Forum menu
To Mike Harding, very well done.
I bet it’s along the lines of we have a new deal (roughly translated to we have the upper hand) take it or leave it.
They always had the upper hand.
The only people that belvieved they didnt are the terminally gullibile & continued support for brexit & even vocal support for no deal, shows that millions still believe the BS the Brexiteers fed them.
Meanwhile Putin must be wetting himself watching us autofelate ourselves over brexit as he inexorably claims more of Ukraine, a bit of cash to Arron Banks, a few 1000 pro-brexit facebook adds, best investment he ever made !
The government is arguing that there’s no point in finding out because they’re not doing it.
Who do the government answer to?
Well, looks like the government thinks (admits) that parliament can instruct it to revoke A50 …
(from gov application to Supreme Court to block the case asking ECj to rule on whether revocation could be unilateral, or needs consent from EU and/or other EU countries)
Yep no better deal will be coming from the EU, they don't need to, to flip a phrase "We need them more than they need us"
Spending billions to get no influence and have no say on the future, while becoming the weaker partner in any future trade agreements we sign, sounds like the sort of thing that needs to be on a bus
/quote= what woz said ^up there some pages back /quote
You can't equate the newly enfranchised with those that have actually exercised their right to vote, though.
Personally i think we should have extended the vote, a la the Scotland Indy vote, to the 16+. Anybody newly enfranchised is ipso facto being 'ignored', but we don't really know how, or even if, they'd vote, so it's difficult to quantify in any kind of meaningful manner.
I have always done my best, often under very difficult circumstances, to prevent a Tory government. I have, more often than not, failed in that duty.
What we do know is that the electorate of the UK voted underwhelmingly to leave the EU.
This has made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad move.
The government has published a list of FORTY benefits of leaving the EU in the manner they have negotiated. Impressive. You can read them all here, where one of our more active and present MEPs has annotated it for us to help us more fiully understand it…
https://www.richardcorbett.org.uk/falsehoods-failures-fibs-fabrications/
They always had the upper hand.
They didn't on our original before brexit deal where we got quite a good pile of money and other benefits....now it's irrelevant in some ways Maybot is correct it could possibly be the best deal we are going to get,
If we decide to revoke A50 juncker etc Al could still go Ok there's the deal we just negotiated your original membership is gone with your cushy pre brexit one ..I can't see them going ok let's just go back to how it was somehow.
There would be some serious court based wrangling in that scenario. Although I do agree that the EU would try it, because that's how these things work.
May will reduce immigration
Who the **** in their right mind would want to come to this place now other than to see tower bridge and the queen
Yup she's right migration won't half be reduced now there's evidence we are a ****ing hapless set of twunts.
We will leave the common agricultural area
Is this so the farmers can farm the land that they built that housing for the poor on but used most of it for their developer mates to build executive homes whilst bypassing a few greenbelt laws
If we decide to revoke A50 juncker etc Al could still go Ok there’s the deal we just negotiated your original membership is gone with your cushy pre brexit one ..I can’t see them going ok let’s just go back to how it was somehow.
The upcoming ECJ case should help clarify that.
I can't see them letting us back in without a huge price to be paid. Theres no way we'd simply revert to the terms we had before.
And why should the EU do us any favours?
Its not just what we've done, its the utterly graceless manner in which we've done it. Boris, Davis and the rest of the Brexiteer morons all acting like stroppy teenagers and obnoxiously torching every single bridge as they go. Peppering every statement with lies, insults and exceptionalist petty nationalism
Brexit: May challenges Corbyn to live TV debate
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46355299
I thought she would normally run a mile from this sort of thing?
May is terrible at anything like this, but, somewhat amazingly, Corbyn is even worse.
When it comes to powerful oratory, Corbyn has all the presence of a local council health and safety inspector reading some fire regulations to a room full of bored scaffolders.
May being a robot means that at least she generally tends to get the words in the right order
Brexit: May challenges Corbyn to live TV debate
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46355299
/a>I thought she would normally run a mile from this sort of thing?
