Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

http://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1141391624179785734

Is it time to mention lunatics and asylums? These people make May seem like Arthur Scargill.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Yeah, the remain vote is hopelessly (so far) split. If Corbyn backed remain, the Lib Dems would quickly fade away again. It would be interesting to do an analysis of the majorities of Leave Labour MPs. As would be an analysis of pro EU Tory MPs majorities.

It would and I think it has been tried but I doubt it would make a difference to these MPs as they have dug in to their position now. I wonder what happened to the Corbyn promise of Labour Members helping craft the Labour policy. That policy would be to remain which would be the best for the country as almost every economists predicts. Those Labour MPs that wrote the letter are doing exactly what I am criticizing Mark Francois is doing, they are putting themselves ahead of the needs of their voters. The bad thing is they are doing it at the expense and against the will of their members as well.

Enzokk wrote: »

It would and I think it has been tried but I doubt it would make a difference to these MPs as they have dug in to their position now. I wonder what happened to the Corbyn promise of Labour Members helping craft the Labour policy. That policy would be to remain which would be the best for the country as almost every economists predicts. Those Labour MPs that wrote the letter are doing exactly what I am criticizing Mark Francois is doing, they are putting themselves ahead of the needs of their voters. The bad thing is they are doing it at the expense and against the will of their members as well.

TBF to Francois, loathsome as he is, he is articulating the will of a majority of the Tory party membership. Their voters, for the most part, are staunch Brexiteers. Or they have defected to Farage. The Labour MPs who wrote the letter are placing ideology and (almost certainly) constituency above party. You could argue that they might be right from their perspective.

4 left all grim choices. I think lesser of all evils and its not saying much is Saj as he will be reliant on Stewart voters so hopefully that might stop him trying to out farage Farage.

Probably as pointless as debate though as asking who will win the leinster gaa final on sunday or the scotish premier league next season.

Rjd2 wrote: »

4 left all grim choices. I think lesser of all evils and its not saying much is Saj as he will be reliant on Stewart voters so hopefully that might stop him trying to out farage Farage.

Probably as pointless as debate though as asking who will win the leinster gaa final on sunday or the scotish premier league next season.

At least we'll be 500 million richer.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That's brightened my day! Except the Hoey bit.

The upside is the honourable lady is almost certain to be offered a hobsons choice by her party before the next GE: resign or face deselection.

Led by donkeys should now run a massive campaign promoting Boris the man who will now deliver the deepest recession in UK history.

Just so he's really really tied to it.

Joe_ Public wrote:

As for the civil service, they had a very well respected emissary in Brussels who was constantly warning the government they were heading down a path of great pain and its reaction was to eventually have him replaced with a guy whose job was simply to tell them what they wanted to hear.

He resigned, after getting fed up talking to the wall.

A Shropshire Lad wrote: »

I can only imagine the tactical voting that goes on there. Boris probably had people vote for others to get Stewart out

Stewart lost 10 votes since yesterday - that's what did for him.

I just want them gone!

I can only imagine what the EU will be thinking watching these debates, and with the impending doom of Boris Johnson as the leader of the UK...

There is no impending doom regardless of who the Tories pick. The issues remain the same, the same issues facing TM. Recall that TM started off gung-ho, telling the EU what's what, no deal better than a bad deal, using citizens rights as bargaining chips etc.

TM didn't end up with the WA because she didn't want to deliver Brexit. It wasn't because she was a secret remainer only dying to keep immigration open. She ended up with it because it was the best they could do.

And whomever is the next PM will face exactly the same issues. The biggest of which is that Brexit is fundamentally a terrible idea. The world is fundamentally different from 40 odd years ago and the reality is that Brexit forces the UK back into that world rather than the actual reality of the world they face.

So Johnson, Gove or even they the whole lot of them can do little but bang the table and act the hard man but Davis, Raab have all tried that but the EU know the reality facing both themselves and the UK.

black forest wrote: »

So in fact it will be an interesting renaissance of a former meeting in Brussels. At least Sabine Weyand is already waiting for Boris.:D

Aye, saw that a while back and, between 'Sabine the machine' and the next Commission President who, unlikely to be a Luxembourger like Juncker (as such, used to coalition politics pragmatism since forever), will in all probability be German, I think BoJo is in for a far rougher ride in Brussels, than Davis/Raab/May ever had.

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1141469377319120896

Just when all the unicorns are flying in the Tory leadership campaign this report is released. Certainly interesting timing

Emily Maitlis was very poor journalistically speaking. A proper journalist would have dealt Johnson a sucker punch after his GATT Article 24 comments.
The Northern Irish guy should have done so too.

Rutte has been one of the most vocal and consistent European leaders when it comes to this.

I think you are wrong. The backstop was the idea to get around the problem created by TM red lines. How to keep the border open in Ireland when they wanted to get rid of everything else.

Without NI, there wouldn't really be a problem. The UK decided to leave, so leave and put up the borders. NI, and specifically the GFA, caused a huge problem as the UK had an international agreement which stated they couldn't simply do that.

As such, the EU agreed to treat NI as a special case. It is actually quite a coup for the UK to get them to agree as it, technically, goes against the 4 pillars. But the EU were willing to do so A) because NI is such a small part of the EU, it helped with the peace process and C) it should have made the rest easier.

Of course it ended up but even more divisive as the ERG and others simply couldn't accept that their vision of Brexit was not going to be the pure through form they wanted.

The UK wide backstop was again the UK's idea to try to get over the stigma of the NI backstop and try to help TM get the deal over the line. Recall that the DUP main gripe with the backstop was not the backstop itself, it was that they were being treated differently. The ERG then grabbed that and claimed they couldn't possibly stand by whilst their DUP colleagues were against it. Of course when the UK side backstop was announced, getting around all the previous complaints, and whole new raft of complaints came in and the DUP were still not happy.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Meanwhile Karen Bradley can't organise a píss up for Irish people with a free bar.

Lots of Conservative talk about giving Stornmount a say. Unless they specifically rule out the Petition Of Concern then its effectively giving the DUP + UUP a veto.



The DUP are Kingmakers, and all they've got to show for it is a few quid and lip service. The ERG are only using the backstop as a red herring. Without it there'd be other "concerns".



They still have the option of pulling the plug on the govt. They'll still get re-elected so no risk.

The big payoff is that a GE could mean no Brexit or a Customs Union, either meet their demand for no divergence from the UK , apart from the existing divergences on major socioeconomics.

If it's a hung parliament they are back in the driving seat.


If Labour win , well have the Tories actually done for them so far ?
Besides Corbyn is too busy with the foot shooting to win.

She didn't even know there was a unionist-nationalist divide in Northern Ireland. She couldn't be bothered to look that up before starting her job as secretary of state. Is incompetence a virtue in the Tory party?

fash wrote: »

I am not convinced that any agreement with the EU which involved any obligations on the UK would be acceptable to the ERG - it is never satisfied grievance politics that motivates them.

100% agree and it is why I think that any deal is doomed to failure regardless. They keep moving the goalposts and will seemingly accept only that the UK take over full and total control of the EU.