Jump to content
Jools

The Brexit Thread

Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, Van wink said:

FT seems to think the government just has the numbers get its Brexit deal through the house and to defeat amendments for a Customs Union or a second referendum.

I would be a little surprised if there aren't the numbers for the Customs Union amendment. I've always felt that was a reasonable compromise way forward and that eventually it would succeed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hairy Canary said:

I would be a little surprised if there aren't the numbers for the Customs Union amendment. I've always felt that was a reasonable compromise way forward and that eventually it would succeed.

 

There might well be (unless this has changed it is Labour policy that if Brexit happens it should be with a CU, not least because it solves the Irish/Northe Sea border problem). However the government will argue that a CU is a question to be settled in the post-Brexit trade talks and is not relevant to the Withdrawal Agreement.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

There might well be (unless this has changed it is Labour policy that if Brexit happens it should be with a CU, not least because it solves the Irish/Northe Sea border problem). However the government will argue that a CU is a question to be settled in the post-Brexit trade talks and is not relevant to the Withdrawal Agreement.

While typing that (honestly!) I see this got said by the govt.

Robert Jenrick confirms that Parliament will get to vote on the destination of Britain's relationship with the EU much further down the line - the argument the government needs to win over Labour MPs today.

Which I think means the govt. wants a basic vote that the UK leaves with the WA as is but is willing later to have MPs try to attach demands for this and that and the other in the post-Brexit talks. Bearing in mind that MPs can tell the govt. what to ask for in those talks but cannot compel the EU to agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Hairy Canary said:

At the risk of being shot down in flames for being terminally dim or some such hilarity but here is a genuine question. Is this something that can be challenged or changed to a longer timescale? 

I appreciate that ordinarily the government sets the timetable but wasn't there a successful move to take control of Parliamentary business when the indicative votes process took place earlier in the year?

I think there may be a vote later on the time allocated. Not 100% sure as just read something quickly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Herman said:

I think there may be a vote later on the time allocated. Not 100% sure as just read something quickly. 

Thanks Herman. Just seen that there will be a vote later today.

Still seems a little unclear as to whether the timescales can be amended or just that the proposed ones are rejected.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even Farage is right occasionally - quote from him this morning -

“[Boris] wants to bounce us into this new treaty before we wake up. It’s the same story every time. It’s about the Tory party, not the country.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Even Farage is right occasionally - quote from him this morning -

“[Boris] wants to bounce us into this new treaty before we wake up. It’s the same story every time. It’s about the Tory party, not the country.”

I'd guess the talk on stopping a CU amendment will put the frighteners on the Brexit-extremists. By placating Labour MPs and stating that they will get an opportunity to attach a CU arrangement at a later date, the ERG and Faragists will get hot under the collar.

That said, I suspect the strategy for Boris is to get this through, get the general election and win a big enough majority so that the idea of a CU is dead and buried. And with a raft of moderate Tories not standing in the next election with more unhinged RWNJs lining up to replace them, the makeup of the Tory PLP after the next election will be even more UKIP-looking than it currently is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it any wonder that people are confused. On Saturday we were told Boris was in trouble and yesterday the Speaker made it even more embarrassing. Yet today we are told because of the unique way we process our laws in our parliamentary system, he is in a more advantageous position.

Explain that to the twenty odd percent who didn't vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"A king emperor left in 24 hours, and we are removing an imperial yoke in over a week," he added.

I wonder what the rest of the World thinks about JRM. A throwback to boys up chimneys, naval power, the gold standard and doffing your cap to the squire.

Now that the public seems to have completely lost faith in Parliament it is probably time to finally blow it up and start again. Even the Royal Family has moved into the 21st century by marrying actresses and discussing mental health. But Parliament is stuck in its antiquated format and needs overhauling.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simplified the WAB will have it's second trading today and if it passes it will move to it's third reading where it will be scrutinised and amended if 'necessay by the Lords before the returning to the lower house for te same.

However the Lords 'stuff'is not binding and it is the elected house that has the final say

A motion to the house to determine the time the above have for that process (3 days) will be voted on tonight. If that falls it would mean enough this would be available to fully examine and most likely vote downmthe WAB, it being such an horrendous Bill.

One that not only goes against much of what the brexiteers were told they would get, but has many open ended clauses that would allow a future government to do as it pleases.

Would you be happy with a Corbyn government having that level of unchecked power ?

Parliament needs to have a much longer period to examine this Bill, make it's implication known to voters BEFORE any vote is taken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, keelansgrandad said:

Now that the public seems to have completely lost faith in Parliament it is probably time to finally blow it up and start again. Even the Royal Family has moved into the 21st century by marrying actresses and discussing mental health. But Parliament is stuck in its antiquated format and needs overhauling.

An ill informed populace will always go against what they don't understand. Blaming Parliament for their willingness to beleive absurd sheite in the rightwing media is not a valid position.

