Forum menu
Jo Maugham has a twitter thread on John Majors comments:
Initially scary but ends on a positive note.
https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1177308131644325888
Ian Blackford's tweet is right.
"There is a clear warning here for Parliament. @BorisJohnson has to be brought down by a cross party consensus to stop this. We are facing someone that will stop at nothing. We need to take the keys of number 10 from him."
The simple solution is for the opposition to take over right now.
DAG and a few others on Twitter are my usual goto when I want to shut down the absolute bile that Brexiteers exclaim as law, but then again.....”experts.....what do they know?” 😉🤷♂️
DAG says No
Yeah, they said it's impossible on R4 this morning too. None the less, the opposition can still do as Ian Blackford says. Job jobbed.
The simple solution is for the opposition to take over right now.
There is no mechanism to do this safely. anyway its more fun to pile the humiliation on Johnson
There is no mechanism to do this safely. anyway its more fun to pile the humiliation on Johnson
None of this is 'fun'. One of the horrors of a lot of Westminstercentric media coverage is that it treats Brexit as some sort of jolly political game, when the reality is that there are lives and futures at stake. 🙁
The simple solution is for the opposition to take over right now.
No, cos it might not work. This is a knife-edge situation because BJ still has support, and plenty of it.
"Don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes".
None of this is ‘fun’. One of the horrors of a lot of Westminstercentric media coverage is that it treats Brexit as some sort of jolly political game
Boris Johnson's sister was interviewed on Five Live yesterday. She was asked if she thought her brother was feeling under pressure at the moment.
Her answer? "Oh no. He's absolutely loving this!"
To him and Cummings this is all indeed a game. Everything is just a game to these people because they come from a gilded, rarefied world where there are no consequences for anything, no matter what they do. Hence their opinion that they can simply ignore laws that don't suit them. They still think they can, even after the supreme court ruling
No, cos it might not work.
There is no mechanism to do this safely.
Firstly, I suspect Ian Blackford knows what he's talking about, but leaving aside the plea to authority. There's no risk: VONC, take over take any action they think is wise. Job Jobbed.
There’s no risk: VONC
VONC definitely carries a risk. The risk they won't win it. Can they count on the support of the turfed-out Tories? Will Corbyn as a prospective interim PM put off a few MPs here and there?
There’s no risk
There's massive risk as it give BoJo the perfect 'people vs parliament','they stopped us getting it done' rhetoric for his election campaign. Better to leave him in post until the no deal cliff edge is gone, then his support will fragment as Leavers move to BXP Limited
DAG says No
You would have thought this government would be tempering its enthusiasm for dodgy legal advice from Geoff Cox et al after the kicking it got at the SC last week.
OOB - the risk is that they do not end up with a new government in place in time to stop the no deal. Thats why no opposition party will do it.
There’s massive risk as it give BoJo the perfect ‘people vs parliament’,’they stopped us getting it done’ rhetoric for his election campaign.
Electoral risk. Yes, there's *certainly* that risk. They're not citing that risk though.
VONC definitely carries a risk. The risk they won’t win it. Can they count on the support of the turfed-out Tories? Will Corbyn as a prospective interim PM put off a few MPs here and there?
Yes, the Tory party themselves *want* to be out of government so the opposition would certainly win it even if there was a bit of unconventional voting going on.
But the risk of not winning is no risk at all since if they lose they are no worse off.
OOB – the risk is that they do not end up with a new government in place in time to stop the no deal.
They would *be* the new government it would take 5 minutes, they could pick names out of a hat, it's only going to govern for long enough to take two or three simple actions.
So as I say, No risk. They could stop all the shouting (on both sides) and just take over, today. The reason they're not is because it suits them electorally. That's fine, it's how the system works but we can all stop the pretence around this.
The good thing about all this is the brains an expertise in constitutional affairs are not on Johnsons side.
Next week there will be new laws past to make it even more watertight. Don't be suprised to see a senior government official going with a pre written letter on the authority of the queen / parliament.
No OOB - there is a risk - the risk is that johnson maneuvers things to ensure the 31st is passed with no new government in place. thats why non of the opposition parties will call for a VONC until no deal is stopped for sure
No OOB – there is a risk – the risk is that johnson maneuvers things to ensure the 31st is passed with no new government in place.