Great an hour of her saying the same thing over and over again in a slightly different way.
She has no choice she needs to convince mp it is the right deal.
And against Corbyn, she knows he has no answer.
I don't know if you noticed but May was getting a bit testy in parliament yesterday. Its the first time I've ever seen her betray the slightest hint of genuine human emotion. Ok... that particular human emotion was desperately resisting the urge to tell some reactionary old **** like Bill Cash to STFU, but its progress of sorts.
And against Corbyn, she knows he has no answer.
Well, the same answer. Isn't it traditional that a debate should feature at least two points of view?
Trumps flailing into the matter of trade deals smells fishy, obviously he's not read the 600page document!
Put up to it by his chums Johnson & Farage, no doubt
<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;"> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-nigel-farage-enjoy-13603076</span>
Todays hearing at the ECJ is now over. The UK Governments defence is that clarification on unilateral revocation on Article 50 is only needed if the UK decides it wants to revoke and one of the EU27 object. Plainly, knowing all of the options prior to the "meaningful vote" is considered some form of cheating.
I can’t see them letting us back in without a huge price to be paid. Theres no way we’d simply revert to the terms we had before.
I dunno. It would make sense I think. The EU will look great if one of its biggest members tries to leave just to come crawling back cap in hand.
On the TV debate idea a tough moderator who could call them both out on BS - like any extra money for the NHS etc. would be a good thing. A serious remain voice on the panel could also do some good but May would have nothing to do with that.
Brexit: May challenges Corbyn to live TV debate
Anything is better than a GE from her point of view.
Great an hour of her saying the same thing over and over again in a slightly different way.
And you can draw the same conclusion that anyone with any sense has been drawing since this whole fiasco kicked off.
And why should the EU do us any favours?
Quite - it's not like you can un-kick someone in the nuts.
How are they going to argue when they both want the same thing?
Are they just going to try and out gammon each other?
Oh and the EDL are going to march in favour of Brexit just before the vote.
If in doubt (and a grown up really shouldn't be) look at what the likes of the EDL, Farage et al say and do and then do the polar opposite. Then you'll be on the side of right not wrong.
Are they just going to try and out gammon each other?
It might be worth a watch purely to play 'thinly veiled racist dog whistle quote' bingo......
if may needs UKIP to get her deal through or maybe even a coalition government
Errrr, do UKIP have nay MPs?
Errrr, do UKIP have nay MPs?
No idea but let's imagine it for a moment
How are they going to argue when they both want the same thing?
Are they just going to try and out gammon each other?
A good article in todays Guardian by Rafael Behr:
The seismic shock of Brexit will change the UK’s politics for ever
As he put it:
Labour’s policy is to engineer a general election, win it, then cook up an alchemist Brexit that keeps the benefits of the single market without the obligations of EU membership. The unavailability of that combination has been proven many times.
So... the same cake and eat it nonsense the Torys have had to admit doesn't exist and never will. Corbyns position is just as nonsensical as the Tory's. Their positions are exactly the same (magic fairies and unicorns). Both are totally unachievable and will end up doing untold damage to the UK's future. But they're not allowed to admit that because.... you know... Will of the People and all that.....
Both will go nowhere near the obvious question, which May has dodged countless times:
Will any deal be better than the one we have now? Because we all know the answer is a simple "NO", maybe with a caveat "of course it won't! Are you a complete moron?"
You just know now what Corbyn will do. He'll mumble on about obscure clauses, as he does, in an attempt to bore everyone to death, then try and change the subject on to rural bus timetables or something. May will just do her usual and endlessly repeat meaningless soundbites.
Its quite possible that even amongst the smouldering wreckage of the last few years, this 'debate' could mark a new low for UK democracy
Brexit, Britain’s 21st Century Suez
Its far far worse than Suez. Suez was just an incident that taught us where we are in the grand scheme of things.
The trouble is that the nutters driving Brexit still think we're some temporarily dormant superpower, and they're going to restore that once more. The British Empire will rise again
The upcoming humiliation as that delusional fantasy is brutally exposed by the realities of globalisation will dwarf Suez.
