I know that having Mr Johnson in number 10 is enraging to many - most? - people but that shouldn't mean that one supports, never mind applauds, the current shennanigans in Parliament and the attempt to prolong the Br**it torture ad infinitum, because that is what will happen.
The great fallacy here is the idea that in the event of Brexit happening on 31st October, the torture stops.
Nope.
It'll get a lot worse. There years of negotiations that will follow.
This is true ten-fold more in the event of NoDeal.
And as far as "agitation and demonstration" go, it looks pretty tame from my side of the Channel. It's been mentioned before that if anything like this had been inflicted on the French, they would have been in the streets building barricades months earlier. The British have been quite restrained about it considering.
If the public, following the referendum, was so all-fired keen on Brexit, then they should have elected MPs to match. As it is, an evenly balanced referendum was followed by an evenly balanced HoC.
I know that having Mr Johnson in number 10 is enraging to many - most? - people but that shouldn't mean that one supports, never mind applauds, the current shennanigans in Parliament and the attempt to prolong the Br**it torture ad infinitum, because that is what will happen.
The great fallacy here is the idea that in the event of Brexit happening on 31st October, the torture stops.
Nope.
It'll get a lot worse. There years of negotiations that will follow.
This is true ten-fold more in the event of NoDeal.
At least there wouldn’t be anyone in parliament or the media actively working to undermine or block the negotiations any more.
If the public, following the referendum, was so all-fired keen on Brexit, then they should have elected MPs to match. As it is, an evenly balanced referendum was followed by an evenly balanced HoC.
But as @la vie en rouge says, from this side of the Channel, it doesn't really look like the public is all-fired keen on remaining, either.
I know that having Mr Johnson in number 10 is enraging to many - most? - people but that shouldn't mean that one supports, never mind applauds, the current shennanigans in Parliament and the attempt to prolong the Br**it torture ad infinitum, because that is what will happen.
These are dangerous times. If the LibDem-anyone else alliance manages, with the connivance of the Speaker, to wrest control of the order paper from the government, and then use that to override the Act that was passed in January 2017, then a large swathe of the electorate is going to draw the lesson that prolonged demonstration and agitation is the best way to get what one wants, while the other, larger swathe, will learn that MPs only see fit to obey Acts of Parliament when it suits them. That is dangerous.
Those who seek to have the UK remain in the EU may well rejoice, but they are laying the foundations of the collapse of respect for Parliament and the Acts that it passes.
Let's remember that back in 2016, the idea of a second referendum was the preserve of Tim Farron and Owen Smith, neither of whom are exactly Machiavellian titans of the political élite.
If we are where we are, it's because your guys are doing their best to pull defeat from the jaws of victory to a degree not seen since Napoleon decided to march on Moscow.
I know that having Mr Johnson in number 10 is enraging to many - most? - people but that shouldn't mean that one supports, never mind applauds, the current shennanigans in Parliament and the attempt to prolong the Br**it torture ad infinitum, because that is what will happen.
The great fallacy here is the idea that in the event of Brexit happening on 31st October, the torture stops.
Nope.
It'll get a lot worse. There years of negotiations that will follow.
This is true ten-fold more in the event of NoDeal.
At least there wouldn’t be anyone in parliament or the media actively working to undermine or block the negotiations any more.
Do you really, honestly believe that? Do you think the government will come up with an idea for how to cooperate with the EU on fisheries, and have no one in the UK disagree? Or, on the rights of citizens in different countries, whether there's any convergence between UK and EU standards to ease trade? There are many visions at the moment of what a future outside the EU will look like, do you think all but one of them will suddenly disappear on the first of November?
That's all before you add into the mix a large minority who would work towards rejoining the EU at the earliest opportunity.
And an electorate which hadn’t voted for any particular kind of Brexit has elected a like-minded HoC which can’t decide on any particular kind of Brexit. Having the referendum before clarifying what kind of Brexit would be sought/available was putting the cart before the democratic horse.
