Apologies for the double post but the more I think about this, the more outrageous I think it is. It just shows how far gone some of the Brexit idiots really are.
Northern Ireland is much more the UK's problem that the Republic of Ireland's. What I mean by that, is that whilst there were definitely issues for the Republic during the troubles, essentially the violence was in the North. Since the Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement (GFA) was signed, no doubt Eire has benefited economically. For example there is now a much better road link from Belfast to Dublin (paid for, in part, by the EU development fund); the lack of border security has no doubt helped trade. However the benefits are much greater to a portion of the UK. NI has thrived since peace broke out - not to mention that in 20 years we haven't added to the 3000 deaths* from the previous 30.
Essentially the UK government is completely abdicating its duty of care to the people of NI. If Ireland said Sod-it, forget the GFA, let's have a proper border; there would be detrimental effects for Ireland but nothing like the effects that NI would suffer - what A FUCKING PART OF THE UK would suffer. It has bothered me all the way through that the UK government has shown no interest in protecting NI - the moves have all come from the EU because Ireland insisted on it.
If we look back to where the (now) legendary 'backstop' came from, it shows once again a complete dereliction of duty on the part of the UK government.
The so-called first-stage deal signed by the UK and the EU a year ago only happened because the EU gave May a deal and came up with something that could cope with the NI situation. I watch PMQs most weeks and I was appalled when May kept claiming the initial agreement as some sort of success for her Government. "You said we wouldn't get a deal" she has shouted at Corbyn more than once "and we did." Not really, the EU gave you the only deal that would work when you couldn't come up with anything. Part of that deal - inescapably - is the backstop. If the UK government cared for ALL of its citizens then they would have had NI as top of their negotiating priorities and Gibraltar second. Instead, they've tried to wish NI away and pretended the Rock doesn't exist. Unless of course it's an excuse to blame Spain for our own failings.
I didn't think I could be more appalled by the Brexit insane brigade. I was wrong.
AFZ
*The exact figure, I can't quite remember, but it is carefully recorded. Even individual killed in the troubles is officially named, hence the exact figure (which is around 3000) is known. I think this is really important.
As I said up thread, if the DUP didn't hold the balance of power in Westminster, the Tories would thrown the whole of Northern Ireland under a bus by now.
As I said up thread, if the DUP didn't hold the balance of power in Westminster, the Tories would thrown the whole of Northern Ireland under a bus by now.
Unfortunately a side result of non-cooperation by Sinn Fein is that only unionsts - and largely only the DUP (I think there is also an independent, Lady Somethingorother, who is generally critical of the DUP) who are speaking for a highly complex situation in NI. Which is fairly obviously impossible.
I'm sure the DUP would argue that they are simply fighting their own corner, but it seems to me that they are their own worst enemy in this situation. I think there is a danger that they might actually get what they are asking for (a fairly extreme version of brexit) which in turn would lead to bad things, not least for the DUP.
I can't parse how strong unionism is within the Tories - but I do think that the DUP are making a bigger deal of this than they need to, given that NI already has a separate education system, legal system, food security regime, etc than the rUK. In some ways it is even more divergent than Scotland, which is another reason why the Stormont crisis is so bad. They could choose to run their own things as their own country but it's not happening at the moment.
Anyway, I suppose I'm saying that wider divergence between NI and the rUK would not necessarily be "throwing them under a bus" and does not have to even be a step towards reunification in Ireland. However it feels like the deeply unrepresentative situation in Westminster is now making that more likely.
I can't parse how strong unionism is within the Tories
I can't either. They certainly say a lot about maintaining the union, but they consistently seem to promote policies that if they benefit anyone it's the wealthier sections of the population of southern England and to the detriment of other parts of the UK. There's a massive disconnect between strong words about maintaining the Union and statements and policies that treat Scotland, Wales, NI and even Northern England as though we're colonies of secondary importance to southern England existing solely to serve "our betters" down south.
