Update on the Labour Party Position:

I’m just listening to yesterdays Pienaars Politics (thats how rock and roll my life is) and the labour party has just announced an important policy: Transgender people who identify as women will be allowed on to all-women parliamentary shortlists

Nothing on Brexit as yet, but nice to see the important issues of the day being addressed

Remoaners should be happy. The current noise from the empty vessels – R-M, Fox, Bojo etc – is simply indicative that they know that events are moving away from their hard line positions. We continue to move to compromises across the board, which is a good thing

So May the incompetent, the remainer, the weak PM among a split cabinet, etc has moved on to

1. Delivering legislation through parliament

2. By-passing the insurmountable three obstacles in stage one

3. Is moving slowly on to the nitty gritty of trade making it clear that existing solutions don’t work.

4. Starting to get on to passporting versus equivalence in fin services and equivalence elsewhere

Not a bad effort all in all

The current noise from the empty vessels – R-M, Fox, Bojo etc – is simply indicative that they know that events are moving away from their hard line positions

Like definitely not being part of any customs union?

If thats moving away from their positions, what would you class as moving towards their position? Bricking up the channel tunnel? Invading Portugal? Sending a fleet of gunboats to China?

Not a bad effort all in all

An opinion you share with one other person in the UK. That person being Theresa May

“Remoaners should be happy. The current noise from the empty vessels – R-M, Fox, Bojo etc – is simply indicative that they know that events are moving away from their hard line positions. We continue to move to compromises across the board, which is a good thing”

Two things:

“Remoaners” = “Remainers”, please. A little respect goes a long way in promoting discussion and debate in a friendly manner.

I think that’s a very good point, things are clearly not going in the direction that your hardcore Brexiteers want. However, we’ve confusion as to whether we’re in or out of a Customs Union depending on who is speaking and it’s blatantly obvious that we’ve seen some colossal blunders so far – Article 50 was submitted way too soon, the election was a disaster and it transpires that each member of the cabinet has a different understanding of what Brexit means. It’s clear that the Brexiteers are taking an authoritarian line, but the realities of the situation are quickly eroding all the rational cases for an irrational policy decision.

What’s left is the irrational and emotional reasons for Brexit – immigration, the notion of “sovereignty”, isolationism and the conflicting demands of these against future economic growth.

A little respect goes a long way in promoting discussion and debate in a friendly manner.

I think you’re onto a lost cause with that one where THM is concerned. He’d sneer at his firstborn if it made him feel superior. This is evidenced by the fact he’s actually a remoaner [sic] himself.

When remoaners stop posting deliberate lies then they qualify as remainers – otherwise….it’s insulting to be lied to consistently by hard core remainers who are as bad/worse than hard core Brexshiteers

binners – the safe bet at the end of this is that there will be a trade deal. Why? Because it’s in both sides interests

this is where this whole “in” stuff is important and why people deliberately use the words “in the CU” to confuse people

“When remoaners stop posting deliberate lies then they qualify as remainers – otherwise….it’s insulting to be lied to consistently by hard core remainers who are as bad/worse than hard core Brexshiteers”

It’s too easy to throw around terms to describe people who don’t fit with one’s own ideology. It’s rife right now and it’s not exactly helpful. I politely asked if we could have some respect in this thread, just before I agreed with your point.

I will politely ask once again if you would please desist from referring to those with whom you disagree as “Remoaners” and if in your view someone is either incorrect or mis-informed then perhaps it might be useful to politely explain this with citations.

Otherwise, end up in the situation whereby we fling thinly veiled insults at one another because it’s all too easy to dismiss those who disagree by dehumanising them.

then perhaps it might be useful to politely explain this with citations.

In this particular case I suspect you stand more chance of Rees-Mogg leading the charge for a federalised Europe and the dissolution of the monarchy

binners – the safe bet at the end of this is that there will be a trade deal. Why? Because it’s in both sides interests

I find your naive confidence in our ‘Negotiating Team’ quite sweet and charming. You’ve seen who’s in charge of negotiations, right?

What I don’t understand is why May gets to transform the UK so  profoundly in such a short space of time.  Why don’t we have any democratic input into the future of our country?  I thought we were all into the democracy now?

May is also trying to quell the rebellions within her own party. You could argue that it’s party before country, yet again and you may be correct.

IMHO, what should have happened immediately after the referendum result is the convening of an independent public inquiry to look into the causes, pros, cons and to make recommendations.