And as far as "agitation and demonstration" go, it looks pretty tame from my side of the Channel. It's been mentioned before that if anything like this had been inflicted on the French, they would have been in the streets building barricades months earlier. The British have been quite restrained about it considering.
When I lived in France, the government introduced a change to the way it compiled statistics on cars being set on fire. From thenceforth, only cars that someone had actually set on fire directly would count. If the car was on fire because the flames had spread to it from an adjacent burning car, that car would no longer be included in the statistics ...
I regret too few MPs seem to be treating this crisis as a threat to democracy and too many as about Brexit. And I find those who think threatening No Deal will result in the EU caving in unbelievable. What concessions do they think the EU can make?
I know that having Mr Johnson in number 10 is enraging to many - most? - people but that shouldn't mean that one supports, never mind applauds, the current shennanigans in Parliament and the attempt to prolong the Br**it torture ad infinitum, because that is what will happen.
The great fallacy here is the idea that in the event of Brexit happening on 31st October, the torture stops.
Nope.
It'll get a lot worse. There years of negotiations that will follow.
This is true ten-fold more in the event of NoDeal.
At least there wouldn’t be anyone in parliament or the media actively working to undermine or block the negotiations any more.
This has been well covered by others but again, completely mistaken. The only way to make it stop and move on is to revoke A50. Whether one advocates that position or not, that is a simple fact.
Of course if A50 was revoked, some people would be very unhappy but the action of the state to negotiate on 101 things would cease.
Any other course means years and years of this kind of conflict as the UK wrestles not wanting to concede anything in negotiations against her need for trade deals.
I regret too few MPs seem to be treating this crisis as a threat to democracy and too many as about Brexit. And I find those who think threatening No Deal will result in the EU caving in unbelievable. What concessions do they think the EU can make?
Oh, there are concessions available. If the UK side decides on asking to remain in the customs union and single market then the EU can probably look at removing the Irish backstop. The problem is that any concessions the EU can still make would need the UK to remove the red lines the Tories have arbitrarily drawn without consulting the people or Parliament.
Those who seek to have the UK remain in the EU may well rejoice, but they are laying the foundations of the collapse of respect for Parliament and the Acts that it passes.
I think the blame for that can be laid squarely at the feet of those who pledged to hold such a poorly-thought out referendum on this topic in the first place, for purely party political ends.
After that week when the Commons voted against everything put to them, did anyone have any respect for them? And it's hard to have any respect at any time for the Lords, given how the membership of that House is determined.
I have a hypothesis: ABdPJ wanted to have "Prime Minister of the UK" on his CV. He's done that, now he's ready to let someone else take over and do the hard work.
Is it this week or next that he goes to Balmoral? You really do have to feel sympathy for a nonagenarian, wanting a break, problems with a son and now having to have such a man as a guest. She may have survived having the Ceaușescus staying in he Palace, but she was 30 years younger then.
Is it this week or next that he goes to Balmoral? You really do have to feel sympathy for a nonagenarian, wanting a break, problems with a son and now having to have such a man as a guest.
I feel sure HMQ has plenty of experience in dealing with arrogant and obnoxious posh English cads.
Corbyn playing the "You Brexit, you fixit" card is the cherry on the cake. Johnson trapped as PM with no mandate, no morals and no majority. Boom.
Yes, weird how Boris looked tongue-tied and blustering, Corbyn sprightly. How Boris does bloviate.
That terrible moment when you've got what you always wanted, realised it's not nearly as fabulous as you thought it would be ... And you're totally actually going to have to do some work to deliver on what you promised
Both he and JRM looked totally out of their depth last night. Some of those Tory MP's faces where a total picture. Wonder how many letters have gone in already.
I have a hypothesis: ABdPJ wanted to have "Prime Minister of the UK" on his CV. He's done that, now he's ready to let someone else take over and do the hard work.
I think it was @chrisstiles that said Boris was an expert at falling upwards, and I agree with him that such a line on his CV guarantees a lifetime of lucrative speaking engagements.