It's a total mess. And in a finely balanced minority government situation encourages everyone to spout bollocks for their own political ends.
I can't see that anyone is really talking much sense - and the default position of sticking to a known political and economic landscape is effectively being disrupted by politicans who seem determined to get something worse for no tangible gains.
We haven't said much here about Labour recently - so let's. Diane Abbot is one of the worst front-bench politicians I have ever seen. Her speech the other day was utter nonsense. Filled with enough rubbish to make others on her bench cringe visibly in pain.
It isn't bad enough that the Labour position makes no sense (why would the EU offer a better deal? Why would they want to spend time working on a customs deal that the UK can pick and choose aspects of? How does this meet the stated aims of protecting worker rights and environmental standards anyway?), they send in one of the most tongue-tied politicians to mount the kind of defense that allows in 10 cheap tries on a wet day in Pontypridd.
Give it up already. Who are you trying to impress Jeremy?
This interview with Emily Thornberry pretty effectively skewers the nonsense. To be fair, she does seem to have a level of competence beyond the majority in the Shadow Cabinet, but she must surely know that the things she is saying are complete humbug.
And, incidentally, it says something when the hardest politicans interviews are conducted by actor-comedians.
I saw on the early morning news that Channel 4 were at least offering to host a face to face between the OM and !eader of the opposition, because the BBC and ITV had backed out. How true this was I am now unsure.
I saw on the early morning news that Channel 4 were at least offering to host a face to face between the OM and !eader of the opposition, because the BBC and ITV had backed out. How true this was I am now unsure.
Channel 4 tonight is a debate - featuring representatives of all sides, I believe. But not necessarily including people based on their titles.
(I happen to know that Caroline Lucas is representing the People vote argument)
I think the playing-for-time is because there is an accepted truism that the EU caves in at the last minute.
The problem is that all logic suggests that there is no way it can cave in. They can't accept a loss of control over the Irish backstop - otherwise they risk an open backdoor into the CM leading to an undermining of it.
They can't offer a trade deal with frictionless borders unless the other partner is prepared to keep to EU rules, otherwise this defeats part of the object of being an EU state.
They can't offer a bespoke deal or risk undermining the fudge they already have with the EFTA states.
I can't see what they can actually conceed. Even what they've already offered in the draft is quite dangerous for the union.
I think the playing-for-time is because there is an accepted truism that the EU caves in at the last minute.
The problem is that all logic suggests that there is no way it can cave in. They can't accept a loss of control over the Irish backstop - otherwise they risk an open backdoor into the CM leading to an undermining of it.
They can't offer a trade deal with frictionless borders unless the other partner is prepared to keep to EU rules, otherwise this defeats part of the object of being an EU state.
They can't offer a bespoke deal or risk undermining the fudge they already have with the EFTA states.
I can't see what they can actually conceed. Even what they've already offered in the draft is quite dangerous for the union.
Yep.
In the case of Greece vs EU circa 2012-13, the EU was completely in the wrong and did not cave in, even compromising both the welfare and the democary of Greece.
If the EU doesn't cave in when they're wrong, it seems to me to be really unwise to expect them to cave in when they're in the right.
Intriguingly, some analysts I respect suggested that Greece would have been much better served by walking away and leaving the Euro. For various domestic reasons they didn't do this. The UK is not so lucky, we can walk away from the table but that would be a really stupid thing to do.
I might have said before here - but I think the Tories are trying game theory as advocated by Yanis Varoufakis when he was finance minister in Greece.
The problem is that doing this is that it is a horrendous risk, with very little clear chance of success. Eventually Greece couldn't face the consequences of going up against the EU and losing.
Varoufakis insisted that Greece would have won in the end - but couldn't persuade his own political friends to continue taking the heat.