Its all about ‘Taking Back Control’ Molls

If you wanted to be picky you might also refer to it as the greatest assault on parliamentary democracy this country has ever seen, but, you know…. you’re probably an enemy of the people

Now that the Tories have reneaged on Phs 1 by demanding a hard border in Ireland, how can anyone trust a word they say. That is really going to help with negotiations.

Binns. I would suggest that the naive thing is to believe that DD is in charge. Ditto Barnier. They are front men. The real work is done by their skilled teams.

How can an assault on democracy involve referendum, parliamentary votes and a final vote. Talk about twisting the truth.

Mol. You can’t argue for representative gov on one hand and then complain when they exercise that peer on the other.

@THM, I hope that you take my point on wording and language in the spirit that it’s intended?

Agreed on DD and Barnier being the public face on negotiations, that much should be obvious to anyone.

And do you feel that the Great Repeal Bill and subsequent debate about Brexit in both houses has thus far been given adequate time given the gravity of the situation we find ourselves in?

Mol. You can’t argue for representative gov on one hand and then complain when they exercise that peer on the other.

I can complain when it’s executed badly, and I bloody well will thanks.

What’s happened is there’s been one vote on a very high level concept – to change the future of the country.  And *every single part of that change* has been cooked up in secret by a small group of people.

There is no framework for this.  There is no process.  It’s being made up as it goes along.  Leaving the EU, that’s one thing, but the reshaping of the country according to a small group of idiots, that’s something else entirely.  You think they should have that much power?

The real work is done by their skilled teams.

In secret, behind closed doors.  What was that about representative democracy?

I’ve said many times over the years our system is ****.  Still is, I’m still right.

How can an assault on democracy involve referendum, parliamentary votes and a final vote. Talk about twisting the truth.

In general, it is very easy for all of to us to identify where a referendum and/or other vote has been used to either dismantle, or work around, or prevent the taking up of, democracy. Both historic and contemporary.

Specifically… the referendum in question was not for any particular path to take, and was consultative not binding… and the result was far from decisive… however our parliamentary representatives feel bound by it… and a final vote on a deal, where the alternative is leaving with no deal, is entirely vapid… it does not allow whoever is voting (be it MPs or us) to either have a say over the deal, or to reject it in favour of continued membership if they/we consider it preferable.

What do you expect mol? we are involved in a negotiation with the EU. Do you want it live on SKY Brexshit so that those that you argue are not intelligent enough to participate in th vote can watch it instead of Jeremy Kyle

naked mud wrestling between Fox and Verhofstadt after the 21:00 threshold

there is a process so you are not correct, but there is no framework. Why? Because no one has done this before

It was very clear. It couldn’t have been clearer. Do you want to remain a member of the EU. Yes or No? Hardly high level – it’s a very basic core question and a perfectly valid one

naked mud wrestling between Fox and Verhofstadt after the 21:00 threshold

Still playing the “there is a plan, but it needs to be kept secret because of negotiations” card THM? No one believes that any more, do they?

It was very clear.

A narrowly won vote to Leave the EU does tell us what “the people” are happy to replace EU membership with. Some take it as a mandate for their own vision of the path ahead, some as a mandate for any path whatsoever that excludes EU membership. It’s likely neither.

One thing that we have had drilled into us over the last year, is that when you hear the words “very clear”, get ready for the very opposite.

“I would suggest that the naive thing is to believe that DD is in charge. Ditto Barnier. They are front men.”

Of course DD (along with some other cabinet ministers) is in charge. Unless you believe in these conspiracy theories about how the civil service is trying to undermine brexit. Being in charge does not mean he’s doing all the work, but it does mean he sets the policy agenda.

“One thing that we have had drilled into us over the last year, is that when you hear the words “very clear”, get ready for the very opposite”.

Indeed. Those of us old enough to remember the Thatcher/Major era recall the repeated use of “in real terms” by politicians when confronted with the fact that their meaningless economic jargon actually meant cuts, stuff becoming more expensive or that the value of the pound had just fallen through the floor.

No – in fact never played that at all kelvin but feel free to make things up to suit

I have simply stated (appreciate that this is a tough one for you) that both sides have starting positions that they know are incompatible. From there, they will negotiate solutions that will involve a series of compromises on both sides. We saw that in phase one and we will see it again at every stage. Around this, there will be lots of noise

Tell me how a question – should the UK remain a member of the EU or leave the EU? – could be considered anything other than very simple. The fact that non economist who regularly abuse the dismal science (sic) now focus all their time on arguing little else other than economics and in the meantime abusing data is rather amusing

DD setting the agenda? Is this a puss take? The EU set the agenda at every stage. Why does every fact have to be distorted at every stage??