Much like trumpism, brexit still has millions of loyal supporters
they really think 'no deal' will be great for the UK
Brexit, Britain’s 21st Century Suez
This. It's why I sort of have the view that this brexit bollox needs to happen, and it needs to hit hard, despite the pain we will all suffer. Suez demonstrated we were no longer a global military power which could act unilaterally, and from that point forward would have to work with other nations, the result of which being fewer opportunities for war. Brexit will show that we are no longer a global economic power which can operate on it's own. The result hopefully being a more equitable and joined up world which is more able to address the real important problems of things like climate change, population, and unsustainable resource usage etc. It may also snap us out of our little-englander mentality. God knows how low we have to go though for this to happen.
Oh and the EDL are going to march in favour of Brexit just before the vote.
Great, that'll be three angry gammons vs several thousand counter-demonstrators showing where the balance of opinion lies now.
EDL demonstration? - the best advert for remain we could possible ask for.
An EDL pro-brexit march would be quite amusing.
Would solidify plenty of MPs against brexit
my worry is that enough Tory & Labour MPs would abstain that Mays deal scrapes through & we end up stuck in transition limbo for a decade, because no one wants to take responsibility either way
Good post from Peston
We've all been focussing on the crisis that would ensue if - as expected - the PM loses the meaningful vote on her Brexit deal on 11 December.
But just for a moment think about the implications if she wins, because they too would be momentous.
To state the obvious, we'd be out of the EU on terms that are semi-blind - we wouldn't know our long-term destination. But we would be out.
And she, the PM, would rein supreme.
She would have crushed her opponents, who would have lost all hope of political advancement or favour.
And having delivered Brexit against the odds, she could be pretty confident in staying PM for as long as she wanted, perhaps well beyond the next election - and the election itself would be off the cards till 2022.
Just saying all this out loud demonstrates quite how unlikely it would be - especiaily after even her former human shield Michael Fallon has said how much he loathes her Brexit plan.
So let's revert to perhaps the more pertinent question of what happens if she loses the big vote.
Then, as I said on News at Ten, it comes down to who among the leaders of the two biggest parties is fastest to show proper leadership.
A display of decisive leadership will be hard for the PM, because she'll be under intense pressure to return to Brussels to ask EU leaders to amend the Withdrawal Agreement such that Northern Ireland's DUP would no longer be be able to complain that the so-called backstop drives a wedge between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.
Such prevarication would undermine her authority, especially if the EU says no.
Even in the unlikely event the EU caves, the trick might fail - because there are plenty of MPs in her own party who like Fallon hate the idea of handing over £39bn in a divorce bill for such an uncertain long-term trading relationship with the EU.
And there is no chance of any change to that just-signed Political Declaration by the EU that is so indeterminate on the permanent relationship between the UK and EU.
So May could fail to secure her deal if it returned to the Commons for a second vote, whether or not the deal had been tweaked to reassure the DUP.
She would therefore face pressure from the Remainers in her cabinet, led by the chancellor Philip Hammond, the business secretary Greg Clarke and the work and pensions secretary Amber Rudd to move to the softest style of Brexit - the so-called Norway model enhanced perhaps by membership of the customs union.
The advantages of this approach is that it would deliver frictionless trade, which would render unnecessary any Northern Ireland backstop to keep open the border on the island of Ireland. It is also the kind of Brexit favoured by most big exporters and importers.
For Brexiter purists, Norway-plus’s defects are manifold - mainly that it would see the UK as an EU rule-taker forever and would allow only the most limited control on free movement of workers to the U.K.
So for Brexiter ultras, a planned no-deal Brexit, as opposed to an accidental chaotic one, would be preferable. But to avoid chaos, to ensure necessary infrastructure is on the border and a series of mini deals are agreed to avoid extreme shocks (such as airplanes being unable to land), the UK would probably have to stay either in the EU or in a state of “transition” (non-voting membership) for at least another year after 29 March 2019.