I'm reluctant to try to make light of a complex and difficult situation that may have a tragic outcome, but I wish the PTB and everyone else would stop referring to the border-that-is-no-border as a "backstop". That term comes from cricket and a backstop is a last resort when the ball goes past the wicketkeeper, but in this case I cannot see anything resembling a "wicketkeeper", unless, just as in other aspects, Treeza is trusting to the players to be scrupulously honest and try to make a whole stack of pounds and euros across the border-in-name-only.
There's now a report by at least two MPs that the EU were informed that the vote would be postponed sine die a full 24 hours before anyone else was told. There is a similar claim that the 'clarification' Treeza is supposedly trying to get was actually outlined over a week ago.
Her incompetence and dishonesty are truly limitless. And the deal, as the Guardian has observed, is no more, it has ceased to be.
From an interested US observer to my friends here across the Pond - what next, then? No-deal Brexit (dear God!)? New referendum? I listen to the BBC take (we get BBC World Service late nights on our local public radio station), but I'm curious to hear from some of you.
From an interested US observer to my friends here across the Pond - what next, then? No-deal Brexit (dear God!)? New referendum? I listen to the BBC take (we get BBC World Service late nights on our local public radio station), but I'm curious to hear from some of you.
My current prediction, in order of likelihood, is:
1) no deal
2) acceptance of current deal with minor variations
3) rescindment of Article 50 thus maintaining (sort of) the status quo*
4) second referendum†
*Interchangeable in order of likelihood with (4). But I think (4) probably requires (3)
†Contrary to what hopeful Remainers will tell you (4) may still lead to (1) or (2) or further as-yet unthought-of confusion, which is why I would like it to be in fourth place.
I think there are a number of people who think that Brexit is inevitable also reject no-deal.
I think a number of those would vote to withdraw Article 50 in order to buy (from their perspective) more time and avoid no-deal.
I'm not sure there's an obvious route from Article 50 withdrawal to any form of Brexit, including with a deal, because withdrawing Article 50 seems to mean "we pinky swear never to invoke it again".
There's now a report by at least two MPs that the EU were informed that the vote would be postponed sine die a full 24 hours before anyone else was told. There is a similar claim that the 'clarification' Treeza is supposedly trying to get was actually outlined over a week ago.
Her incompetence and dishonesty are truly limitless. And the deal, as the Guardian has observed, is no more, it has ceased to be.
I think my senses have become dulled by this endless lying and obfuscation. I suppose it hasn't become Trump-like, or has it? Is there an honest man or woman?
I think there are a number of people who think that Brexit is inevitable also reject no-deal.
I think a number of those would vote to withdraw Article 50 in order to buy (from their perspective) more time and avoid no-deal.
I'm not sure there's an obvious route from Article 50 withdrawal to any form of Brexit, including with a deal, because withdrawing Article 50 seems to mean "we pinky swear never to invoke it again".
I don't exactly disagree with you, but this is as much about perception and choosing least-worst options as cold hard reality.
If the UK were to withdraw A50, I've little doubt that there would be efforts to close the loophole and clarify that states can't bounce around with A50 notifications.
But we are in the last chance saloon. If this is the only option to avoid driving off the cliff, I think many will grab it.
I doubt enough Leavers could be persuaded. I think accepting the current deal or a slight variation thereof is more acceptable to them since there is less uncertainty attached and a much better chance of actually achieving some form of Brexit at the end than via an untested procedure that involves unequivocally withdrawing the UK's intention to leave at all.
I don't think anyone knows that. In my estimation, having spent a lot of time following the positions and debate in parliament, there are very few who support no-deal. Of the other leavers, few would allow a no-deal because they accept the consequences are so bad.
These would back the draft, but if that's off the table, I think many would reluctantly accept that cancelling the A50 is the only alternative.
But it is impossible to tell exactly who many would jump on this idea.
My current prediction, in order of likelihood, is:
1) no deal
2) acceptance of current deal with minor variations
3) rescindment of Article 50 thus maintaining (sort of) the status quo*
4) second referendum†
*Interchangeable in order of likelihood with (4). But I think (4) probably requires (3)
†Contrary to what hopeful Remainers will tell you (4) may still lead to (1) or (2) or further as-yet unthought-of confusion, which is why I would like it to be in fourth place.