Corbyn playing the "You Brexit, you fixit" card is the cherry on the cake. Johnson trapped as PM with no mandate, no morals and no majority. Boom.
Yes, weird how Boris looked tongue-tied and blustering, Corbyn sprightly. How Boris does bloviate.
That terrible moment when you've got what you always wanted, realised it's not nearly as fabulous as you thought it would be ... And you're totally actually going to have to do some work to deliver on what you promised
Both he and JRM looked totally out of their depth last night. Some of those Tory MP's faces where a total picture. Wonder how many letters have gone in already.
I like John Crace's line, "The PPI claims hotline for duff prime ministers is in meltdown".
I know that having Mr Johnson in number 10 is enraging to many - most? - people but that shouldn't mean that one supports, never mind applauds, the current shennanigans in Parliament and the attempt to prolong the Br**it torture ad infinitum, because that is what will happen.
The great fallacy here is the idea that in the event of Brexit happening on 31st October, the torture stops.
Nope.
It'll get a lot worse. There years of negotiations that will follow.
This is true ten-fold more in the event of NoDeal.
At least there wouldn’t be anyone in parliament or the media actively working to undermine or block the negotiations any more.
Do you really, honestly believe that? Do you think the government will come up with an idea for how to cooperate with the EU on fisheries, and have no one in the UK disagree? Or, on the rights of citizens in different countries, whether there's any convergence between UK and EU standards to ease trade? There are many visions at the moment of what a future outside the EU will look like, do you think all but one of them will suddenly disappear on the first of November?
My point is that we would no longer have to cope with those who don't want a deal at all, and who will happily employ wrecking tactics to achieve that end. Even those who want the hardest possible Brexit want there to be trade negotiations after the fact, they just want those negotiations to start with a completely clean slate.
Disagreements over the best trade/fisheries/citizenship policy happen all the time. That's what parliament is for. But do you seriously think there would be a faction within post-Brexit Westminster that would try to make sure no trade deals were struck or policies enacted at all?
To put it another way, in a post-Brexit world everyone would agree that we have to trade with the EU. They might disagree about the details, but they would all be seeking the same ultimate end.
That's all before you add into the mix a large minority who would work towards rejoining the EU at the earliest opportunity.
I doubt they'd do so by attempting to block any and all trade with the EU until we rejoin.
But do you seriously think there would be a faction within post-Brexit Westminster that would try to make sure no trade deals were struck or policies enacted at all?
Yes, because every trade deal with the EU would have to re-open a number of questions that any of the proposed deals have to address (including payment of funds), and that have been seen as betrayal by the BXP and their constituency. Also Farage is not going to simply disappear.
Disagreements over the best trade/fisheries/citizenship policy happen all the time. That's what parliament is for. But do you seriously think there would be a faction within post-Brexit Westminster that would try to make sure no trade deals were struck or policies enacted at all?
This is where I (and I suspect others) think you are profoundly mistaken.
Parliament would have to agree on SOMETHING and there are more than enough factions who would oppose all sorts of deals on the basis that they are not 'pure enough.' Or whatever nonsense. I really don't see how any deals will happen for years; not because they are opposed to a deal per se but because only their deal is acceptable.
The 'no deal' people are deliberately obfuscating the point that if we leave the EU without a deal already in place, we may not have anything left that the EU wants. European companies are already resourcing all their contracts for IT, parts and raw materials to exclude British suppliers.
We have always needed them more than they need us, and it is folly to believe otherwise.
And yet that was exactly the basis of the leave argument. They would come running after us. As I have said before, the EU is a large body, they can easily supply much of what they need from within
If the public, following the referendum, was so all-fired keen on Brexit, then they should have elected MPs to match. As it is, an evenly balanced referendum was followed by an evenly balanced HoC.
To be pedantic, for the most part they did. People voted for parties that promised to implement the result of the referendum and the Act passed to allow that to happen, but since then they've demanded A Deal and then refused to vote for the one on offer.