Not possible. The government goes at the moment of the VONC loss. The new Govt would be able to act almost immediately.
No it does not. 14 days to see if someone else can forma government that holds confidence - if not then a new election.
During that 14 days the outgoing government still controls business.
It would be done that afternoon because everyone on the opposition benches agrees what they want to do and will have pre-agreed.
...and controls business??? - The Government *already* control business!
Ian Blackford's not an idiot, this is as close to risk free as anything can be.
Apart from the fact that Johnson would still control if / when and who is recommended to the queen! thats the problem. If he sits and refuses to recommend anyone we are in uncharted waters
there are real risks to calling a VONC now which is why non of the opposition parties want one until the threat of no deal is gone.
The government goes at the moment of the VONC loss. The new Govt would be able to act almost immediately.
That can only happen IF there is a credible alternative PM who could command the confidence of the house. If not, and lets be clear right now there isn't any candidate who could do that, then a general election would have to be called and parliament prorogued. Once that happens there is NO parliament but there IS a government, the current one. A vote of no confidence is not in the best interests of anyone other than those who want a no deal Brexit.
Apart from the fact that Johnson would still control if / when and who is recommended to the queen! thats the problem. If he sits and refuses to recommend anyone we are in uncharted waters
This is incorrect. However, Corbyn would have to demonstrate clearly he has the support of enough MPs to make him a candidate for PM who clearly commands the confidence of the House. At that point Queenie will dismiss Boris, even if he refuses to resign, and invite JC to attempt to form a government.
The government goes at the moment of the VONC loss
Not entirely true - the opposition has to demonstrate the ability to be able to form a new government, or the incumbent PM continues to sit. Basically, he's there until enough of a working alternative is presented to the queen to allow her to dismiss him.
And by 'working alternative', it has to be the opposition parties with coalition agreements/confidence and supply agreements demonstrably in place, rather than a load of folk moaning about how they would rather have Harriet Harman/Ken Clarke.
And during the 14 days after a MONC, the Conservatives also have the opportunity to try to re-create a working majority, it's not an open goal for Labour et al.
After 14 days, if no-one has made it over the line, then a second VONC would lead to a dissolution and a GE.
14 days to see if someone else can forma government that holds confidence – if not then a new election.
During that 14 days the outgoing government still controls business.
This is what BoJo & Co are counting on isn't it. If they can hang on in there till Mid-October then the clock is effectively run down for a VONC so it needs to happen within the next couple of weeks.
But Corbyn needs to understand and be clear, He's not actually going to be campaigning to win and be PM, but soley on the promise of participating in a coalition (with LDs, independents and any willing Cons) who will do three specific things
1: apply for an extension to allow for
2: a 2nd Referendum.
3: Once the outcome of that Referendum is implemented He will call a GE.
He should be clear also that 2nd referendum will be a "No-deal exit Vs Remain in the EU" vote with no room for half truths and painted busses BoJo/Moggy/Cummins and Nige can explain to the people why the No-deal Brexit they want is in their interests.
The Brexiteers Have had their chances to formulate a deal the majority of them can live with, the closest they seem to have come is Still May's offering, and now they're trying to run the clock down to a No-deal Brexit.
We're at a point so far beyond the scope of the original Referendum that it needs to be clearly voted on the only mechanism by which that can be achieved now is initiated with a VONC.
Pitch forks never achieved anything.
Liberté, égalité, fraternité?
martinhutch
VONC definitely carries a risk. The risk they won’t win it. Can they count on the support of the turfed-out Tories? Will Corbyn as a prospective interim PM put off a few MPs here and there?
Rory Stewart was on PM earlier in the week saying he wouldn't back a vote of no confidence as he didn't want Corbyn becoming PM.
Liberté, égalité, fraternité?
and The Greatest Showman.
Not entirely true – the opposition has to demonstrate the ability to be able to form a new government, or the incumbent PM continues to sit. Basically, he’s there until enough of a working alternative is presented to the queen to allow her to dismiss him.