Oh, silly me, I thought the various and unclear positions that members of our government keep spouting were simply “posturing”? Isn’t that the word you use? We have no idea what the government want to replace membership of the EU with, because they haven’t agreed it amongst themselves yet.

appreciate that this is a tough one for you

What an idiot I am for feeding the time wasting troll.

On the “promise” of lack of a Customs Arrangement (despite it being specifically allowed for in a recent government bill), don’t forget that CDS is likely to not be in place in time for next year, and CHIEF is not being updated to cope with rEU customs… so, the “promise” means that, on “our side” we HAVE to have a transitional arrangement in place for next year… “we” have put ourselves over a barrel as regards keeping goods moving.

(Sorry about the jargon… have a quick search fellow IT types.)

That’s my hill farming clients f****d then.

If there should be no trade deal within the 2 years up to 2019, without transition arrangements the ‘default’ exit position would 12

<span style=”font-size: medium;”>
</span>

<span style=”font-size: medium;”>certainly include tariffs on all main agricultural commodities. The scale of tariffs under a negotiated deal could be anything from 5% to perhaps 40% while under default conditions they would be around the higher end of this scale: a 12.8% tariff plus a variable amount per tonne depending on the cut, which can amount to as much as 50% ad-valorem equivalent (AHDB, 2016). </span>

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/f06571_00c7b7cb284e472396b073f909824d4a.pdf

We have a very good idea

the problem is that it cannot be achieved without compromise.

All that is unclear is where the boundaries of the compromises will lie. But by being so obviously divided we simple make the likelihood of them lying on the harder side more not less likely. One reason why I dislike the rabid version of remaining – it’s merely making a bad situation worse instead of better.

Divided? By “we”, do you mean our government? Or “the people?”

The solution for this is for the government to decide, and state, what it would like to replace EU membership with, and then ask “the people” to support it.

The EU may well say no, or seek to heavily modify what we get (of course they would) but at least the government would have the strength of clarity and the support of “the people”. Of course, if that support doesn’t manifest itself, we remain, or an alternative plan must be arrived at. Why go to the EU with no clear aim, or an aim that doesn’t have strong support back in the UK?

As a rabid remainer, I like the idea of JRM as PM – it would kill Brexit once and for all.

Joking aside though, given May’s redline in equal treatment for GB and NI, and her no customs union statement, has she just reneged on her much lauded move to stage 2 deal?

I think yes, but it might need some forensic examination of her position, statements and deals to know for sure.

They have

They did

Hence we are in a messy negotiation

You still seem to be forgetting that the decision on ending membership has been taken

Why IGM is uncle Vince going to stage some remarkable recovery?

when the Tories go, we get Brexshit #2 the one that puts jobs first

Probably a lot of truth in this

‘Tell me how a question – should the UK remain a member of the EU or leave the EU? – could be considered anything other than very simple. ‘

I don’t know, perhaps we could ask someone who used it as a protest vote against ‘politicians’?

Why IGM is uncle Vince going to stage some remarkable recovery?

Doubt it. Why the question?

when the Tories go, we get Brexshit #2 the one that puts jobs first

Putting jobs first is surely infinitely preferable to putting rabid right-wing ideology first, just in front of some misty-eyed old bollocks about a return to empire?

TMH seems to me post JRM/Borid/Fox intervention Hammond was put firmly in his place by May with No10 confirming that we would 100% be leaving the customs union.

In other news Barnier trying to turn a vice into a virtue, yup they’ll be some increased barrier to UK/EU trade overall. For us that’s a very small price to pay for broader free trade greements and being able to buy things more cheaply elsewhere. For EU thats less business with their rich neighbour. Also laughable he is again unabke to understand what the UK’s position is, crystal clear namely l; a bespoke trade deal including financial services with no budget payments or the alternative of no deal and no money

For us that’s a very small price to pay for broader free trade greements and being able to buy things more cheaply elsewhere. For EU thats less business with their rich neighbour.

Luckily for us losing 26 is a small price whereas them losing one is bad eh

Also laughable he is again unabke to understand what the UK’s position is, crystal clear namely l; a bespoke trade deal including financial services with no budget payments or the alternative of no deal and no money

so give us access for free as either way we are not paying. Gosh the EU must be very tempted by that offer. Jamby lend me your car and bike for nothing or its no deal and no payment – tempted? PS you need me more than I need you obvs