I regret too few MPs seem to be treating this crisis as a threat to democracy and too many as about Brexit. And I find those who think threatening No Deal will result in the EU caving in unbelievable. What concessions do they think the EU can make?
This.
This? Do you mean M. Barniers statement that he sees no reason to re-open negotiations?
But do you seriously think there would be a faction within post-Brexit Westminster that would try to make sure no trade deals were struck or policies enacted at all?
Yes, because every trade deal with the EU would have to re-open a number of questions that any of the proposed deals have to address (including payment of funds), and that have been seen as betrayal by the BXP and their constituency. Also Farage is not going to simply disappear.
If the UK leaves without having a trade arrangement in place, then the first thing that happens when they approach the EU to negotiate a deal is that the EU side refuses to talk until the outstanding bill is settled. £40b ish plus interest. That's going to go through Parliament without comment.
Then the EU will have red lines, which could quite easily include a requirement that any deal results in reopening the border in Ireland, probably meaning some form of customs union similar to that in the backstop. Nothing there which will cause disagreement in Parliament.
While some form of customs union is on the table there will be very limited opportunities to discuss trade deals with any one else, Parliament which was promised all these new deals isn't going to complain about waiting a few years before negotiations can even start.
And, that's only considering the trade side of any negotiations.
But do you seriously think there would be a faction within post-Brexit Westminster that would try to make sure no trade deals were struck or policies enacted at all?
Yes, because every trade deal with the EU would have to re-open a number of questions that any of the proposed deals have to address (including payment of funds), and that have been seen as betrayal by the BXP and their constituency. Also Farage is not going to simply disappear.
If the UK leaves without having a trade arrangement in place, then the first thing that happens when they approach the EU to negotiate a deal is that the EU side refuses to talk until the outstanding bill is settled. £40b ish plus interest. That's going to go through Parliament without comment.
Corbyn playing the "You Brexit, you fixit" card is the cherry on the cake. Johnson trapped as PM with no mandate, no morals and no majority. Boom.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Corbyn has spent his entire political career voting against the EU, speaking against it at every turn and likening it to a dictatorship - don't take my word for it, check Hansard.
When it comes to a question of consistency or integrity you couldn't get a fag paper between them.
Corbyn playing the "You Brexit, you fixit" card is the cherry on the cake. Johnson trapped as PM with no mandate, no morals and no majority. Boom.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Corbyn has spent his entire political career voting against the EU, speaking against it at every turn and likening it to a dictatorship - don't take my word for it, check Hansard.
When it comes to a question of consistency or integrity you couldn't get a fag paper between them.
OTOH, a good proportion of the current "Leave, Leave, Leave" cabinet were pro EU, even when they were ministers in previous governments. Boris only jumped when the referendum campaign started. He's an opportunist, but I hesitate to call him a cheap one because he will cost the country dear.
Hence my much earlier post saying I've had enough. Our parliament and the people in it have moved far, far beyond humour or parody. A better Speaker might have had a chance of stopping the wheeling out of the self-destruct button but I fear its its too late now - and in any case we're still stuck with the posturing Pickwick wannabe Bercow.
Corbyn playing the "You Brexit, you fixit" card is the cherry on the cake. Johnson trapped as PM with no mandate, no morals and no majority. Boom.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Corbyn has spent his entire political career voting against the EU, speaking against it at every turn and likening it to a dictatorship - don't take my word for it, check Hansard.
When it comes to a question of consistency or integrity you couldn't get a fag paper between them.
I'm struggling to see your point here. One is a consistent voice for Leave, who has maintained a position throughout that we need a deal with the EU that protects jobs, people and the environment. The other one is Boris Johnson.
I could put the the entire Rizla factory between them and still have room for the entirety of British American Tobacco.
Disagreements over the best trade/fisheries/citizenship policy happen all the time. That's what parliament is for. But do you seriously think there would be a faction within post-Brexit Westminster that would try to make sure no trade deals were struck or policies enacted at all?