And by ‘working alternative’, it has to be the opposition parties with coalition agreements/confidence and supply agreements demonstrably in place, rather than a load of folk moaning about how they would rather have Harriet Harman/Ken Clarke.
And during the 14 days after a MONC, the Conservatives also have the opportunity to try to re-create a working majority, it’s not an open goal for Labour et al.
After 14 days, if no-one has made it over the line, then a second VONC would lead to a dissolution and a GE.
Thanks for the explanation. I still see no risk here. Leader can be anyone, chosen by lottery, as Ken Clarke says the identity of the Caretaker is irrelevant. The Torys won't recreate a govt 'cos they want out ASAP. Agreements can be in place before the VONC, the government only needs to last a day or perhaps hours, long enough to do what they want Boris to do which is extend and call an election at which point parliament is stood down anyway.
Ian Blackford’s not an idiot, this is as close to risk free as anything can be.
Rory Stewart was on PM earlier in the week saying he wouldn’t back a vote of no confidence as he didn’t want Corbyn becoming PM.
Good for him, what about the rest?
The point isn't that they "want Corbyn" (half of his own MP's don't want him) it's that they simply Don't want Boris.
I'd go so far as to say that this particular VONC transcends part loyalties and is about MPs doing something that is actually in the national interest for a change... Imagine that Eh?
Ian Blackford has not that I have seen moved away from the common joint line.
Its interesting OOB that all the opposition parties disagree with you, all the constitutional experts disagree with you, all the political pundits disagree with you
the safest way is to get the extension before a VONC
Far from being unsafe, it's the *only* safe way.
Party leader Nicola Sturgeon said she "agreed" installing the Labour leader or "someone else" after a vote of no confidence in Boris Johnson was the only" failsafe" option.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49850484
Good for him, what about the rest?
The point isn’t that they “want Corbyn” (half of his own MP’s don’t want him) it’s that they simply Don’t want Boris.I’d go so far as to say that this particular VONC transcends part loyalties and is about MPs doing something that is actually in the national interest for a change… Imagine that Eh?
...and in the vanishingly unlikely event that the VONC is going the "Government's way" Boris will send a couple of Tories round to "rebel" because he *wants* to lose. Or the least embarrassing way would be to try to get the DUP to vote with the opposition.
Leader can be anyone, chosen by lottery, as Ken Clarke says the identity of the Caretaker is irrelevant.
It's irrelevant who is presented to the Queen if they can demonstrate the confidence of the HoC. How we get to that person will determine how much confidence can be demonstrated. If JC refuses to step aside in that process in favour of whoever, then the chances of assembling a coalition are greatly diminished, as it is likely that the expelled Tory MPs, or a good chunk of them, would be needed to force through MONC and/or prop up the proposed unity government.
and in the vanishingly unlikely event that the VONC is going the “Government’s way” Boris will send a couple of Tories round to “rebel” because he *wants* to lose. Or the least embarrassing way would be to try to get the DUP to vote with the opposition.
I doubt it. His plan, as I see it, is either to have one last attempt with a rebadged May deal presented as some kind of new thing around the middle of next month, or to delay and hope that the opposition parties simply cannot coalesce around JC enough to win VONC/form unity gvt. At which point he takes his chances by ignoring the Benn law forcing him to ask for extension, or pissing of the EU 27 enough to make them refuse the request, sending us off the cliff.
But Corbyn needs to understand and be clear,
Lol!
OOB - after the threat of no deal is removed - thats the bit you missed.
astonishing to see you quoting the SNP favourably - even if misquoting 🙂
Ms Sturgeon added: "Nothing is risk free but leaving Johnson in post to force through no-deal - or even a bad deal - seems like a terrible idea to me."
Removing Boris Johnson before the end of October looks like it has to happen… but to call it even close to risk free isn’t honest. It carries huge risks, for all our countries as well as for all MPs and parties involved, so proceed with caution seems to be the current approach. The Rebel Conservatives in particular won’t back any such measure ‘till after it is too late for Johnson to bring home an updated Withdrawl Arrangement from the EU.
pissing of the EU 27 enough to make them refuse the request, sending us off the cliff.
