Brexit thread III

191012141569

Comments


  • From the perspective of those wanting a second referendum, a Labour government or rainbow alliance is your best chance of getting one. (You are highly unlikely to get remain without a second referendum.) It doesn't matter which way the opposition would campaign in a referendum if no such vote is held - and realistically, the Lib Dems are not going to form the bulk of the next government.

    Yep.

    I've had this argument with a few Remainers, a Labour / Labour-led coalition is the only path to stopping Brexit. The latter is Constitutionally possible without an election...

    I remain frustrated that Corbyn's Labour hadn't opposed Brexit more but I am irrelevant. The people that matter are those who voted leave or didn't vote but might vote Remain in a future vote. And, for all my frustration with Corbyn on this, he cannot be credibly accused of blocking Brexit. The ones who think he is are the delusional pro-Brexit crowd, but so what? They're voting Leave anyway.

    The real question in the next 2 months is what are the Conservatives who know that No Deal will be a disaster prepared to do to stop Boris? That's what will shape our nation's next decade or two.

    There is no certainty but there are enough of prepared to go the whole-hog, if necessary, to give me hope.

    AFZ
  • There are also plenty of people who want to get rid of Tories, but won't vote Labour, or at least, Corbyn. So they prefer the Tories.
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    I suspect the reality of a referendum will be that both parties will allow mps to campaign on both sides of the debate - so the key issue will be whether the government holds a referendum rather than which side of the ticket they nominally support.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, Epiphanies Host
    Sure, DT. My point is that in those circumstances they don't have the political power to make any major decisions. Ministers 'tread water'.
  • But the Tories will not hold a referendum, surely.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    It is possible. If they think any deal they have is strong enough they could go for it.
  • EirenistEirenist Shipmate
    What hope is there that the result of a second referendum will be any different from the first?
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    It’ll be between defined outcomes - this deal here -> or withdraw article 50
  • It’ll be between defined outcomes - this deal here -> or withdraw article 50
    But, that requires the government to define the deal and, therefore, to campaign for that. Which would also normally suggest that the rest of the party also campaign for that. The Tories are not a party which will unite behind any particular deal, neither are Labour. Which is the whole problem we have, there was never a party that could unite behind leaving the EU (let alone a particular version thereof) and convince the public to vote for them.
  • alienfromzogalienfromzog Shipmate
    edited July 19
    Eirenist wrote: »
    What hope is there that the result of a second referendum will be any different from the first?

    No guarantees but all the polling suggests it would be.

    AFZ
  • ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
    I can't recall, but didn't the polls before the referendum suggest remain? Not meaning to be rude, but polls can be terribly unreliable.
  • Climacus wrote: »
    I can't recall, but didn't the polls before the referendum suggest remain? Not meaning to be rude, but polls can be terribly unreliable.

    No. The polls were too close to call.

    I am going to resist my usual people misunderstand polls and they're not usually 'wrong' in the sense people mean rant... I'm sure it's still on the Ship from last time.

    Polling is often misrepresented and is reported...

    There are no certainties but I don't think there's another way forward so regardless it's the right thing to do...

    AFZ
  • Eirenist wrote: »
    What hope is there that the result of a second referendum will be any different from the first?

    No guarantees but all the polling suggests it would be.

    AFZ
    If there's a referendum with a sensible question (to confirm agreement to a defined plan for leaving the EU, or the status quo - although at this stage that's no longer remain on the terms of EU membership of 2015) then at least the result will be meaningful. We just need the government to sit down and agree a plan for leaving the EU so there's a question on the ballot paper - a white paper running to 500+ pages would do be a decent start.
  • ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
    Thanks for the correction.
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    I notice our lack of a functioning polity is leading Iran to think that nicking tankers in the straits of Hormuz is a relatively low risk activity.
  • Even with a functioning government, what would the UK be able to do? A single warship, a second on the way, is not enough to escort all UK tankers in the area. Any diplomatic action would need the weight of a superpower behind it - the US under Trump doesn't appear to know what diplomacy is, and the UK has pissed off the EU. The UK isn't a global superpower, we can't stand on our own, despite the fiction that the Brexiteers have sold themselves.
  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    I notice our lack of a functioning polity is leading Iran to think that nicking tankers in the straits of Hormuz is a relatively low risk activity.