Destroying the ability of non UK owners to subject voters to a barrage of lies and misinformation is real answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hairy Canary said:

I would be a little surprised if there aren't the numbers for the Customs Union amendment. I've always felt that was a reasonable compromise way forward and that eventually it would succeed.

 

It’s the sort of deal I had hoped for, presumably the FT has good sources but it will be very close

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It always seemed the best deal, for leavers and remainers, from the outset so I don't understand why there is so little support from the Tory right wing. I know they are worried that the EU would protect its own members first but surely not to the detriment of trade with us.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Van wink said:

It’s the sort of deal I had hoped for, presumably the FT has good sources but it will be very close

the old part pregnancy idea

unfortunately the UK is either in or out of the EU

there is no imaginary 'half way' house where the cake is eaten but still exists on the table

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said

 

Lisa Nandy: Why we should vote for the Brexit bill at second reading

Lisa Nandy

22nd October, 2019, 8:20 am

 

 

Three years after the referendum, parliament is as divided as before and the country is more so. My inbox, like that of every MP, is full of people who live just a few streets from each other demanding we either respect or overturn the result of the referendum. We have gone round in circles for three years. If there was ever a moment for political leadership, it is now. It is time to start making some decisions, and if we cannot, to go back to the country and ask them to choose between what are very different paths on offer for Britain.

For three years, most of us have clung to our principled positions on Brexit. The ERG want to cut all ties; the Lib Dems want to overturn the result; Labour is divided into people who believe a soft Brexit does less democratic harm, and those who believe a second referendum can be won and that it will do less economic harm.

It has taken us through cross-party talks that achieved nothing, and indicative votes in which those on both extremes knocked out every compromise option in the centre. We have failed at every opportunity to take the offer of a soft Brexit, and now we are faced with a country that is divided and furious – and a Tory Party that has united to likely push through a hard Brexit or no deal at all.

For so many reasons, not least the real and immediate consequences for the country, we should be forced to look at the facts as they currently are and not what we’d like them to be. That means engaging with the deal in front of us. Not accepting it wholesale, or nodding it through, but scrutinising and debating something real – the legislation that will enact our exit from the EU, which we pledged to uphold in 2016, and 2017 when this parliament was elected, and to work across parliament to see if there is any prospect of agreeing a way forward.

I want to ensure our future relationship is on the basis of a customs union because most of our businesses trade with the EU and the current direction of travel will put many out of business altogether. No country has ever done a trade deal with the EU in just 14 months as the government proposes, so we have a responsibility to make sure there is a bridge to our new trading relationship or risk all the consequences of a no deal Brexit later on.

I recognise that for some of my colleagues, the only right answer is a second referendum in which Remain wins. But all of this means putting amendments to legislation. If we are to put a deal to the people, we need a deal to put. If a referendum can be won in parliament, there has to be an amendment to allow it. If we can’t, we have to stop clinging to an unobtainable principle on what our perfect outcome might be, sought from a place none of us want to be in.

Politics is nothing if not the hard graft of negotiating through difficult choices in the interests of the many. The rest is protest. It’s time all MPs from every party stopped holding out for our perfect outcome and found the route to compromise. We could, as one Labour colleague put it to me, “keep our hands clean”, and stand on the sidelines watching this go through to the detriment of the people we represent. Or we could allow this to be debated at second reading to fight for the vision of the future we want. If we can’t get the numbers, if we can’t win support, if we can’t win our argument in parliament, then we have to take this argument to the country in a general election and put a real alternative to the people. This is the reality of where we are. It’s time we faced it.

 

Lisa Nandy

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, (you can tell I'm not a Tory) as long as we leave with some sort of deal, then a General election is needed to clear all the bad blood. Then we will see whether there is any clear intention. And other policies as well. For example, our borrowing still rises despite the Chancellor saying "we are turning the page on austerity".

I would imagine it would probably still be a hung parliament but who knows. That was predicted in 1997.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

It always seemed the best deal, for leavers and remainers, from the outset so I don't understand why there is so little support from the Tory right wing. I know they are worried that the EU would protect its own members first but surely not to the detriment of trade with us.

The Tory so-called Spartans (the real Spartans were men of honour. Arguably a bit mad but honourable. Whereas these are quite unprincipled) hate a CU because it stops the UK pursuing their absurd Elizabethan merchant-venturer dream of independent trade deals. And the LibDems don't like it because by definition it accepts Brexit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Van wink said:

 the Lib Dems want to overturn the result

the rest of that twaddle is at the same level of misreprentation

no one is calling for that result to be overturned, how can you overturn advice ?

there is no mythical 'middle way', and that claim is aimed to merely over excite the 'not too bright', the very thing that has got us into this mess and allows certain political groups to play on this for their own ends - note how fartrage has now changed his tune on leaving, as his new stance better suits his own agenda

sadly, as can be seen, there are still gullible fools all too desperate to be conned

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

To be fair, (you can tell I'm not a Tory) as long as we leave with some sort of deal, then a General election is needed to clear all the bad blood. Then we will see whether there is any clear intention. And other policies as well. For example, our borrowing still rises despite the Chancellor saying "we are turning the page on austerity".