On this point, what level of confidence is there that we haven't already reached that threshold?
Am I right in thinking that one member state could veto our request? My feeling is that BoJo will still be in power on the 31st October, even if he respects the law and asks for an extension, he's not going to make any effort to sell the idea in Brussels. Without a good reason to grant an extension, what motive does the EU have? They've already said their no-deal preparations are complete...
1. They don’t want to be blamed.
2. They actually care about the effects on jobs/medicine etc😒.
3. They are actual statesmen as opposed to a coked up clown.
If Johnson has to ask for an extension & the EU make it conditional ona 2nd ref or GE, is the ball then back in Johnson's court?
Not to sound too pessimistic, but..
1. They don’t want to be blamed.
Why would they care if the UK blames them? To the rest of the world it's plainly the UK's fault.
2. They actually care about the effects on jobs/medicine etc😒.
The long term uncertainty is damaging in itself. At some point you need to amputate the limb to save the rest of the body. The countries which will see the most economic pain are also those with the strongest economies.
3. They are actual statesmen as opposed to a coked up clown.
Ultimately, the Project is of greater importance. At a national level, the countries likely to be hit hardest are also eyeing the opportunities this presents. Holland could pick up a lot of business once the UK are out...
And then what? Everything comes out lovely? Don’t be daft. If you face down the bully and manage to beat him in a fight, he just comes back with more mates and ambushes you.
It’s not the way, dude.
And appeasement has worked in the past? Remain needs to keep it’s narrative heard, otherwise once this is done - they will turn on the next enemy. Do you think once the EU has been ‘deal’ with they will just carry on governing without a new bogeyman to whip up hate against?
If we keep them focussed on the EU that contains the current right wing political narrative to a focussed issue.
Holland - The Netherlands in general - has already done pretty well out of Brexit. Lots of skilled workers coming in, needing houses and stuff. My town's an easily commuteable distance from Amsterdam and in the last two years houses were on the market for literal hours. You'll struggle to rent here. Seeing fewer UK diplomatic plates now, but that's because those cars are on Dutch plates now.
The EU has already said it will give an extension.
If Johnson has to ask for an extension & the EU make it conditional ona 2nd ref or GE, is the ball then back in Johnson’s court?
iirc the Benn bill stated that if the EU made a counter offer, then parliament gets to debate and decide upon whether to accept that offer.
The current maths shows just what a knife-edge we're on when it comes to VONC.
Conservative 288
Labour 247
Scottish National Party 35
Independent 34
Liberal Democrat 18
Democratic Unionist Party 10
Sinn Féin 7
The Independent Group for Change 5
Plaid Cymru 4
Green Party 1
Speaker 1
So today's news about the SNP puts them collectively at 282 MPs, versus 288 Conservative. Assuming the DUP are still on board, that means they need to find another 17 to overtake the present conservative grouping, although this assumes that zero Labour MPs would abstain/vote against their own party (which is quite an assumption).
Jo Swinson has ruled out a unity gvt with JC at the helm, and while it's quite possible she'll crack on this one, her 18 seats cannot be relied upon right now. It's hard to see how she can maintain this position in the face of a No Deal Brexit. The various Plaid/Greens and Change whatever make 10, effectively cancelling out the DUP.
Which brings us to 34 'independents', including the Conservative rebels. It's hard to predict how many of them would back a VONC, or even abstain.
And appeasement has worked in the past?
Worked in what sense? This isn't WWII. You are attempting to argue with people with abuse. This is never going to change anyone's mind. The tabloid press persuaded leave voters by pretending to be their friend. They know what they are doing.
If we keep them focussed on the EU that contains the current right wing political narrative to a focussed issue.
That's a different issue.
DazH isn’t just talking about abuse, he thinks remainers should compromise their position for the sake of unity.
That is dangerous as it legitimises the right wing narrative and will allow them to move onto their next target.