    As I said on the Iranian thread, the tanker the UK seized earlier in the month continues to be detained at Gibraltar - so from an Iranian perspective it's simple tit for tat.

    I presume the alternatives are a de-escalation and a simultaneous release of both ships, the UK sending enough of its navy to the Gulf to escort every British connected ship through the Straits, or an appeal to Trump.

    The post war record of the UK in the Middle East is not a great one and it looks to be heading to crisis just before someone who is completely unsuitable for the role gets installed as PM.
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    Even with a functioning government, what would the UK be able to do? A single warship, a second on the way, is not enough to escort all UK tankers in the area. Any diplomatic action would need the weight of a superpower behind it - the US under Trump doesn't appear to know what diplomacy is, and the UK has pissed off the EU. The UK isn't a global superpower, we can't stand on our own, despite the fiction that the Brexiteers have sold themselves.

    If we had a functioning government we might not have royally pissed off the EU - or even just spent some time giving the situation serious thought, rather than having the foreign secretary galavant all over the country arguing with sociopathic muppet about kippers.
  • "Not pissing off the EU" would place the end of government functioning back to 2015, or earlier. Which is possible.
  • RicardusRicardus Shipmate
    It’ll be between defined outcomes - this deal here -> or withdraw article 50
    But, that requires the government to define the deal and, therefore, to campaign for that. Which would also normally suggest that the rest of the party also campaign for that. The Tories are not a party which will unite behind any particular deal, neither are Labour.

    My impression is that the Brexit conflict within Labour is primarily about whether or not to have a second referendum, and that if Corbyn achieves a deal of the kind he wants, he would not have difficulty getting his MPs to accept it provided it was subject to a second referendum.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    edited July 19
    Rocinante wrote: »
    Macron would likely be the main obstacle to another extension. By all accounts he took a lot of convincing to give us a 6 month extension, when most other EU leaders were happy with a year. 6 months has turned out to be the worst of both worlds, really: long enough for our myopic politicians to lapse back into complacency and in-fighting, not long enough to change anything.

    I think Macron sees advantage for France in no-deal Brexit, it would also distract from his domestic troubles.

    That's more than unfair to Macon. Let's start at the beginning. The UK gave the required notice to withdraw. At that stage, everyone knew that at the end of 2 years the UK would no longer be part of the EU. The 27, including France, negotiated in good faith with the UK and reached an agreement. The UK is then unable to follow through with its internal procedures necessary to implement the agreement and is given an extension of 6 months. Almost 4 of those months have passed and the UK is still no closer to completing its procedures and shows no ability to do so in the future.

    Why should any of the 27 agree to a further extension when recent events show no understanding by the UK of the internal preparation necessary to leave, let alone a willingness on its part to take necessary steps? All that is shown is childish posturing from most of its national politicians.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Barnabas62 wrote: »
    Eutychus.

    Who's we? A caretaker government pending a General Election after a vote of no confidence in the present government.

    AIUI, Eutychus is French, so the "us" in his post referred to France (and perhaps the other 26).
  • Gee D wrote: »
    Why should any of the 27 agree to a further extension when recent events show no understanding by the UK of the internal preparation necessary to leave, let alone a willingness on its part to take necessary steps? All that is shown is childish posturing from most of its national politicians.
    Except that's not changed, and the rest of the EU granted an extension already with plenty of evidence that there'd be no understanding of the preparation needed - given that that would need to have started within the political parties to inlcude leaving the EU within their manifesto so that we can vote for candidates who want to leave the EU (or not depnding on our views), then when (if) we vote for enough candidates who want that then they can form a government, define what they want and put it to the people in a referendum. The cocked up farcical 2016 vote put the cart before the horse, defied common sense and showed no indication of an understanding of what needed to be done.