This is where I (and I suspect others) think you are profoundly mistaken.
Parliament would have to agree on SOMETHING and there are more than enough factions who would oppose all sorts of deals on the basis that they are not 'pure enough.' Or whatever nonsense. I really don't see how any deals will happen for years; not because they are opposed to a deal per se but because only their deal is acceptable.
I seriously doubt it. Firstly, most of the prime movers of Brexit are just trying to avoid having to abide by the new anti-tax avoidance laws currently being passed by the EU, so once they've avoided them the details of any trade deals won't be important any more. Secondly, they all know we have to trade with the EU if we're going to have any kind of economy left. And thirdly, once the pro-Brexit portion of the UK population have been told we've left the EU they'll see it as them having won and lose interest in any of the fine detail of the subsequent trade deals that get made.
Boris and his cronies could pass a trade deal that commits us to customs union in all but name, and as long as they can keep dodging their taxes and spin it to the public as having left the EU they'll take it as a win. Meanwhile, with Brexit a done deal, the other parties would most likely agree to the deal on the basis of keeping the British economy afloat rather than risk being seen as the ones keeping us from becoming Great Again.
Comments
The problem here is that it's really difficult to find a non-silly way to do this particular damned silly thing.
So we have Boris saying he's willing to do it the damned silly way.
Working in IT having to technically advise clueless management, one soon starts siding with Sir Humphrey.
The great fallacy here is the idea that in the event of Brexit happening on 31st October, the torture stops.
Nope.
It'll get a lot worse. There years of negotiations that will follow.
This is true ten-fold more in the event of NoDeal.
AFZ
At least there wouldn’t be anyone in parliament or the media actively working to undermine or block the negotiations any more.
But as @la vie en rouge says, from this side of the Channel, it doesn't really look like the public is all-fired keen on remaining, either.
Let's remember that back in 2016, the idea of a second referendum was the preserve of Tim Farron and Owen Smith, neither of whom are exactly Machiavellian titans of the political élite.
If we are where we are, it's because your guys are doing their best to pull defeat from the jaws of victory to a degree not seen since Napoleon decided to march on Moscow.
That's all before you add into the mix a large minority who would work towards rejoining the EU at the earliest opportunity.
When I lived in France, the government introduced a change to the way it compiled statistics on cars being set on fire. From thenceforth, only cars that someone had actually set on fire directly would count. If the car was on fire because the flames had spread to it from an adjacent burning car, that car would no longer be included in the statistics ...
I regret too few MPs seem to be treating this crisis as a threat to democracy and too many as about Brexit. And I find those who think threatening No Deal will result in the EU caving in unbelievable. What concessions do they think the EU can make?
This has been well covered by others but again, completely mistaken. The only way to make it stop and move on is to revoke A50. Whether one advocates that position or not, that is a simple fact.
Of course if A50 was revoked, some people would be very unhappy but the action of the state to negotiate on 101 things would cease.
Any other course means years and years of this kind of conflict as the UK wrestles not wanting to concede anything in negotiations against her need for trade deals.
AFZ
This.
After that week when the Commons voted against everything put to them, did anyone have any respect for them? And it's hard to have any respect at any time for the Lords, given how the membership of that House is determined.
Yes, weird how Boris looked tongue-tied and blustering, Corbyn sprightly. How Boris does bloviate.
That terrible moment when you've got what you always wanted, realised it's not nearly as fabulous as you thought it would be ... And you're totally actually going to have to do some work to deliver on what you promised
Both he and JRM looked totally out of their depth last night. Some of those Tory MP's faces where a total picture. Wonder how many letters have gone in already.
I think it was @chrisstiles that said Boris was an expert at falling upwards, and I agree with him that such a line on his CV guarantees a lifetime of lucrative speaking engagements.
I like John Crace's line, "The PPI claims hotline for duff prime ministers is in meltdown".