To state the blooming, bleedin’, blinkin’ obvious, these rival Brexits split cabinet and Tory Party down the middle.
Which is what provides Labour with its opportunity.
According to senior Labour sources, Corbyn is close to agreeing that shortly (days) after the loss of the meaningful vote by May, he would formally make his party the champion of another referendum or People’s Vote - on the basis that if there is no consensus in parliament on what comes next, the question has to go back to the people.
At this conjuncture, there might well be a clear parliamentary majority for such a referendum - with the choice between May’s deal (as the only negotiated deal) and remaining in the EU - if the Tory MPs who currently say they back a plebiscite stick to their guns.
Which is why, if May sees this coming (which presumably she must), she may try to head it off at the pass by saying shortly after losing the vote that she remains committed to Brexit and will in effect lead a government of national unity to capture the will of parliament on what kind of Brexit is sought by most MPs.
If Brexit it be for the PM, rather than referendum, that would probably be Norway-plus, if she wants to reflect the preference of parliament.
But for her to become deliverer of what many Tories would see as conversion of the UK into the ultimate vassal state would be potentially lethal for her party.
The Brexiter ultras would be incensed, and would certainly try to depose her, prior to conceivably quitting the party altogether if they were to fail.
Or to put it another way, there are just over two weeks to go before events that will be tumultuous, egregious, nation changing. I only wish I could tell you how this epic ends.
TL:DR - Mays deal is dead, you'll struggle to find any serious voices arguing otherwise.
It's looking like it will be 80 votes short in the Commons, its the what comes next that is interesting.
Next week, 180 million free people of nine different free countries will go to the polls in freedom to elect one free Parliament to represent them all.
They will do so in a Western Europe which for the first time in its history is composed entirely of democratic Governments. How we all welcomed Portugal and Spain into the democratic European family.
The new Assembly will be the first multi-national, multi-lingual Parliament ever to be elected in the long story of man's continuing struggle for peace and freedom.
Margaret Thatcher.
Who thought Binners would ever agree with Thatcher on something...
I feel violated!
Actually... I've said it before but I think that Thatcher would be absolutely appalled by this present crop of Tory's who claim to venerate her, and what they're up to.
But the Brexiteers live in an alternative universe where you can pick and choose which bits of history you acknowledge, to back your fairy-tale narrative, and which you deny or ignore
I don't think for a second she'd have supported Brexit. Quite the opposite. She understood global capitalism a lot more than any of these clowns, and the importance of the single market, customs union, and the EU principles generally
But the Brexiteers historic revisionism won't allow them to acknowledge this or any other inconvenient facts
Who thought Binners would ever agree with Thatcher on something…
The Right Honourable Gentleman would learn something instructive if he listened to what I was saying, rather than the way in which I was saying it...
I'd swap this shower of fools for Thatcher in a hearbeat - and I'm a left wing Scot.
In fact I'd take Major or even Gordy Broon at this point too
I've said it repeatedly - save us Tony Blair, you're our only hope.
I think we can all agree, whatever your political persuasion, that 'anyone but this lot' pretty much covers it*. And I'm talking about both parties here. If Corbyn was sat where May is now, we'd be in exactly the same boat. They're both equally as useless as each other. I'm sure that Jezza would probably have appointed Dianne Abbott Brexit secretary and packed her off to Brussels to negotiate things
* The obvious exception being the ones who got us into this mess in the first place, Dave and Gideon
Surely we could go for a Norway model, save on the divorce bill, then use the savings to build the infrastructure to implement the controls around freedom of movement that already exist within the EU rules. That would placate the racists
Or we could just stay, and then implement the controls around freedom of movement that already exist within the EU rules.
^1 which was of course the obvious solution from the outset if the tories hadn't preferred the easy solution of fully open border and blame the EU for everything.