    The 2016 vote allowed our politicians to grandstand though, let them play their childish games. So, that was alright. If the politicians can posture that makes anything valid.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    There has been a big change since the extension was granted - that week about Easter when the Commons voted against anything put to it. Different combinations of course for different propositions. That really showed the childishness of the present generation of. UK politicians; a few exceptions of course - the SNP and Liberals primarily - but overall a real refusal to sit down and work through to a solution.
  • My "we" was in reference to B62's post and meant whoever was supposedly in charge in the UK.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, Epiphanies Host
    edited July 20
    Gee D wrote: »
    Barnabas62 wrote: »
    Eutychus.

    Who's we? A caretaker government pending a General Election after a vote of no confidence in the present government.

    AIUI, Eutychus is French, so the "us" in his post referred to France (and perhaps the other 26).

    I think Eutychus has dual nationality and I thought he was referring to my 'we', since I was describing the UK governmental mess.

    Did the UK cease to have a functioning government re EU issues after 2015? That's a good question.

    (xpost)
  • EutychusEutychus Admin
    edited July 20
    The "us" in my later post was in response to the question about how we (here in France) and/or Macron are responding.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    A spinning head, but I got it right (I think).

    Barnabas 62 - Not sure at all about that. Cameron could not have been worse than May, and perhaps, just perhaps could have been better.
  • ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
    Does Brexit make the French news much? What do your papers or news programmes make of it, and the current behaviour of the UK's politicians?
  • It doesn't make the news beyond the occasional feature expressing bemusement at the lack of action (France has a tradition of strong executive government and thinks of the UK as being more pragmatic than France, so is perplexed at why nothing is happening).

    On the other hand, this anecdote also serves as quite a good summary:

    Many years ago in a small Provençal town I was inexpertly playing pétanque and managed to land a boule in a nearby river (it ricoched off a tree root). There was general consternation and incomprehension amongst the locals until my playing partner explained to the crowd C'est un Anglais ('he's English'). At which point everyone relaxed as if that more than sufficed as an explanation: the English are eccentric, they, their behaviour, and its outcomes are impossible to understand.
  • RocinanteRocinante Shipmate
    edited July 20
    Gee D wrote: »
    Rocinante wrote: »
    Macron would likely be the main obstacle to another extension. By all accounts he took a lot of convincing to give us a 6 month extension, when most other EU leaders were happy with a year. 6 months has turned out to be the worst of both worlds, really: long enough for our myopic politicians to lapse back into complacency and in-fighting, not long enough to change anything.

    I think Macron sees advantage for France in no-deal Brexit, it would also distract from his domestic troubles.

    That's more than unfair to Macon...

    I think you misunderstand my intent. ISTM that Macron is currently the most realistic and clear-sighted politician in Europe, in that he is the only one who isn't fantasising about a rosy future in which Britain is either:

    (i) A close friend of the EU, possibly still tied to it in many ways, possibly still a member (The rest of the EU and Remainers), or

    (ii) A swashbuckling global superpower, free trading on the high seas and sticking two fingers up to Johnny Foreigner (Leavers)

    Macron seems to have determined many months, possibly years, ago that no-deal Brexit was the inevitable outcome of this clustershambles. Being a pragmatist and a bit of a Gaullist (my impression), he has therefore also determined to ensure the best outcome for France, and secondarily the EU, that can be obtained from this thing which is going to happen.

  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Gee D wrote: »
    That really showed the childishness of the present generation of. UK politicians; a few exceptions of course - the SNP and Liberals primarily - but overall a real refusal to sit down and work through to a solution.
    What did the majority of Labour MPs not do that the Liberals and SNP did do?

    It seems to me that the impasse is largely down to: Tory (and a few Labour and DUP) leavers who won't accept May's deal; and those MPs almost all Tory who won't support No Deal but won't support a second referendum or make Remain the default either.
    The main body of Labour MPs don't fall in either category.

  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Rocinante, thanks for the clarification.

    Dafyd, what Labour did not do was present a clear and organised plan to put the whole question back for a second referendum. Had they done so, it would have got through, and I'd be very surprised if the EU would not have extended time both for it to occur and for any future actions to be taken (minimal in the case of a Remain success).
  • Gee D wrote: »
    Rocinante, thanks for the clarification.