The basic situation is that all the politicians, barring the headbangers, can see that Brexit has no clothes. But none of the Tories and only a few diehard Remainers in Labour are prepared to be the small boy. They're all waiting for someone else to say it first.
Is there a better Conservative MP to be PM? Anyone you think would do a better job?
We may be about to find out since the requisite number of letters have been received and a no confidence vote will be held tonight.
Frankly, though, I'm beginning not to care (and warning, this is a long rant!). I wish the whole lot of them - or the vast majority of them - would clear out of Parliament for good. Labour as well as Tories - they're all useless and they're all playing this for their own political advantage without any semblance of pretending to care about how to bring about a resolution to the Brexit crisis that does the country any good.
Cameron started it by calling a referendum purely to stop divisions in the Tory party, then buggering off when it backfired and he lost, leaving someone else to clear up the mess.
Theresa May might have been given a poor hand, but she's played it probably as badly as she could. Triggering Article 50 before they had any kind of plan; calling a completely unnecessary general election, then bollocksing that up leaving her, and the country, in an even worse pickle; cosying to up the DUP; consistently holding out utterly unrealistic promises and meaningless soundbites and non-answers; only getting any semblance of a plan together in the last few weeks; consistently appointing rubbish ministers and secretaries of state (Johnson, Davies, Raab...) who couldn't negotiate a treaty to sell nuclear weapons to North Korea, never mind one of the most difficult and complex negotiations ever.
...and yet somehow she's ended up as the only one with any semblance of a realistic plan. And still she makes things worse.
The ERG and other hard-Brexiteers are liars, hypocrites and cowards; they pour scorn on every halfway-workable proposal then run away or cry childishly when they're asked to actually make their "plans" a reality.
The DUP don't seem to give a shit about what the people of Northern Ireland (who voted remain) want or need, but just blunder on ahead, intoxicated by the power they hold and throwing spanner after spanner into the works. At least Ian Paisley eventually learnt how to say "yes".
Perhaps only Dominic Grieve and Ken Clarke (perhaps Anna Sourbry?) emerge with any credit from the Tory side. But Labour aren't much better. They go trotting off into the lobbies to vote yes to triggering Article 50 without bothering to ask the government whether they have, y'know, a plan. The leadership ignores the majority of its members and voters and sits on the fence. They play this weird "waiting game", consistently failing to hold the government to any form of account in their ineptitude in the negotiations. Then Corbyn, having heard that no other deal is possible, starts wibbling on about negotiating a better deal - it isn't going to happen!
Yvette Cooper, Kier Starmer, Hillary Benn... who else from Labour emerges with any credit here?
The Liberal Democrats are now irrelevant and as wet as a swim up the Manchester Ship Canal in a downpour; the Greens are right but insignificant (sadly); the SNP are probably right as well, but can't do a lot. No one, or very few, is prepared to treat this seriously and realistically, no one is prepared to stop playing political games and actually knuckle down and work out what's best for the country... I don't care if May goes or stays, the lot of them need to clear off now!!
I learn from the BBC that Johnson, Raab and David Davies have been hinted as Brexiteer candidates. Apparently they're going to have some preliminary hustings to pick a single candidate from Slytherin.
The Liberal Democrats are now irrelevant and as wet as a swim up the Manchester Ship Canal in a downpour; the Greens are right but insignificant (sadly); the SNP are probably right as well, but can't do a lot. No one, or very few, is prepared to treat this seriously and realistically, no one is prepared to stop playing political games and actually knuckle down and work out what's best for the country... I don't care if May goes or stays, the lot of them need to clear off now!!
Amen.
I’m with you. I joined the Green Party recently, I hope many, many do the same.