The gammons don't want to be placated. They're beyond that. They just want to rail against everything. NOTHING will satisfy them
I hate to quote Dave, but he was right when he described the Brexiteers as 'people who won't take yes for an answer'
That would placate the racists
assuming there was a 2nd ref & it went for Remain, in order to stop the gammon festering this would have to be one of the first moves any government would have to make
next up to fix teh skills gap; sort out further education, reverse the collapse of apprenticeships, encourage people from pointless degrees to useful vocational training and obviously reinvest in the poorest areas that have been hurt the most by austerity
IF we end up remaining (still unlikely imo) whatever flavour government should make these things a priority & make sure everyone knows it
That would placate the racists
I have no desire to placate them. Let them eat shit.
Let them eat shit.
coming right up...
Placate them....
They dont like brown people in their field of vision or Eastern Europeans.
Sat in a new flagship hotel i london today and 8 out of 10 of the hotel team i am working with are Eastern European. Also they are very good at their jobs.
Sat in a new flagship hotel i london today and 8 out of 10 of the hotel team i am working with are Eastern European. Also they are very good at their jobs.
According to a "friend" most lapdancing establishments are heavily slanted towards Eastern European "employees". Also very good at their jobs. This will end post Brexit
Even in the unlikely event the EU caves, the trick might fail – because there are plenty of MPs in her own party who like Fallon hate the idea of handing over £39bn in a divorce bill for such an uncertain long-term trading relationship with the EU.
Surely we could go for a Norway model, save on the divorce bill,
Why is Peston perpetuating this myth?
It is not, by any definition, a "divorce bill." It's money we've committed to paying as part of ongoing projects prior to the referendum. It's not a single bill, it's made up of lots and lots of agreements and investments. Whether we leave or not, we'll still be obliged to pay it.
In the event of a "divorce" we could potentially negotiate with the EU as to which bits we'd still pay - we could for instance take ownership of some projects and maintain them ourselves. But we'd have to consider each separate commitment in turn.
In any case, the notion that we could just refuse to pay it is a pipe dream. Aside from the fact that we could be taken to court for failure to pay, welching on deals right before looking to strike up new ones is insanity. Who's going to want to enter into favourable deals with a country which has just demonstrated itself to be untrustworthy?
According to a “friend” most lapdancing establishments are heavily slanted towards Eastern European “employees”. Also very good at their jobs. This will end post Brexit
That's because lots of British men and women are so fat, objects orbit around their arses.
I know that people say that May is stoic for soldiering on in the face of everything, but going out on a tour of the country to 'sell her deal'?
Yeah... because last time she went out on the road to use her legendarily warm interpersonal skills on the public it went really really well, didn't it? Losing a twenty-odd point poll lead in a matter of weeks? If you were one of her advisors surely you'd just lock hert in a cupboard until the vote?
Losing 20 points to a crap mumbling public speaker who was also out on the campaign trail? That time you mean?
The debate idea is very interesting. I assume Mays advisors think she will be able to pin an accusation of hypocrisy on Corbyn and that will damage labours position which is still evolving. given how poorly May comes over on TV and how well Corbyn does then I find it weird. Whatever Corbyn is or isn't I think in debate with May he will win hands down and will be well prepared for any attempt to portray him as wanting the best of both worlds - and how can she make out his position is ridiculous when its less so that hers?
My feeling is both think they have a "killer fact"
I really cannot believe he would walk into trap on this - he has Starmer to prep him. I cannot believe that May will be able to come out of it well
Its just so strange.
she reboots to safe mode maybot 95 as soon as it gets tough and would probably stumble into her own trap.
How well Corbyn comes across on TV?
Eh? Come on Uncle Jezza. Surely not even you believe that?
Hes absolutely awful! As is May! Just for different reasons. Both of them have the powerful oratory presence of a sat-nav
its going to be like watching a robot arguing with Keith Lard. And when I say arguing, they actually won’t be, because they’ll both be articulating (or trying too) pretty much the same position, both equally ridiculous
should rename the documentary "the thick of it"
OK Binners - he is perceived better by the general public the more he gets fair airtime - thats the big lesson from the last GE campaign. Once the TV had to give him equal billing and airtime and balance his ratings went right up.