Remain can keep fighting its case, pick it’s battles and calmly wind up the opposition by holding them to account for this - until they screw up so badly out of frustration that it shifts public opinion against them. We need to set up Boris and the ERG to take the blame for this going wrong, even if that were a no deal brexit followed by us running back to the EU for a BINO deal once the effects kick in.
he think remainers should compromise their position and compromise for the sake of unity
And so they should. A referendum to accept a Withdrawl Agreement vs deciding to remain instead, is a compromise. But part of that is the assumption that people can, and will, argue why either of those options is right for the UK. That’s why I think Labour (and SNP) are closest to a compromise… although I still think Labour need to be clear what they want if we have a general election.
What isn’t a “compromise” is to accept that one particular form of Brexit “has” to happen, do or die, despite not looking like anything proposed by either Leave campaign in 2016, or having popular support in the country at large.
A referendum isn’t a compromise, that’s as strong a call to political warfare in the current climate as any - and something DazH was arguing against not long ago.
Remain ran a fairly boring unemotional campaign last time, so you think that is going to be the case this time? It will make 2016 look positively pleasant.
This needs to and will get worse before it can get better.
That is dangerous as it legitimises the right wing narrative and will allow them to move onto their next target.
+1000.
This isn’t about compromise with people who will then just say “ok, we’ve met halfway and that is about right”.
It misunderstands totally the vast reservoir of petty nastiness that is ‘out there’. A reservoir that has been filled with poison year after year, decade after decade by the gutter press. “Feeling a bit down in the dumps because your life isn’t the Utopia you thought you deserved? Well, it is not your fault. You were born here. You DO deserve it. It is all those foreigners / benefits cheats / muslims that are taking the life to which you are uniquely entitled away”.
Most of the gammons won’t be happy until the Lancasters are on the runway, next stop Berlin. Tally ho.
It's easy to frame this as remainers against leavers, and I'm sure we're going round in circles, but it needs to be remembered that hard Brexiteers voted against Theresa May's deal, several times. Compromise needs to happen on both sides if a deal is to go through, and right now that doesn't look likely to happen, as the entire problem is that there is no deal that works for everyone.
Every possibility has been exhausted. At which point the only sensible option is to go back to the drawing board. It's a sad state we're in, and the rhetoric from the far right and the conservative party (which now appear to be one and the same thing) is primarily what's fuelling it. There is no fix at this point, it's checkmate. Labour's position of 2nd ref on a proposed deal is the best we can hope for imo.
*Pedant Alert*
Most of the gammons won’t be happy until the Lancasters are on the runway, next stop Berlin. Tally ho.
'Tally Ho' was used by fighter pilots to indicate they had the enemy aircraft in sight. Wouldn't be used by a bomber pilot.
HTH
‘Tally Ho’ was used by fighter pilots to indicate they had the enemy aircraft in sight. Wouldn’t be used by a bomber pilot.
HTH
Ha! Yes.
‘Chocks away’ would have been better.
A referendum isn’t a compromise
Yes it is. Result of the last referendum has resulted in a manner of leaving being negotiated, and preparations to leave have been put in place. Asking voters “do you want to leave in this manner, are you happy that we are prepared for it, and that what it should deliver is what you want for the UK”… before proceeding… is a completely reasonable compromise. Those that say it is not are obviously in no frame of mind to consider what the country as a whole wishes to do next.
DazH isn’t just talking about abuse, he thinks remainers should compromise their position for the sake of unity.
Ok I'm talking abuse specifically.
I don't want to compromise my position because theirs isn't really valid. Most of them dont have an actual real grievance with the EU, it's just a bogus reaction to a made up problem.
If leavers had good arguments I could easily be persuaded. It'd be great to think we could do better than the EU, that we could be a proper progressive place, but a) the EU isn't stopping us, b) thats not what most leavers are even asking for and c) the reality of our situation is that we need to be part of a larger trading bloc in the modern world and this is the only one there is.
Yes it is. Result of the last referendum has resulted in a manner of leaving being negotiated, and preparations to leave have been put in place. Asking voters “do you want to leave in this manner, are you happy that we are prepared for it, and that what it should deliver is what you want for the UK”… before proceeding… is a completely reasonable compromise. Those that say it is not are obviously in no frame of mind to consider what the country as a whole wishes to do next
Oh I agree - but if measured objectively it will, as DazH has rightly pointed out, cause more polarisation. I’d wager that the majority of brexiteers do not view it as a compromise.