My point is that we would no longer have to cope with those who don't want a deal at all, and who will happily employ wrecking tactics to achieve that end. Even those who want the hardest possible Brexit want there to be trade negotiations after the fact, they just want those negotiations to start with a completely clean slate.
Disagreements over the best trade/fisheries/citizenship policy happen all the time. That's what parliament is for. But do you seriously think there would be a faction within post-Brexit Westminster that would try to make sure no trade deals were struck or policies enacted at all?
To put it another way, in a post-Brexit world everyone would agree that we have to trade with the EU. They might disagree about the details, but they would all be seeking the same ultimate end.
I doubt they'd do so by attempting to block any and all trade with the EU until we rejoin.
Yes, because every trade deal with the EU would have to re-open a number of questions that any of the proposed deals have to address (including payment of funds), and that have been seen as betrayal by the BXP and their constituency. Also Farage is not going to simply disappear.
This is where I (and I suspect others) think you are profoundly mistaken.
Parliament would have to agree on SOMETHING and there are more than enough factions who would oppose all sorts of deals on the basis that they are not 'pure enough.' Or whatever nonsense. I really don't see how any deals will happen for years; not because they are opposed to a deal per se but because only their deal is acceptable.
AFZ
We have always needed them more than they need us, and it is folly to believe otherwise.
To be pedantic, for the most part they did. People voted for parties that promised to implement the result of the referendum and the Act passed to allow that to happen, but since then they've demanded A Deal and then refused to vote for the one on offer.
This? Do you mean M. Barniers statement that he sees no reason to re-open negotiations?
If the UK leaves without having a trade arrangement in place, then the first thing that happens when they approach the EU to negotiate a deal is that the EU side refuses to talk until the outstanding bill is settled. £40b ish plus interest. That's going to go through Parliament without comment.
Then the EU will have red lines, which could quite easily include a requirement that any deal results in reopening the border in Ireland, probably meaning some form of customs union similar to that in the backstop. Nothing there which will cause disagreement in Parliament.
While some form of customs union is on the table there will be very limited opportunities to discuss trade deals with any one else, Parliament which was promised all these new deals isn't going to complain about waiting a few years before negotiations can even start.
And, that's only considering the trade side of any negotiations.
I assume sarcasm and agreement.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Corbyn has spent his entire political career voting against the EU, speaking against it at every turn and likening it to a dictatorship - don't take my word for it, check Hansard.
When it comes to a question of consistency or integrity you couldn't get a fag paper between them.
OTOH, a good proportion of the current "Leave, Leave, Leave" cabinet were pro EU, even when they were ministers in previous governments. Boris only jumped when the referendum campaign started. He's an opportunist, but I hesitate to call him a cheap one because he will cost the country dear.
Hence my much earlier post saying I've had enough. Our parliament and the people in it have moved far, far beyond humour or parody. A better Speaker might have had a chance of stopping the wheeling out of the self-destruct button but I fear its its too late now - and in any case we're still stuck with the posturing Pickwick wannabe Bercow.
I'm struggling to see your point here. One is a consistent voice for Leave, who has maintained a position throughout that we need a deal with the EU that protects jobs, people and the environment. The other one is Boris Johnson.
I could put the the entire Rizla factory between them and still have room for the entirety of British American Tobacco.
I seriously doubt it. Firstly, most of the prime movers of Brexit are just trying to avoid having to abide by the new anti-tax avoidance laws currently being passed by the EU, so once they've avoided them the details of any trade deals won't be important any more. Secondly, they all know we have to trade with the EU if we're going to have any kind of economy left. And thirdly, once the pro-Brexit portion of the UK population have been told we've left the EU they'll see it as them having won and lose interest in any of the fine detail of the subsequent trade deals that get made.
Boris and his cronies could pass a trade deal that commits us to customs union in all but name, and as long as they can keep dodging their taxes and spin it to the public as having left the EU they'll take it as a win. Meanwhile, with Brexit a done deal, the other parties would most likely agree to the deal on the basis of keeping the British economy afloat rather than risk being seen as the ones keeping us from becoming Great Again.