she in receipt of brexiter funding (pre referendum) but she is a member of tory brexit think tank Prosperity UK. Among other stuff.

https://twitter.com/tinymattresses/status/1186298530719293442?s=20

She is a total disgrace. At least with Kate Hoey you kind of accept where she is coming from. No place for her in the party but unfortunately the damage is already done.

GM228 · 21-10-2019 09:13PM

GM228 wrote: »

Some light reading.

The Withdrawal Agreement Bill.

There's loads to pick out, but first thing which really stands out is the lack of an ability for Parliament to request an extension to the transition period.

As I thought, S30 will not go down well with the opposition:-

https://twitter.com/hilarybennmp/status/1186373549025615878?s=19

Joe_ Public · 21-10-2019 09:18PM

Read something about gov needing to give 21 days notice before a vote on a treaty bill which this is. So they are obviously using some dastardly fiendish loophole to get around it, but question is, will it work?

Enzokk · 21-10-2019 09:27PM

It would be crazy for MPs to try and get this done in a week or two when the original timeline left 3 months for them to get the legislation done. The reason why? It takes time to get it right. If Johnson gets his way and this is rushed through it will cause damage that should have been caught in the time to make sure everything is correct.

GM228 · 21-10-2019 09:32PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Read something about gov needing to give 21 days notice before a vote on a treaty bill which this is. So they are obviously using some dastardly fiendish loophole to get around it, but question is, will it work?

A treaty can not be ratified until 21 sitting days have passed under the terms of S20 of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, but there are exceptions such as for exceptional circumstances.

Enzokk · 21-10-2019 09:34PM

GM228 wrote: »

A treaty can not be ratified until 21 sitting days have passed under the terms of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, but there are exceptions such as for exceptional circumstances.

I guess, "just get it done", would not count as exceptional circumstances. Seeing that an extension has been applied for as well you would assume there is no need to rush this through, right?

Joe_ Public · 21-10-2019 09:36PM

GM228 wrote: »

A treaty can not be ratified until 21 sitting days have passed under the terms of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, but there are exceptions such as for exceptional circumstances.

Thanks. Are these truly exceptional circumstances though? Why does it need to be rushed as we know EU will grant a technical extension if required (well 99 % sure anyway!)?

briany · 21-10-2019 09:40PM

What does it mean to vote for the WA in principle? What is this concept that I'm suddenly only hearing about, now? Were the votes on May's deal only in principle as well? Sounds like it makes the vote next to worthless as we've seen what the UK can do with agreements 'in principle' before.

GM228 · 21-10-2019 09:49PM

Enzokk wrote: »

I guess, "just get it done", would not count as exceptional circumstances. Seeing that an extension has been applied for as well you would assume there is no need to rush this through, right?

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Thanks. Are these truly exceptional circumstances though? Why does it need to be rushed as we know EU will grant a technical extension if required (well 99 % sure anyway!)?

It should be noted that the 21 day procedure does not apply to the WAB as it is not a treaty, it is just an instrument, and note S33 of the WAB:-

Section 20 of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (treaties to be laid before Parliament before ratification) does not apply in relation to the withdrawal agreement (but this does not affect whether that section applies in relation to any modification of the agreement).

They are effectively legislating their own loophole and avoiding the question of what is an exceptional circumstance.

Once (IF) the WAB is passed the WA can be ratified straight away.

Joe_ Public · 21-10-2019 10:01PM

It just sounds crazy to me, even if they are technically within their rights in what they are doing. As an mp i would automatically vote no on basis it did not give enough time for proper scrutiny and feel entirely justified. When asked about an economic impact analysis, sajid javid shrugged and declared it "self evident" that the deal was good for the uk economy. Thats banana republic stuff if you ask me.

LeinsterDub · 21-10-2019 10:05PM

Enzokk wrote: »

I guess, "just get it done", would not count as exceptional circumstances. Seeing that an extension has been applied for as well you would assume there is no need to rush this through, right?

I'd not get too excited about these things. They can all be undone by a one line bill.

Capt'n Midnight · 21-10-2019 10:14PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Gove just said that direct rule will have to return if Stormont isn't up and running after Brexit. Hope the EU picked this up.

A wee bit more on the DUP's latest cunning plan to get Stormont up and running.

And they might have gotten away with it if they hadn't left the original date on the letter they sent to the NI Attorney General yesterday asking about legislative competence.

Typos happen. But typing June when you mean October ?

It completely undermines the stunt at Stormont earlier because it implies they've been actively not sending that letter for the last four months.

So yeah the executive will be reforming any day now :rolleyes:

Professor Moriarty · 21-10-2019 10:24PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

A wee bit more on the DUP's latest cunning plan to get Stormont up and running.

And they might have gotten away with it if they hadn't left the original date on the letter they sent to the NI Attorney General yesterday asking about legislative competence.

Typos happen. But typing June when you mean October ?

It completely undermines the stunt at Stormont earlier because it implies they've been actively not sending that letter for the last four months.

So yeah the executive will be reforming any day now :rolleyes:

They lost whatever shred of credibility they had left with today's farcical stunt. The sight of Foster saying how sad she was that SSM legislation was coming in made her look like an old biddy from the 60s.

briany · 21-10-2019 10:28PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The sight of Foster saying how sad she was that SSM legislation was coming in made her look like an old biddy from the 60s.

Yes, Foster has really gone against her modern, hip, fresh & funky image on this one.

Professor Moriarty · 21-10-2019 10:29PM

briany wrote: »

Yes, Foster has really gone against her modern, hip, fresh & funky image on this one.

Yes. She had me fooled for a long time. The truth will out though.

weemcd · 21-10-2019 10:39PM

It's quite stunning how long the list of failures run for Arlene Foster's tenure as DUP leader, since 2015:

RHI
Stormont collapse
Loss of overall Unionist majority
Brexit
Irish Language Act
Gay Marriage
Abortion rights

Every single one a monumental failure on her and her party. I've surely forgotten another half a dozen.

Professor Moriarty · 21-10-2019 10:41PM

weemcd wrote: »

It's quite stunning how long the list of failures run for Arlene Foster's tenure as DUP leader, since 2015:

RHI
Stormont collapse
Loss of overall Unionist majority
Brexit
Irish Language Act
Gay Marriage
Abortion rights

Every single one a monumental failure on her and her party. I've surely forgotten another half a dozen.

Party support has tanked.

GM228 · 21-10-2019 11:00PM

weemcd wrote: »

It's quite stunning how long the list of failures run for Arlene Foster's tenure as DUP leader, since 2015.....

She's in competition with Johnson to see who can achieve the most failures :pac:

Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Comments