Meanwhile I’m stopping watching or reading any of it. I don’t care who wins - none of them care one fig. The rot started with Tony Blair and has culminated in this shit fest.
Market forces can fuck off, they are rooted in fear and greed and nothing else.
The Tories are making our lives worse. What more evidence does anyone want?
Also, thinking about it, a leadership contest makes some sort of parliamentary sense as a way of breaking the deadlock. It doesn't prejudice the outcome, not by a long way. But it might, just might, open up new options.
The Tories are making our lives worse. What more evidence does anyone want?
Also, thinking about it, a leadership contest makes some sort of parliamentary sense as a way of breaking the deadlock. It doesn't prejudice the outcome, not by a long way. But it might, just might, open up new options.
New options for what? By the time it is decided, there will be no alternative than a hard brexit.
I joined the Green Party recently, I hope many, many do the same.
I'm actually considering standing as a candidate in the next round of local elections (we have other, longer standing members who would be more suitable for a Parliamentary election).
Comments
Northern Ireland is much more the UK's problem that the Republic of Ireland's. What I mean by that, is that whilst there were definitely issues for the Republic during the troubles, essentially the violence was in the North. Since the Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement (GFA) was signed, no doubt Eire has benefited economically. For example there is now a much better road link from Belfast to Dublin (paid for, in part, by the EU development fund); the lack of border security has no doubt helped trade. However the benefits are much greater to a portion of the UK. NI has thrived since peace broke out - not to mention that in 20 years we haven't added to the 3000 deaths* from the previous 30.
Essentially the UK government is completely abdicating its duty of care to the people of NI. If Ireland said Sod-it, forget the GFA, let's have a proper border; there would be detrimental effects for Ireland but nothing like the effects that NI would suffer - what A FUCKING PART OF THE UK would suffer. It has bothered me all the way through that the UK government has shown no interest in protecting NI - the moves have all come from the EU because Ireland insisted on it.
If we look back to where the (now) legendary 'backstop' came from, it shows once again a complete dereliction of duty on the part of the UK government.
The so-called first-stage deal signed by the UK and the EU a year ago only happened because the EU gave May a deal and came up with something that could cope with the NI situation. I watch PMQs most weeks and I was appalled when May kept claiming the initial agreement as some sort of success for her Government. "You said we wouldn't get a deal" she has shouted at Corbyn more than once "and we did." Not really, the EU gave you the only deal that would work when you couldn't come up with anything. Part of that deal - inescapably - is the backstop. If the UK government cared for ALL of its citizens then they would have had NI as top of their negotiating priorities and Gibraltar second. Instead, they've tried to wish NI away and pretended the Rock doesn't exist. Unless of course it's an excuse to blame Spain for our own failings.
I didn't think I could be more appalled by the Brexit insane brigade. I was wrong.
AFZ
*The exact figure, I can't quite remember, but it is carefully recorded. Even individual killed in the troubles is officially named, hence the exact figure (which is around 3000) is known. I think this is really important.
The only hope is that the masses realise that they've been manipulated. Man the barricades..
Unfortunately a side result of non-cooperation by Sinn Fein is that only unionsts - and largely only the DUP (I think there is also an independent, Lady Somethingorother, who is generally critical of the DUP) who are speaking for a highly complex situation in NI. Which is fairly obviously impossible.
I'm sure the DUP would argue that they are simply fighting their own corner, but it seems to me that they are their own worst enemy in this situation. I think there is a danger that they might actually get what they are asking for (a fairly extreme version of brexit) which in turn would lead to bad things, not least for the DUP.
I can't parse how strong unionism is within the Tories - but I do think that the DUP are making a bigger deal of this than they need to, given that NI already has a separate education system, legal system, food security regime, etc than the rUK. In some ways it is even more divergent than Scotland, which is another reason why the Stormont crisis is so bad. They could choose to run their own things as their own country but it's not happening at the moment.