Where I differ or did differ with DazH, is that I think that the increased tensions caused by a referendum are an acceptable side effect for the long term health of the country.
Molgrips, it was leave that won last time by running an emotional campaign with the use of disparaging and abusive language and imagery, it was just more subtle than it is now. Remain lost as they couldn’t appeal to emotion, they now can - and that means the argument will get personal.
Where is the line? Should leave be the only ones using emotive language? How do remain roll back the language and tone without allowing leave to be the ones running a wildly emotive campaign?
What isn’t a “compromise” is to accept that one particular form of Brexit “has” to happen, do or die
I've been saying this for months. It's like having a custody battle over a child and so to "compromise you slice him / her down the middle and take half each." Flights on the wings of fantasy aside, it's clearly not a compromise simply because absolutely no-one on either side wants it.
The compromise to be had is to acknowledge everything the leavers are pissed off about and address those concerns, rather than ignoring them and offering nothing more than the status quo. If someone wants an iPhone to knock nails in, do you give them an iPhone because they "know what they want," or do you give them a hammer?
Jo Swinson has ruled out a unity gvt with JC at the helm, and while it’s quite possible she’ll crack on this one, her 18 seats cannot be relied upon right now.
Libdems will join with 100pc enthusiasm. The Libdems are the remain party so they need a prompt election more than anyone. A VONC and quick extension election suits them better than *any* of the other parties. Yes, they'll want Corbyn swapped out, but so will everyone else.
argue with people with abuse. This is never going to change anyone’s mind.
+1.
but if measured objectively it will, as DazH has rightly pointed out, cause more polarisation.
Late 2019 and early 2020 will bring increased “polarisation”, come what may. An election will cause this. Leaving without a deal will cause this. MPs changing the government will do this. Leaving with a deal that the public haven’t been asked to back with cause this. That things are going to get worse before they (might) get better is not unique to holding a confirmation referendum.
One of the Spiked/LM sh t stirrers has already been on TV calling for riots. More of this to come.
Good point - but an election turns people on politicians, a referendum will turn people on on each other. Which scenario is better is up for debate, personally I would rather see people blame each other for this mess as opposed to politicians as the blaming the political establishment allows the public to ignore their role in creating this mess and dodge collective responsibility.
People need to be forced to smell the shit they created.
raybanwomble
Member
That is dangerous as it legitimises the right wing narrative and will allow them to move onto their next target.
And we've already seen it, in fact. May's deal was brought down because it was too much of a compromise for the headbangers to accept, and people said straight faced "It's not even brexit". As soon as anything was put on the table they instantly moved to demanding a harder brexit.
In a functioning democracy you ought to be able to compromise but it just doesn't work if it's one way.
May’s deal was brought down because it was too much of a compromise for the headbangers to accept
Which is exactly the point I was just making.
For the headbangers and crooks it wasn't damaging enough, for everyone else it was slightly less worse than we already have so what was the point?
Over three years on, we still haven't worked out what we want, which is something of a barrier towards getting it.
argue with people with abuse. This is never going to change anyone’s mind.
What about those folk that talk utter nonsense and repeat lies time and time again and refuse to listen to or at the very least examine the facts? - how do we get through to them?. I've just made the mistake of listening to the last 20mins of the Andrew Pierce show on LBC (6.40-7pm) and every single caller was of a certain age, they are talking utter ****ing shite yet i am meant to roll over and honour their rabid belief that brexit will be a good thing for the country?...aye...that'll be ****ing right!.
Agreed Somafunk - those on the receiving end of these abusive fascists need to be able to be able to angrily and robustly defend themselves. If that means mocking them, so be it.
People like this and those that support them explicitly or implicitly
deserve all the mocking and derision that they get and I'll be ****ing damned if I am going to be told that their voices should be heard for balance and fairness. The people who phone into that show are invariably the ones posting links to EDL marches on their Facebook pages.
Brexiteers May Go to ECJ to Stop Article 50 Extension
Would this be the ultimate irony??
What about those folk that talk utter nonsense and repeat lies time and time again and refuse to listen to or at the very least examine the facts? – how do we get through to them?.