    Dafyd, what Labour did not do was present a clear and organised plan to put the whole question back for a second referendum. Had they done so, it would have got through, and I'd be very surprised if the EU would not have extended time both for it to occur and for any future actions to be taken (minimal in the case of a Remain success).

    How would it have got through? Are you saying that enough Tories would have vote for it?
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, Epiphanies Host
    Gee D

    'Me' too!

    Would any PM have been able to get a better withdrawal deal than Mrs May? I doubt that. The EU 27 position has been remarkably consistent and the structure of the withdrawal agreement follows that
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Gee D wrote: »
    Dafyd, what Labour did not do was present a clear and organised plan to put the whole question back for a second referendum.
    The Labour leadership did not present a clear and organised plan. To what extent are Labour MPs to blame for that?

  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Barnabas62 wrote: »
    Would any PM have been able to get a better withdrawal deal than Mrs May?
    Another PM might have started from a more feasible set of red lines.

  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, Epiphanies Host
    Which would not have changed the EU red lines.

    It would have been easy to get a Norway style deal which would have fallen foul of BINO (Brexit in Name Only).

    As an arch-Remainer I would have been happier with that. But regardless of PM in the present Parliament, that wouldn't have got through the House either.

    Dafyd, it was implied rather than said, but what I was meaning was any other PM given the composition of the House of Commons post Brexit. Even without the result of Mrs May's General Election, I'm not sure any PM could have conjured up red lines avoiding BINO to produce a Withdrawal Agreement to satisfy the Commons.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Dafyd !!! At the very least raised in the party room with a solid paper to go with it.

    quetzalcoatl I think it could well have. Party lines seem not to have counted in hose votes. Either Tories voting for it, or sufficient abstaining to allow it through.

  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    Gee D wrote: »
    Rocinante, thanks for the clarification.

    Dafyd, what Labour did not do was present a clear and organised plan to put the whole question back for a second referendum. Had they done so, it would have got through, and I'd be very surprised if the EU would not have extended time both for it to occur and for any future actions to be taken (minimal in the case of a Remain success).

    How would it have got through? Are you saying that enough Tories would have vote for it?

    They've presented motions for a second referendum at least twice, they didn't pass.
  • Gee D wrote: »
    Rocinante, thanks for the clarification.

    Dafyd, what Labour did not do was present a clear and organised plan to put the whole question back for a second referendum. Had they done so, it would have got through, and I'd be very surprised if the EU would not have extended time both for it to occur and for any future actions to be taken (minimal in the case of a Remain success).

    How would it have got through? Are you saying that enough Tories would have vote for it?

    They've presented motions for a second referendum at least twice, they didn't pass.

    I thought that nearly all motions failed, until the recent no deal one. I still don't know how Stetson can assert otherwise, unless he he has a secret conduit into Tory MPs. Voting for a Labour pro-referendum motion could lead to deselection.
  • ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
    Thank you Eutychus; and thanks for the bonus pétanque story too!
  • ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
    Do you think any others will follow Hammond, or would it be just him?
  • Today's Guardian suggests more will follow Hammond.
  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    Climacus wrote: »
    Do you think any others will follow Hammond, or would it be just him?

    Gauke has already said he will follow Hammond.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Climacus wrote: »
    Do you think any others will follow Hammond, or would it be just him?

    Gauke has already said he will follow Hammond.

    Alan Duncan has already gone.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, Epiphanies Host
    Oh I'm sure Boris has it all worked out :mrgreen:
  • EirenistEirenist Shipmate
    Yes, our kippers (and UKIPpers will be safe!
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    What is disappointing is that none of this was said before the vote. Perhaps, just perhaps, the opinions of these senior party members may have helped the voters decide.
  • Simon ToadSimon Toad Shipmate
    I for one will be extremely disappointed if Lord Protector Johnson engineers a no-deal Brexit. It will mean that bagging the English will no longer feel like punching up.
This discussion has been closed.