Anyway, I suppose I'm saying that wider divergence between NI and the rUK would not necessarily be "throwing them under a bus" and does not have to even be a step towards reunification in Ireland. However it feels like the deeply unrepresentative situation in Westminster is now making that more likely.
I can't see that anyone is really talking much sense - and the default position of sticking to a known political and economic landscape is effectively being disrupted by politicans who seem determined to get something worse for no tangible gains.
We haven't said much here about Labour recently - so let's. Diane Abbot is one of the worst front-bench politicians I have ever seen. Her speech the other day was utter nonsense. Filled with enough rubbish to make others on her bench cringe visibly in pain.
It isn't bad enough that the Labour position makes no sense (why would the EU offer a better deal? Why would they want to spend time working on a customs deal that the UK can pick and choose aspects of? How does this meet the stated aims of protecting worker rights and environmental standards anyway?), they send in one of the most tongue-tied politicians to mount the kind of defense that allows in 10 cheap tries on a wet day in Pontypridd.
Give it up already. Who are you trying to impress Jeremy?
FFS.
And, incidentally, it says something when the hardest politicans interviews are conducted by actor-comedians.
Channel 4 tonight is a debate - featuring representatives of all sides, I believe. But not necessarily including people based on their titles.
(I happen to know that Caroline Lucas is representing the People vote argument)
This is forcing us closer towards the precipice - and she clearly hasn't got a clue what to do next.
I think it's time to stop. Is everyone agreed?
The problem is that all logic suggests that there is no way it can cave in. They can't accept a loss of control over the Irish backstop - otherwise they risk an open backdoor into the CM leading to an undermining of it.
They can't offer a trade deal with frictionless borders unless the other partner is prepared to keep to EU rules, otherwise this defeats part of the object of being an EU state.
They can't offer a bespoke deal or risk undermining the fudge they already have with the EFTA states.
I can't see what they can actually conceed. Even what they've already offered in the draft is quite dangerous for the union.
Yep.
In the case of Greece vs EU circa 2012-13, the EU was completely in the wrong and did not cave in, even compromising both the welfare and the democary of Greece.
If the EU doesn't cave in when they're wrong, it seems to me to be really unwise to expect them to cave in when they're in the right.
Intriguingly, some analysts I respect suggested that Greece would have been much better served by walking away and leaving the Euro. For various domestic reasons they didn't do this. The UK is not so lucky, we can walk away from the table but that would be a really stupid thing to do.
AFZ
The problem is that doing this is that it is a horrendous risk, with very little clear chance of success. Eventually Greece couldn't face the consequences of going up against the EU and losing.
Varoufakis insisted that Greece would have won in the end - but couldn't persuade his own political friends to continue taking the heat.
Her incompetence and dishonesty are truly limitless. And the deal, as the Guardian has observed, is no more, it has ceased to be.
You need to be over here.
My current prediction, in order of likelihood, is:
1) no deal
2) acceptance of current deal with minor variations
3) rescindment of Article 50 thus maintaining (sort of) the status quo*
4) second referendum†
*Interchangeable in order of likelihood with (4). But I think (4) probably requires (3)
†Contrary to what hopeful Remainers will tell you (4) may still lead to (1) or (2) or further as-yet unthought-of confusion, which is why I would like it to be in fourth place.
The simplest, safest option would be to accept the draft deal.
If that's off the table, the only two remaining options are no-deal or no-brexit. The chances of anything else seen remote.
I can't tell which of those is more likely.
I think there are a number of people who think that Brexit is inevitable also reject no-deal.
I think a number of those would vote to withdraw Article 50 in order to buy (from their perspective) more time and avoid no-deal.
Dunno, I agree they'd need to get their act together to do anything in the short remaining time.
I'm not sure there's an obvious route from Article 50 withdrawal to any form of Brexit, including with a deal, because withdrawing Article 50 seems to mean "we pinky swear never to invoke it again".
I think my senses have become dulled by this endless lying and obfuscation. I suppose it hasn't become Trump-like, or has it? Is there an honest man or woman?