Good question. Not buy insulting them though - that will just entrench their position. "You're an absolute bloody moron!" "I am? Oh, I'm terribly sorry - please set me straight, I'll definitely accept your point of view now you've called me that" Yeah, no.
Molgrips, it was leave that won last time by running an emotional campaign with the use of disparaging and abusive language and imagery, it was just more subtle than it is now. Remain lost as they couldn’t appeal to emotion, they now can – and that means the argument will get personal.
It will.
deserve all the mocking and derision that they get and I’ll be **** damned if I am going to be told that their voices should be heard for balance and fairness.
I am not making a moral argument here. Joining in the abuse simply will not work. We are in dire need of something that will.
My view on compromise and "winning" the leavers over?
Pain. Financial hardship affecting them and their families.
Yep, it'll affect me and many others that didn't vote for it but we will have to endure. No choice.
No other way. Honestly guys. Talking to them politely does nothing. Arguing does nothing.
Pain is needed, some polite "told told you so's" then trying to rebuild a broken society.
It's going to take decades.
(Personally, and with some emotion behind saying this... I now think that going off the cliff edge as soon as possible is better than a long drawn out downward spiral. Then the pain will hit fast and hard meaning we can move on sooner. I hate myself for saying the above to be clear.😟)
The Brexiteers who will actually suffer financial hardship post-leave will not be brought around because of it.
They already suffer under the current political system, they already feel pain. Heaping more on them will simply further disenfranchise them and push them further away from the middle ground. If/when they realise they’ve been lied to, it will just be another facet of a ruling elite to have failed them.
What is frightening about that is where it leaves them to go. There will be no democratically elected avenues left for them to align with. What happens to a society where such a significant minority completely turns its back on democracy?
My view on compromise and “winning” the leavers over?
Pain. Financial hardship affecting them and their families.
Their media will just blame who ever, it won't be there fault, it'll be remainers, foreigners the EU, basically the same, they'll never see it.
If they can not see it now with Boris and Cummins on there screen daily they'll never see it. Just for one second imagine being on the same side as Cummings, what a stand up feller...
I do agree this will take a generation to resolve, maybe more, rest of my life for sure.
Not sure whether to be alarmed or honoured at how my views seem to be the focus of the last page or two.
Honestly, despite having an interest in radical politics, borne from a past of being involved in grassroots environmental and animal rights direct action, these days I’m an old hippy who wants everyone to get on.
The most scary thing about brexit is that it has divided people who before had no problem with each other. I’ve experienced this myself, I’ve lost friends, and been distanced from some family members, and I’ve been equally to blame for being as set in my views as they were. Which is why I’m not doing it any more. From now on I’m building bridges. I haven’t changed my view on brexit being a bloody stupid idea, but I’ve changed how I talk about it. If everyone else did the same then we might actually solve this thing.
Or maybe I’m being too idealistic. It wouldn’t be the first time. 😀
You do offer some interesting if sometimes wildly frustrating opinions with a level of certainty Daz. That’s why.
A while ago I disagreed with you on a referendum being divisive - I think you are right now on that, but I still think it’s the best alternative unless we accept what poopscoop is saying (and I am inclined to) - that hard brexit needs to happen to teach people a lesson.
The fundamental problem is the control over the flow of information.
There is a virtual monopoly in this by people who stand to benefit greatly from Brexit.
Our problem is that many of the people who fervently believe in Brexit have got all their informations and opinions from those monopoly sources.
Spotted this amazing piece of Brexiteer nonsense doing the rounds on Facebook
To anyone crowing about the Supreme Courts action yesterday
"The Supreme Court is an EU affiliated Court. No British law or Constitution was broken by the Prime Minister proroguing Parliament but the Europhile judges quoted EU law in their somethingion. This is a constitutional coup by unelected Supreme Court judges, where no law was broken, yet you wish to celebrate it? The courts have no place in politics. Thats why the powers were seperated after the Civil War. Where is the scrutiny? Where is the public accountability? Who are these people who have literally just invented a new law without Monarch or Parliament being involved in the process and you are happy about it?