He will make mincemeat of of May I am quite sure and come out of any debate with increased approval ratings.
It is not, by any definition, a “divorce bill.” It’s money we’ve committed to paying as part of ongoing projects prior to the referendum.
True - but it is also £39 billion that Brexiteers stated we wouldn't be paying a single penny of and the EU could "go whistle":
Boris even claimed Brussels could end up paying us!
Yeah tj but how does that help us with the brexit problem?
Why is Peston perpetuating this myth?
It is not, by any definition, a “divorce bill.”
Regardless of semantics, I’d assume a Norway style deal to have less breakaway costs so the difference could be spent on improving stuff
although I’d strongly prefer the whole thing was abandoned
He will make mincemeat of of May I am quite sure and come out of any debate with increased approval ratings.
Well, bully for him, but as he is essentially arguing the same case as May but with red unicorns who gives a ****?
Debating may live will be a bit like having an argument with a customer service chat bot on a website.
I suspect that the labour position will change and that he will have something nice nd juicy to use in the debate should it happen.
I think that May will not get the deal thru but labour will fail in the attempt to win a confidence vote - then labours position will become second referendum with a question of Mays deal or remain. Labour amendment on a second referendum will pass.
they have to use parliamentary momentum and once Mays deal fails the momentum is with Labour
Debating may live will be a bit like having an argument with a customer service chat bot on a website.
Plenty on here TRY and debate with Chewk, not much difference really.
The debate is really nothing to do with Corbyn, may is just realigning the narrative along traditional party lines, it doesn't even matter if he wins the debate, she will have taken the battle to where she wants it, left vs right.
It is actually quite clever, I assume she has a new strategist, it is a cut above any other move she has made.
Yep - this is basically Corbyn acting as her stooge (knowingly or otherwise). We can have the pretence of a debate without fear of anyone who is favour of the EU interrupting it with hard facts, highlighting the costs of exit or the advantages of remaining. The British ( and by that I really mean English) establishment in action.
So is Sturgeon doing the same Scotroutes? Now appears to be arguing for brexit as well. So she has shifted from "in at all costs" to " EEA" to now " Norway plus" which is also a pie in the sky position.
I know she is not central to the debate but this shows she is rather floundering over this - I have to say I am disappointed but its unsurprising as some ( many?) SNP / Independence voters want out of the EU. I expected better from her.
how well Corbyn does then I find it weird. Whatever Corbyn is or isn’t I think in debate with May he will win hands down and will be well prepared
As long as he doesn’t have to remember numbers, policies or have to operate an iPad he will be fine....
I’ll give him some credit for sticking to the policies and ideas he developed in the 70s consistently. Trouble the world constantly changes and he acts like a relic and against a decent opposition with a strong spin team he is out of place. If the current bunch weren’t a load of angry unpolished turds they would wipe the floor with him
I’ll give him some credit for sticking to the policies and ideas he developed in the 70s consistently.
You mean running the country for the benefit of the majority of its people? How ****ing dare he? What a loon.
So is Sturgeon doing the same Scotroutes? Now appears to be arguing for brexit as well. So she has shifted from “in at all costs” to ” EEA” to now ” Norway plus” which is also a pie in the sky position.
Did you watch her press conference?
No I didn't scotroutes - just the reporting which looks a bit selective from watching that. But she has been equivocating around EEA membership for a while but that looked clearer. Thanks.
just the reporting which looks a bit selective
You should know by now 😂
You mean running the country for the benefit of the majority of its people? How **** dare he? What a loon.
it Depends on what you see as the key requirements for the people. We already have a good standard of living, alright healthcare and are mostly safe. Nationalising industry, running it poorly and funnelling tax money into things may not help so much. Pretty much all governments recently have a poor record of being able to manage money and large projects. Whole scale reform of energy and transport systems does need to happen though. Trouble is they can only assign funds for 3-4 years not the 10-20 it would actually take...
personally I am leaning towards proportional representation and national governments as a more balanced way to run the country for the benefit of more of the people you could have longer term policies too