I don't exactly disagree with you, but this is as much about perception and choosing least-worst options as cold hard reality.
If the UK were to withdraw A50, I've little doubt that there would be efforts to close the loophole and clarify that states can't bounce around with A50 notifications.
But we are in the last chance saloon. If this is the only option to avoid driving off the cliff, I think many will grab it.
These would back the draft, but if that's off the table, I think many would reluctantly accept that cancelling the A50 is the only alternative.
But it is impossible to tell exactly who many would jump on this idea.
Thanks!
Probably.
Ken Clarke? Dominic Grieve? Oh, you probably mean someone the tories might actually elect.
We may be about to find out since the requisite number of letters have been received and a no confidence vote will be held tonight.
Frankly, though, I'm beginning not to care (and warning, this is a long rant!). I wish the whole lot of them - or the vast majority of them - would clear out of Parliament for good. Labour as well as Tories - they're all useless and they're all playing this for their own political advantage without any semblance of pretending to care about how to bring about a resolution to the Brexit crisis that does the country any good.
Cameron started it by calling a referendum purely to stop divisions in the Tory party, then buggering off when it backfired and he lost, leaving someone else to clear up the mess.
Theresa May might have been given a poor hand, but she's played it probably as badly as she could. Triggering Article 50 before they had any kind of plan; calling a completely unnecessary general election, then bollocksing that up leaving her, and the country, in an even worse pickle; cosying to up the DUP; consistently holding out utterly unrealistic promises and meaningless soundbites and non-answers; only getting any semblance of a plan together in the last few weeks; consistently appointing rubbish ministers and secretaries of state (Johnson, Davies, Raab...) who couldn't negotiate a treaty to sell nuclear weapons to North Korea, never mind one of the most difficult and complex negotiations ever.
...and yet somehow she's ended up as the only one with any semblance of a realistic plan. And still she makes things worse.
The ERG and other hard-Brexiteers are liars, hypocrites and cowards; they pour scorn on every halfway-workable proposal then run away or cry childishly when they're asked to actually make their "plans" a reality.
The DUP don't seem to give a shit about what the people of Northern Ireland (who voted remain) want or need, but just blunder on ahead, intoxicated by the power they hold and throwing spanner after spanner into the works. At least Ian Paisley eventually learnt how to say "yes".
Perhaps only Dominic Grieve and Ken Clarke (perhaps Anna Sourbry?) emerge with any credit from the Tory side. But Labour aren't much better. They go trotting off into the lobbies to vote yes to triggering Article 50 without bothering to ask the government whether they have, y'know, a plan. The leadership ignores the majority of its members and voters and sits on the fence. They play this weird "waiting game", consistently failing to hold the government to any form of account in their ineptitude in the negotiations. Then Corbyn, having heard that no other deal is possible, starts wibbling on about negotiating a better deal - it isn't going to happen!
Yvette Cooper, Kier Starmer, Hillary Benn... who else from Labour emerges with any credit here?
The Liberal Democrats are now irrelevant and as wet as a swim up the Manchester Ship Canal in a downpour; the Greens are right but insignificant (sadly); the SNP are probably right as well, but can't do a lot. No one, or very few, is prepared to treat this seriously and realistically, no one is prepared to stop playing political games and actually knuckle down and work out what's best for the country... I don't care if May goes or stays, the lot of them need to clear off now!!
Amen.
I’m with you. I joined the Green Party recently, I hope many, many do the same.
Meanwhile I’m stopping watching or reading any of it. I don’t care who wins - none of them care one fig. The rot started with Tony Blair and has culminated in this shit fest.
Market forces can fuck off, they are rooted in fear and greed and nothing else.
The Tories are making our lives worse. What more evidence does anyone want?
Be careful what you wish for. The protests here are best summarised by Acts 19:32:
New options for what? By the time it is decided, there will be no alternative than a hard brexit.