Brexit process

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 17 Dec 2018, 19:37

The SNP would demand a referendum.

No. They'll want people to think they demanded a referendum, but the SNP don't actually want a referendum with Corbyn in power, because they are guaranteed to lose it.

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 17 Dec 2018, 19:38

UndercoverElephant wrote:
The SNP would demand a referendum.
No. They'll want people to think they demanded a referendum, but the SNP don't actually want a referendum with Corbyn in power, because they are guaranteed to lose it.

You mean a Brexit referendum or an indy2 referendum?

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 17 Dec 2018, 19:38

RevdTess wrote:
adam2 wrote: The obvious way to achieve this would be to offer three choices.
1) Remain in the EU
2) Leave under the deal currently proposed.
3) Leave with no deal.

That would split the leave vote between the second two choices and thus ensure that the correct result is obtained.
This would be an outrageous referendum for the reasons you specify. I can't imagine anyone, even the most ardent Remainers, would think this is fair.

The only way to do it fairly would be using the single transferable vote system where you rank your preferences from 1 to 3 and if your first choice is eliminated you get your second choice instead. In that way the Leave vote could never be split and Remain would have to beat both alternatives combined assuming no one puts Remain as a second choice.

I would put remain as a second choice.

There is no way to hold a fair referendum. In each case, the format/questions determines the result.

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 17 Dec 2018, 20:31

Well, Corbyn has called his vote of no confidence. I think it's a mistake tbh. The ERG and DUP are supporting her, so she's very likely to win, and it just makes it harder to go for a no confidence vote when no-deal is imminent. I don't know what the rules are but I imagine you can't just keep calling no-confidence votes over and over.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 17 Dec 2018, 20:34

I am now in a peculiar position of not necessarily wishing Corbyn's actions to succeed in bringing May down. The reason being I suspect his actions, if successful, would lead to a referendum where Brexit would be stolen from the people. This could still happen if May's deal gets through. But, I think that is less likely than any other route through this.

Snail · Post by **Snail** » 17 Dec 2018, 20:42

Isnt this vote of no confidence just about pm may, not against government? So is pointless really, as no followup action has to take place? I don't understand why he's done this as Theresa May probably wouldn't resign in any case. It just helps unite the conservatives?

Snail · Post by **Snail** » 17 Dec 2018, 22:06

I see that an amendment has been put forward by opposition parties to try and change it to a proper no confidence vote.

Just more playing imo.

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 17 Dec 2018, 23:07

Little John wrote:I am now in a peculiar position of not necessarily wishing Corbyn's actions to succeed in bringing May down. The reason being I suspect his actions, if successful, would lead to a referendum where Brexit would be stolen from the people. This could still happen if May's deal gets through. But, I think that is less likely than any other route through this.

May will survive this. The can has been successfully kicked into next year.

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 17 Dec 2018, 23:09

Snail wrote: I don't understand why he's done this

He did because he was under pressure by Labour remainers to "do something", even though there's nothing he can actually do to force this process forwards.

It is up to the tories/DUP to break the deadlock. If they do not, we'll get no deal.

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 18 Dec 2018, 00:12

Little John wrote:I am now in a peculiar position of not necessarily wishing Corbyn's actions to succeed in bringing May down. The reason being I suspect his actions, if successful, would lead to a referendum where Brexit would be stolen from the people. This could still happen if May's deal gets through. But, I think that is less likely than any other route through this.

May's deal won't get through.

There's a pattern emerging here. It involves a relentless but slow drift towards no deal, punctuated with occasional lurches in other directions and accompanied by a chorus of "nobody believes in no deal as a serious outcome" coming from remainers who don't understand the process. But the lurches never hold their ground. After a brief period when it looks like some other outcome is gaining momentum, the slow drift toward no deal resumes.

Now it feels different. I get the distinct impression that although May is still defending her deal in public, and may even privately still believe it isn't quite dead yet, we are seeing signs that if she is forced to choose between no deal and a second referendum, she'll choose no deal. If so, it is not at all clear that it can be stopped. It would require anti-no-deal tories to bring down the government, and I don't think they're going to do it.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/80 ... ys-brexit/

GET DOWN TO BUSINESS

Government gives Britainâ€™s 6 million businesses 101 days to prepare for a No Deal Brexit

The dramatic move s part of a significant ramping up of the PMâ€™s threat to walk away from the EU without any agreement unless Brussels agrees to improve its terms

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 18 Dec 2018, 08:49

To be absolutely clear here.

I am not anti-deal per se. But, in order for the referendum result to be respected any deal must be composed of the following:

1) full sovereignty over fishing territories
2) full sovereignty over border controls
3) full sovereignty over legislature
4) full sovereignty over judiciary
5) full sovereignty over taxing and spending

That is not to say that any deal may not include agreements between the EU and the UK on any of the above. But, such agreements, as they specifically affect fundamental matters of sovereignty, must be ultimately within parliament's power to undo as part of any future government's manifestos. In other words, no agreements, where they are comprised of matters of sovereignty, may permanently bind the hands of future governments as that would profoundly undermine democracy.

So, it seems to me, the best outcome from all of this, in the long run, is to leave on WTO. Then, rebuild such agreements and deals with the EU from the ground up. Where both sides are no longer holding any guns to the other's head.

Underneath all of this is a central belief. That government is not there to temper the democratic will of the people.

It is there to serve it.

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 18 Dec 2018, 11:56

It does look increasingly like the only thing that can stop no-deal is a no confidence vote. That means remainer Tories would need to bring down their own government and directly vote to oppose the referendum result. They'd surely know that would see them lose their seats and livelihoods. I'd be amazed if any wanted to go down in history like that. But this is why Corbyn can't do anything till the very last minute, it's absolutely the last throw of the dice, and there can't be any other options left. Even then I don't think it will succeed. Then we'll see if no-deal has any impact on the union in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 18 Dec 2018, 12:42

If we get a no-deal, I think this may reprieve May until 2020. Largely, because no-one else will likely want to implement and deal with the immediate consequences of no-deal.

At the next election, so long as Labour do not screw it up any further for themselves than they already have by allowing the remainers who so infest the PLP to keep on bleating like sore losers, I think they should win that election. And, if that happens, the SNP will likely shut up demanding for another independence referendum, at least for the foreseeable future, because they know they would lose it again under a Corbyn-led Labour government.

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 18 Dec 2018, 17:50

Little John wrote: And, if that happens, the SNP will likely shut up demanding for another independence referendum, at least for the foreseeable future, because they know they would lose it again under a Corbyn-led Labour government.

I'd expect the SNP to push for another indy ref in the case of no-deal, but only if their polls suggest no-deal has moved Scotland significantly towards wanting independence so they can rejoin the EU. Even then, the UK govt (Con or Lab) seems unlikely to want to re-open that can of worms straight after dealing with Brexit. IN means IN, after all. Personally I'm very much in favour of Scottish independence for many of the same reasons Leavers wanted Brexit. They're being ruled undemocratically by England in England's interests.

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 18 Dec 2018, 17:57

By the way I see Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter) on the telly still claiming that parliament will definitely find some means to stop no-deal, including significant numbers of Tories possibly voting down their own government in a confidence vote. I'd be surprised if that happens, but I can imagine the arch-remainers like Ken Clarke who have nothing to lose might go along with it. Anyway, Bradshaw (who used to be my MP not so long ago) was suggesting a government of national unity might follow a no-confidence vote, rather than a GE. I'm strapping myself in for the ride.