Brexit process

Discussion of the latest Peak Oil news (please also check the Website News area below)

Moderator: Peak Moderation

RevdTess
Posts: 3054
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Glasgow

Post by RevdTess »

UndercoverElephant wrote: But that would be suicidal for Labour, wouldn't it? They'd have to be bonkers to put their fingerprints all over May's deal without a referendum. And if there's a referendum between that deal (+CU) and remain, remain will win.
It's an interesting question. I could see Corbyn being so tempted by the possibility of a Customs union Brexit that would split the Tory vote that he might compromise on the referendum. I think Labour would have to accept that they did promise to respect the referendum result, so any agreement that included a customs union and worker/environmental protections would have to take precedence over the party desire for a 2nd ref. Disgruntled Remainer Labour voters haven't really got anywhere else they could go, except perhaps the uninspiringly-named 'Change UK'.
There is currently an attempt to get rid of her by changing the tory party constitution. Requires a petition with 10,000 signatures of members, which should be a doddle.
I've not heard about that. How soon could that happen? What change are they planning to the constitution? Where can I read more?
Little John

Post by Little John »

UndercoverElephant wrote:Anyone still believe a no deal brexit is likely to happen?

Looks completely dead to me, as does May's deal.

Tory leadership election --> GE --> referendum --> revoke.
Tory leadership election --> GE --> referendum --> revoke--> the beginning of insurrection in this country --> the continuing drift towards a fascist state.

I am not being facetious or hyperbolic.

I am being serious.
User avatar
UndercoverElephant
Posts: 13585
Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 00:00
Location: UK

Post by UndercoverElephant »

RevdTess wrote:. Disgruntled Remainer Labour voters haven't really got anywhere else they could go, except perhaps the uninspiringly-named 'Change UK'.
It isn't just the name that is uninspiring. Chucka Ummuna and Sarah Wollaston trying to convince people they can shake up British politics? They are perfect examples of the problem they claim to be the solution to.
I've not heard about that. How soon could that happen? What change are they planning to the constitution? Where can I read more?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics ... tive-party
User avatar
clv101
Site Admin
Posts: 10606
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Contact:

Post by clv101 »

UndercoverElephant wrote:Anyone still believe a no deal brexit is likely to happen?
The more interesting question is why anyone ever thought it likely in the first place.
Little John

Post by Little John »

clv101 wrote:
UndercoverElephant wrote:Anyone still believe a no deal brexit is likely to happen?
The more interesting question is why anyone ever thought it likely in the first place.
Because some of us, being democrats, assumed that after we were told the decision would be ours, after we democratically made that decision, after the UK parliament ratified that decision by triggering A50 and after both mainstream parties campaigned at the last election on a ticket of respecting that decision, it would be carried out. and so, given your question, the even more interesting one, for me, is why you even bother with any pretence of being democrats at all.
User avatar
UndercoverElephant
Posts: 13585
Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 00:00
Location: UK

Post by UndercoverElephant »

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/04/dea ... -you-dare/
Dear Remainer parliament. Although we’re the voters who spurned the petition for this very course of action, we the undersigned formally request that you please revoke Article 50 at your earliest convenience.

For Philip, Oliver, Dominic, Amber, Greg, et al (forgive the familiar first names, but over the last few months we’ve come to feel we know you so terribly well), this appeal from your nemeses may come as a surprise. After all, it was to appease us knuckle-draggers that you invoked the Article in the first place. Apologies for seeming so fickle. But in what Charles Moore has aptly dubbed Europe’s contemporary ‘empire’, all roads lead not to Rome but to Brussels. In the interest of geographical expedience, we would eschew driving a byzantine spaghetti of motorways and roundabouts and still ending up in Belgium. We’d just as soon take the shortcut.

As for the long way round, we Leavers have quit anguishing over whether Mrs May’s withdrawal agreement is worth supporting in order to achieve some fingernail clipping’s worth of our agenda. As oft observed, this agreement would put the UK in a hopelessly disadvantageous negotiating position. In subsequent trade talks, the EU would have all to play for. A helpless supplicant once more, Mrs May or her successor would be obliged to give away the store.

