FrancieBrady wrote: » You could almost just replay the speeches in the HoC from any debate over the last year. Same old same old stuff.
liamtech wrote: » They wont be admitting anything except that the Lib Dems are against brexit - if you are against it - vote Lib dem - if they win the election (and on the same day we colonize the moon and find elvis on the dark side) - they will stop brexit, the lib dems are clear - unlike labor who will maybe stop renegotiate compromise ask jeremy wait he is busy nationalizing private schools - do something We are reaching a point where arguably there is now more to be gained by these parties, in letting brexit happen Lib Dems - can rightly say they fought the good fight and lost. due only to numbers. (and labor leaderships dithering position on brexit - do you want a second Ref Jeremy - Yes, No, Maybe, Only if i get to negotiate, No sure, Not gonna comment, My deputies are entitled to their opinion, i will win the election). The Lib Dems may in fact be seeking to make a huge gain in seats and aim to supplant Labor on the opposition benches SNP - may realize that the writing is on the wall - Labor more than likely wont win, even with coalition. therefore long game - take brexit - rightly complain they fought the good fight - next time the Tories are out they can push either the Lib Dems or Labor, or a possible coalition including the SNP, into going for Indyref2 Its getting very depressing now - Jeremy is making less and less sense
CelticRambler wrote: » Correction: Johnson's deal was approved for its second reading (during which time it can be ammended considerably) Clarification: MPs in parliament implemented the wishes of the people, as expressed in the non-binding referendum of 2016, by triggering Article 50. The reality is that the process has since become bogged down in the entirely foreseeable quagmire of not knowing what the people really wanted when they cast their vote.
theological wrote: » I accept your correction but dispute your clarification. Lots of people like to say people didn't know what they want but those who voted for the single market and customs union amendments and so on were largely remain MPs who wanted to keep the UK as closely aligned to Brussels as possible. It fits into the picture of an establishment who are railing against the decision in 2016. This argument no longer holds in a political climate where the polls show a 16 point lead for the Conservatives who have a deal waiting to be agreed in parliament and an opposition who are running chicken from an election because they know they would be the turkey voting for Christmas. The opposition are preventing democratic recourse here. There's only two ways out of the quagmire (caused by the establishment railing against the British public). Either it is to progress with Johnson's deal or have an election to break the deadlock in parliament.
quokula wrote: » I'm always confused when I see posts like this implying Labour don't have a Brexit policy. Are people purposely pretending not to understand Labour's stance or have they just not noticed everything they've said and done these past few months?Because they've consistently done everything in their power to stop no deal, including tabling and forcing through the amendment that forced the extension and ultimately forced Boris to start seriously trying to make a genuine deal, and including attempting a government of national unity with the support of SNP, Greens and Plaid which the Lib Dems boycotted because standing on the sidelines saying Brexit is bad suits them better than actually doing anything - as you said yourself they want to be able to say they fought the good fight and lost (exactly the same cynical approach that Boris wanted to take in the 2016 referendum)Then on top of that, Labour have been crystal clear that a Labour government will have a second referendum, with a choice between Remain and a Labour negotiated Brexit which includes remaining fully in the Customs Union (solving Ireland's issues) and has none of the Tory red lines - the fine details will depend on the negotiation with the EU of course but it's pretty obvious it'll end up something like Norway and drastically minimise the damage. It's the only sensible route out of the mess for the UK, but so many people on the remain side seem to want to cut off their nose to spite their face because they have an irrational hatred of Corbyn. I suspect that when the real campaigning starts and people have to really engage their brains and think about the consequences of their vote, and the media have to start actually covering party policies, that Labour will see the same boost as they did at the last election. And as they're starting from a stronger base than last time, they've a serious chance of forming a government (most likely in coalition with the SNP who they are aligned with on many important issues)
quokula wrote: » I'm always confused when I see posts like this implying Labour don't have a Brexit policy. Are people purposely pretending not to understand Labour's stance or have they just not noticed everything they've said and done these past few months? Because they've consistently done everything in their power to stop no deal, including tabling and forcing through the amendment that forced the extension and ultimately forced Boris to start seriously trying to make a genuine deal, and including attempting a government of national unity with the support of SNP, Greens and Plaid which the Lib Dems boycotted because standing on the sidelines saying Brexit is bad suits them better than actually doing anything - as you said yourself they want to be able to say they fought the good fight and lost (exactly the same cynical approach that Boris wanted to take in the 2016 referendum) Then on top of that, Labour have been crystal clear that a Labour government will have a second referendum, with a choice between Remain and a Labour negotiated Brexit which includes remaining fully in the Customs Union (solving Ireland's issues) and has none of the Tory red lines - the fine details will depend on the negotiation with the EU of course but it's pretty obvious it'll end up something like Norway and drastically minimise the damage. It's the only sensible route out of the mess for the UK, but so many people on the remain side seem to want to cut off their nose to spite their face because they have an irrational hatred of Corbyn. I suspect that when the real campaigning starts and people have to really engage their brains and think about the consequences of their vote, and the media have to start actually covering party policies, that Labour will see the same boost as they did at the last election. And as they're starting from a stronger base than last time, they've a serious chance of forming a government (most likely in coalition with the SNP who they are aligned with on many important issues)
theological wrote: » This argument no longer holds in a political climate where the polls show a 16 point lead for the Conservatives who have a deal waiting to be agreed in parliament and an opposition who are running chicken from an election because they know they would be the turkey voting for Christmas. The opposition are preventing democratic recourse here. There's only two ways out of the quagmire (caused by the establishment railing against the British public). Either it is to progress with Johnson's deal or have an election to break the deadlock in parliament.
Deleted User wrote: » Is there anything important happening in the commons this week? Or is it all just the prelude to an election or something?
Enzokk wrote: » So much control...https://twitter.com/C4Dispatches/status/1188832197660303360?s=20 A nice thread of the meetings that have taken place with the NHS and drug prices being a topic of discussion. Once Johnson gets his majority the UK will be screwed. Its the same with workers rights, if they intend to make it better than the EU's then you put in the deal that you will keep a level field and potentially have better, you don't get rid of it.
looksee wrote: » Ayes have it but not a majority, so the noes have it.
Joe_ Public wrote: » Interesting twist if true.https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1188870938508570631
Gintonious wrote: » Sammy Wilson is reaching new levels of red face here.
Professor Genius wrote: » Sammy close to tears. He realises he’s been taken for a ride
Eric Cartman wrote: » regardless of what labour propoganda is out there, I don't think theyre going to open up the coal mines, pay people a quid an hour and privatise the nhs as corbyn predicts.
gooch2k9 wrote: » To what end..?
CelticRambler wrote: » The coal mines won't be re-opened, and as long as unemployment benefit remains as generous as it is now, no-one will work for £1/hr ... but the privatisation of the NHS is already under way* and will continue. It is at the same time a massive drain on the public purse and a "golden goose" for private enterprise - far too tempting an opportunity for Tory-voting, Tory-backing types to pass up. * has been for about two decades through the public-private partnership scam, which inevitably rewards the private side of the equation far in excess of the advantages to the public. Ditto for schools, prisons and other "public" services.
Joe_ Public wrote: » Hard to be certain tbh, maybe so they'd be able to change the election date (if allowed), or to stop johnson pursuing his brexit deal, or maybe something else. Will just have to wait and see if anything at all to it.
Strazdas wrote: » Everything about Labour seems chaotic and confusing....nobody knows what on earth they are playing at.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bed6f1d088326d5eb21c0139847332c7.svg)