Frankly you have no understanding as to what just happened yesterday. If you did, you'd be as appallled as the rest of us. Dicey described the seperation of powers as being necessary for good reason, as without that seperation then Paliamentary Supremacy cannot exist. The Judiciary cannot make laws and then rule on them, that is tyranny and as such the Judiciary needs to be subordinate to Parliament.
After yesterdays ruling, the Supreme Court has just put itself above that of the Monarch. Which has effectively put them as Head of State and removed the Monarch as Head of the Judiciary. With the consequence being that we are no longer a Constitutional Monarchy but a Constitutional Supreme-ocracy.
Have you no concept of what this means to the very foundation of our systems of governance? We are ruled by unelected judges. We have a Politburo. Democracy is officially dead. Your votes count for nothing. Your Parliament counts for nothing. Manifestos that gained MP's election now count for nothing as the Supreme Court has deemed itself capable of overuling all, including the Queen. This is a Constitutional Coup by an unelected group of 11 judges that has just overturned 400 years of convention that was needed to end the Civil War.
Where yesterday they invented a law, outside of Parliament, then implemented it. That excess of power was why we had an uprising against the sitting Monarch, yet we are back here again through the arrogance of those who simply will not accept a vote that they disagree with. God help us all "
Credit David Winder.
^^^
Oh Well at least it’s not all uppercase but this shite is a problem.
He’s very dramatic and throwing the words and rhetoric about that some seem to lap up But how do you point out to people that this is bollocks.
Ahh, I've seen bits of that regurgitated verbatim in arguments on Twitter
I did wonder where they got this claptrap
There's a huge amount of ignorance about how the country actually works and (ive learnt a lot since this car crash began)
Sadly people use this as an opportunity to spread bobbins like that & the country becomes a bit more ignorant
Before everyone had an opinion, now everyone has an opinion and a voice, the media just stoke the flames.
Rather ironically, an advert for disneyland popped up below that drivel Bob shared! 😂
We must keep no deal on the table to show them we mean business.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1177884628117577729
So, someone complaining about lack of democracy and arguing for parliamentary sovereignty cites the Queen as part of the system they claim to support. Nice one.
The problem with this political discussion , from what i've read , is that its entirely voiced by 1 side only , so complete & utter retarded drivel can be spouted unchallenged , like this ....
Good point – but an election turns people on politicians, a referendum will turn people on on each other. Which scenario is better is up for debate, personally I would rather see people blame each other for this mess as opposed to politicians as the blaming the political establishment allows the public to ignore their role in creating this mess and dodge collective responsibility.
So your suggesting that the past 3 years of shambolic , ineffective , and self serving behaviour of Parliament from all parties is the fault of the electorate because of how they voted in the referendum ?
How selfish that those 17.4 million people couldn't just tow the line to fit in with the Westminister elites way of thinking eh ?
Heaven forbid we hold politicians accountable when we should blaming ourselves for daring to have a say on this country's future.
Yes , we deserve to suffer more for exercising our democratic rights , correct ?
Christ almighty , dumb doesn't even come close to describing this kind of sentiment.
It looks to me like you gents have been talking amongst yourselves for so long that you genuinely think the views expressed here are representative of the wider public.
This forthcoming general election with be the biggest reality check of all time
As you were , carry on 🙂
Ok, I’ll bite.
What kind of Brexit would you like to see? What problems do you envisage it solving? What are the positive arguments for it?
Please show your workings.
Fact is that most Leavers totally misunderstand UK parliamentary democracy. Boris and his cronies have tried to illegally circumvent the required scrutiny. Nice try, no dice. Now they have to go through the proper channels and convince people it is a good idea, when it is inherently a crock of shit. So ‘will of the people’ is not sufficient, I am afraid.
Go on, lay out the positives for us to understand, please.
Heaven forbid we hold politicians accountable when we should blaming ourselves for daring to have a say on this country’s future.
I agree completely. The voters share very little of the blame in this. They followed the debates, checked out the campaign messages, and then made a judgement as to who was proposing the best way forward for the UK.
@brownsauce… what does holding the likes of Gove & Johnson & Hannan & Raab & Patel to account look like now? Should we expect them to deliver what their campaign said in 2016? Or accept the bait and switch?