For thanks to your help, we’ve been blinded by a veritably Biblical vision of what any resultant trade agreement is bound to entail. Sacrifice of our fishing grounds. Acceptance of freedom of movement. Membership of the single market, or at least full regulatory alignment, which would amount to the same thing. Subjection to the rulings of the ECJ. Restored, if perhaps farcically reduced, annual contributions to the EU budget. And of course, the UK would fall into a customs union by default, if we hadn’t already joined that too. We are hard pressed to distinguish this basket of inevitable concessions from full EU membership, save for the fact that we’d have no vote. Even for us hardcore ‘extremists’, it’s difficult to see how strangling in EU apron strings would improve on the status quo.

We realise you don’t believe this, but we’re not stupid. Aside from the no-deal exit that you continue (rather hysterically) to rule out, every political route under discussion in the chamber that you have hijacked leads to exactly the same place. Every so-called soft Brexit is a not-Brexit. These limp gestures towards departure all neatly strip out any advantage of leaving the bloc — whose favours you prize so highly that you’re willing to demolish your own political infrastructure and forfeit your own integrity to stay attached to it. We do hope your Continental friends are flattered.

We are a frugal people, thrifty with not only our money, but our time, attention, and passion. So we implore you to cut to the chase. We would prefer to avoid a long, agonising extension, during which this pantomime of ‘honouring the referendum result’ will be further dragged out in the service of reneging on it. (In fact, we’ve noticed that the more frequently an MP trots out this expression on camera, the more reliably said MP intends to dishonour the referendum.) We don’t want to be subjected to a disingenuous ‘confirmatory vote’, which would be 100 per cent certain to take the option of genuinely leaving the EU off the ballot altogether. Given the inexorably abasing outcome of trade talks, the ‘withdrawal agreement’ pitted against ‘Remain’ would effectively offer the British people a choice between ‘Remain’ and ‘Remain’, which insults our intelligence. Such empty theatre would pin a fig leaf of democracy over the embarrassing vulgarity of your autocracy. We’d rather skip it.

You fiercely disagree with us over what’s best for our country, whose most historically admirable aspects you crusaders seem disconcertingly bent on destroying in the very process of coming to the nation’s rescue. As this difference of opinion has played out, too, it’s hard to resist the impression that you mostly just want to have your way. And fair play! You seem to be getting your way. Yet what most frustrates us is your dissembling. That’s not to impugn the Lib Dems, Greens, and SNP, who’ve been upfront about plotting to overturn the referendum from the start. We respect their forthrightness. One knows where one is with such people. So we’d far prefer your brutal candour, even if that means your giving overt expression to condescension and tyranny. We don’t want Alastair Campbell to bamboozle us once again about how Brexit is ‘undeliverable’, when the truth is far cruder: you refuse to deliver it.

More elections or referenda would haemorrhage treasure and civic goodwill. Further years of pretend negotiations with Brussels, with all those costly plane trips, hotel suites, and receptions, promise still more numbing tedium on the news, only to land us in a damaged version of where we are now. Since our country is already an international laughing stock, let’s get the big global chuckle over with: ha-ha, the British made such ballyhoo about leaving, and now they’re not. Besides, we’ve glimpsed the future beyond BRINO, just as you have. (You never give us credit for knowing perfectly well what you say behind closed doors.) After a year or two of humiliation as a colony with no voting rights, the UK will quietly, pragmatically come to its senses and rejoin the EU. That’s the plan, right? Come on, admit it. That’s the plan.

That old homily about how it’s best to accept short-term pain and whip a sticking plaster off all at once is germane. It’s true that we’re disappointed. Naively, we believed all that improbable guff we were fed as schoolchildren about parliament deriving its power from you-know-whom. But we’d rather embrace our cynicism in a stroke than keep losing our optimism by debilitating degrees. Have some guts for once in your lives. Be honest, and be efficient. Revoke Article 50. Then face the political consequences.

Yours,

Over Half the British Electorate.
User avatar
clv101
Site Admin
Posts: 10606
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Contact:

Post by clv101 »

Little John wrote:
clv101 wrote:
UndercoverElephant wrote:Anyone still believe a no deal brexit is likely to happen?
The more interesting question is why anyone ever thought it likely in the first place.
Because some of us, being democrats, assumed that after we were told the decision would be ours, after we democratically made that decision, after the UK parliament ratified that decision by triggering A50 and after both mainstream parties campaigned at the last election on a ticket of respecting that decision, it would be carried out. and so, given your question, the even more interesting one, for me, is why you even bother with any pretence of being democrats at all.
My point is that even a basic understanding of how Westminister currently works (not how it should work or might work in the future, but how it does work) should have told everyone that parliament would never facilitate a no deal exit, a large majority of MPs don't want to leave at all, certainly not with no deal. It was a complete non starter.
RevdTess
Posts: 3054
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Glasgow