I would imagine it would probably still be a hung parliament but who knows. That was predicted in 1997.

We will not leave

Trying to appease thickos is not a reason to pander to their ignorance

A GE will pit a Remain side organised to target Tory seats with tactical voting, whereas Leave has a fragmented vote which will split between Johnson and Farage. What that amounts to won't be known until the count, but what it does mean is that polls are far less of an indication than they would normally be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, keelansgrandad said:

there is no mythical 'middle way',

Mum and I agreed one when she took me off the breast and put me on the bottle

or, as stated, it is a case of one or the other

just as the UK's membership of the EU is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yawn

Lovely out in Norfolk today. Pub lunch and a pint at Hingham. Very nice.

It's all winding up nicely🇬🇧

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Even Farage is right occasionally - quote from him this morning -

“[Boris] wants to bounce us into this new treaty before we wake up. It’s the same story every time. It’s about the Tory party, not the country.”

For once I think Farage is wrong.  We need to get Brexit done at Halloween and then bargain hard in the next phase, otherwise we risk being bounced into a second referendum that will be fixed.  I would not rely on Liebore agreeing to lose all of their seats outside of London so soon and they could well try to drag things out until 2022 under FTPA.

Edited by paul moy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

The Tory so-called Spartans (the real Spartans were men of honour. Arguably a bit mad but honourable. Whereas these are quite unprincipled) hate a CU because it stops the UK pursuing their absurd Elizabethan merchant-venturer dream of independent trade deals. And the LibDems don't like it because by definition it accepts Brexit.

Most of this I agree with.

What I think gets missed by many is that the only way to make an economic success of Brexit is to go down the American or Singapore economic model - i.e a Tory deregulated dream ticket.  That is the almost exact opposite to the 'Protectionist' and high level of social benefits supposedly wanted by most Brexters. Haven't got  a job - move then. Sink or swim. Must save for your private pension and so on. The 'State' will be the barest of safety net. This is conundrum at the heart of any Brexit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ricardo said:

Yawn

Lovely out in Norfolk today. Pub lunch and a pint at Hingham. Very nice.

It's all winding up nicely🇬🇧

so lovely, you bothered to post on here 🤪

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bill said:

so lovely, you bothered to post on here 🤪

 

I'm enjoying a pint Billy, 🍺

We do have Wi-Fi even in the bachwoods

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Yellow Fever said:

What I think gets missed by many is that the only way to make an economic success of Brexit is to

be somone who benefits by having employees paid less

by removing other costs such as enviromental protection

an extremely short term measure as can be seen with it's crumbling infrastructure, third world health care and costly penal system needed to deal with the consequences of it's short term policies

and the irony here is it is those who will be in greatest need of healthcare who are advocating the privatising of the NHS and the removal of care workers eyc

as said thickos, who are more concerned with a coloured bit of sheet that a blanket coverage of their welfare

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ricardo said:

I'm enjoying a pint Billy, 🍺

We do have Wi-Fi even in the bachwoods

is enjoying a pint involves 'chatting to the 'likes of me' then good luck, as I cannot say the reverse would be true for me

ps a pint at lunch would send me to sleep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, paul moy said:

We need to get Brexit done at Halloween and then bargain hard in the next phase

yes, accept being hung for a crime you didn't commit, then bargain hard in the after life to have your name cleared

you aren't the brightest are you ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Bill said:

be somone who benefits by having employees paid less

by removing other costs such as enviromental protection

an extremely short term measure as can be seen with it's crumbling infrastructure, third world health care and costly penal system needed to deal with the consequences of it's short term policies

and the irony here is it is those who will be in greatest need of healthcare who are advocating the privatising of the NHS and the removal of care workers eyc

as said thickos, who are more concerned with a coloured bit of sheet that a blanket coverage of their welfare

 

I'm not trying to get too picky but it's obvious that Brexit contains two completely opposed groups. Those that want protection from 'foreign workers' and having to compete globally (i.e import tariffs) and keep their 'way of life' going  - and those that are indeed globally minded yet see no merit in subsidizing local, globally uncompetitive, industries  such as farming, steel etc. Their view is let them go and the people find some other job at a wage the global market can sustain. Remember you are competing on a level field with China, Malaysia, Vietnam, India etc. Good luck!

I suspect under the 'global' Britain a lot of Brexiters are in for one enormous shock!  

Edited by Yellow Fever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×