Post by RevdTess »

clv101 wrote: My point is that even a basic understanding of how Westminister currently works (not how it should work or might work in the future, but how it does work) should have told everyone that parliament would never facilitate a no deal exit, a large majority of MPs don't want to leave at all, certainly not with no deal. It was a complete non starter.
The odd thing to me was that May insisted for so long to keep 'no deal' as an option as if it were some kind of effective threat or bargaining chip. All it's done is created an effective opposition to Brexit who have been able to set aside their differences to fight against the 'no deal' option, and now have a power to control the discussions that they would never otherwise have obtained. If anything has pushed parliamentary sentiment towards revoking A50 or a 2nd referendum, it's the unique threat of 'no deal'. Now that threat has almost gone, so has the panicked impetus for revoking A50 or passing a deal only on condition of a referendum.
User avatar
UndercoverElephant
Posts: 13585
Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 00:00
Location: UK

Post by UndercoverElephant »

clv101 wrote:...should have told everyone that parliament would never facilitate a no deal exit, a large majority of MPs don't want to leave at all, certainly not with no deal. It was a complete non starter.
That's not true. We've have just witnessed a very chaotic process, and no deal was the default outcome. Parliament has stopped it, but it wasn't a foregone conclusion that would happen. Had Bercow made different decisions, there may have been a different outcome.
RevdTess
Posts: 3054
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Glasgow

Post by RevdTess »

Why Labour looks set to become the referendum party
But I am told enough of the referendum doubters are close to folding, partly because the advantages of Labour rebranding as the people's vote vanguard in the forthcoming European parliamentary and council elections would be very significant.

Labour would pick up the votes of almost all of the 48% who voted to remain in 2016, while the Tories would face a humiliating wipe out, with so much of the leave vote likely to gravitate to Farage's new Brexit party and to a somewhat resurgent UKIP.
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-04-11/why ... dum-party/
cubes
Posts: 725
Joined: 10 Jun 2008, 21:40
Location: Norfolk

Post by cubes »

UndercoverElephant wrote:There is currently an attempt to get rid of her by changing the tory party constitution. Requires a petition with 10,000 signatures of members, which should be a doddle.
They have 10,000 members left? :D
User avatar
UndercoverElephant
Posts: 13585
Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 00:00
Location: UK

Post by UndercoverElephant »

RevdTess wrote:Why Labour looks set to become the referendum party
Yep. This is why Corbyn has spent so long trying to sit on the fence, or just keep quiet and stay of the detail of the argument. It was always likely that a time would come when a tactical re-alignment in one direction or another could make a key difference to Labour's chance of winning an election.

Most people know now that no deal is dead, and Corbyn cannot be held responsible for a future killing of something that's already dead (even if he can be held responsible for helping to kill it before now). Which leaves May's unfixable withdrawal deal, or a revoke, whether via referendum or directly. If the tories admit this, it will just cause their vote to collapse even further.

If Labour offers a clear route to putting brexit out of its misery, May will be left defending a compromise position which is being deserted in both directions.

As somebody who wants to see the tory party smashed to pieces, I now find myself hoping May clings on. She's already killed brexit. Now I want to watch her kill the tory party.
User avatar
Vortex2
Posts: 2696
Joined: 13 Jan 2019, 10:29
Location: In a Midlands field

Post by Vortex2 »

cubes wrote:
UndercoverElephant wrote:There is currently an attempt to get rid of her by changing the tory party constitution. Requires a petition with 10,000 signatures of members, which should be a doddle.
They have 10,000 members left? :D
I joined about 6 months ago ... mainly to vote for a better PM than May when the time comes.
RevdTess
Posts: 3054
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Glasgow

Post by RevdTess »

UndercoverElephant wrote: As somebody who wants to see the tory party smashed to pieces, I now find myself hoping May clings on. She's already killed brexit. Now I want to watch her kill the tory party.
She is certainly following the Nick Clegg playbook at the moment.
1) Gain power in coalition
2) Betray your core voters on their number 1 priority because of the needs of your coalition partner.
3) Never, ever, apologise.
RevdTess
Posts: 3054
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Glasgow

Post by RevdTess »

Amused that Farage failed to register https://thebrexitparty.com/ for his new party...

Edit: Oh no it's spreading http://thebrexitparty.eu/
Locked