Remainers and politics geeks- a question for you

(33 Posts)
RemainRita Wed 19-Jun-19 13:28:17

This is really only a discussion for those like me who are passionate remainers, left leaning, and geekily following every twist and turn of this awful saga...

I am thinking through the possible scenarios here...

Obviously on face value Rory Stewart appears to be the least worst candidate in terms of ideology, however his voting record is not good and he is not on our side (left/lib). He only seems rational when compared with Boris/Gove etc. EU will prefer him out of all the candidates and he might be able to get a change to the NI border issue and get May's crappy deal through at some stage. So in essence, he might be able to deliver Brexit.

That said, I've been wondering.... it's clear that Boris would not be able to get Brexit through by 31st Oct anymore than anyone else would. He admitted as much last night in the debate. There is no way the EU would budge an inch with him. He would no doubt fuck it up and do a dreadful job generally, and in doing so once and for all fuck up his career and prove himself to be useless, and have to go. So we would finally be rid of him. In not delivering Brexit and pushing this back until 2020 it becomes more likely that we would have a GE/ referendum / revoke article 50. The mandate from the 2016 referendum gets weaker and weaker the more years go by and something would need to shift. So he would probably not be able to deliver Brexit.

So, Boris would be damaging for this country in terms of wider politics, looking after the most vulnerable, social mobility etc, however the same applies to any of the Tories right? So in a strange way, as we are not going to get a GE or referendum anytime soon, is it somehow better to get Boris's power trip over and done with, have him in, knowing that he will fail with Brexit and then we might actually get a GE / article 50 will be revoked??

I can't believe how fucked up this thinking is by the way, but I'm clutching at straws here!!!

OP’s posts: |
1tisILeClerc Thu 20-Jun-19 20:46:13

{ revoke pending a new referendum in 5 years time when we've come up with a coherent plan to put forward as an option but that's pie in the sky.}

Revoking is one thing but to think the EU will put up with this nonsense in as short as 5 years time is unlikely. It will take 5 years to undo the mess of the last three.

noodlenosefraggle Thu 20-Jun-19 20:20:37

pie in the sky

noodlenosefraggle Thu 20-Jun-19 20:20:03

Yes I can't see us getting another extension just so we can piss about doing the same thing again. What would be the point? It will be on the proviso that we do something major like general election or second referendum as that's the only way to break the deadlock. Parliament as it is has demonstrated it will not vote for anything so a new Parliament or a new referendum is the only solution. Even those are bad ones, as it looks like we're completely split down the middle. I'd like us to revoke pending a new referendum in 5 years time when we've come up with a coherent plan to put forward as an option but that's our in the sky.

sandyfoot Thu 20-Jun-19 13:59:55

"If Scotland has another vote for independence, then fundamentally the UK will change and IMO it would only be fair to first re-run the EU referendum in England, Wales and NI to see if people in the rest of the UK are willing to pay that price. (I suspect the Little Englanders would be)"

Scotland will only have the momentum for a 2nd ref once we're out on no deal in which case it will be too late for rest of UK to have 2nd brexit referendum on that basis. The problem is brexiteers don't seem to care that UK will be broken up, Brexit more important.

DGRossetti Thu 20-Jun-19 13:51:21

Boris could say he needs more time to sort out the mess May left

He'd have to explain how the UK didn't waste the current extension first though.

DumbledoresCrookedNose Thu 20-Jun-19 13:48:11

Not one person voted for no deal because it was never an option. Remember easiest deal in history, Norway style model, etc etc? So since not one person voted for no deal, they need to call the whole thing off if they can't agree a deal.
Of course, they won't. But they should.

The80sweregreat Thu 20-Jun-19 13:34:00

i'M getting to the stage where i thinking ' let them send Boris over
to the EU' and see what he can come back with. None of this is ideal, they may not want to talk to him and it might all back fire, but at least it will put to bed the whole ' May was a remainer and we could do better' etc etc.
I think that it will be a game changer as ' no deal' will hang over everyone and will they then have the balls to walk away?
( i dont want any of this by the way, but its what it seems to be coming down to here) its all very worrying , but the Tories seem to want all this. once it goes to the Tory faithful, they may think differently. but i have a feeling they will vote for Boris and then cross their fingers.

DumbledoresCrookedNose Thu 20-Jun-19 13:25:10

If Scotland has another vote for independence, then fundamentally the UK will change and IMO it would only be fair to first re-run the EU referendum in England, Wales and NI to see if people in the rest of the UK are willing to pay that price. (I suspect the Little Englanders would be)

DumbledoresCrookedNose Thu 20-Jun-19 13:17:44

Boris could say he needs more time to sort out the mess May left (blaming someone else takes the heat off him) and negotiate a better deal. He knows he can't deliver a better deal, but whatever. The question is- would the EU give it? And how would Boris then weasel out of a no deal, given that he can't negotiate anything better?
I find it hard to believe he'd really crash us out, but recent events make me think I need to stock up on tinned food.

DGRossetti Thu 20-Jun-19 10:23:42

Maybe the EU should just double the £39 Billion and say yes an extension for 1 more year only, and that say £20 Billion has to be paid upfront.

I can see a PAYG model being developed by necessity ... then every successive general election can be over how much for ....

1tisILeClerc Thu 20-Jun-19 10:21:21

IIRC of the nominal £39 Billion, £19 Billion was for UK commitments up until 29 March, and the £20 Billion takes the UK contributions up until the end of the projected 2 year transition period (end of 2021).

1tisILeClerc Thu 20-Jun-19 10:17:29

{I think he will come back with the same withdrawal deal as May's but try and convince us all it's different.}
The 'Withdrawal deal' (WA) is essentially a list of treaties between the UK and EU. It states what they are, and how they will be when the UK leaves so is not really a 'deal' but the definition of intended separation.
The PD defines which of the many items are 'separated' and during a transition period I would anticipate that minor 'adjustments' could be made, as If I am correct, most of Mr Barnier's 'steps' (like Canada and Norway schemes) are different permutations of the items in the WA list.
The EU are right to insist that they will not look at the WA again until the UK has signed up to it as the UK has proven that it cannot be trusted.

sandyfoot Thu 20-Jun-19 10:07:16

I like your thinking that the EU would ask us to pay up front. Quite right too... I'm also just hoping that the silver lining of Boris Johnson becoming PM means that in the long run we get rid of him more quickly. I think he will come back with the same withdrawal deal as May's but try and convince us all it's different. It won't get through and there will be a vote of no confidence. I reckon the EU will only give us another extension on the basis of GE or referendum. As a Scot, if we don't stop this then so many people I know who were no voters in our independence referendum would now vote to leave UK

1tisILeClerc Thu 20-Jun-19 09:49:00

Maybe the EU should just double the £39 Billion and say yes an extension for 1 more year only, and that say £20 Billion has to be paid upfront.
It is time to make the pips squeak.

DGRossetti Thu 20-Jun-19 09:33:31

We have to remember the Eu commission all changes November 1st. The current incumbents may not be able to offer an extension anyway ...

Bearing in mind the UK was specifically told not to waste the April-October extensions pissing around with internal politics, it's also hard to see why the EU would bother considering it in the first place. Looks like we all might suffer so the Tories can have their pillow fight.

1tisILeClerc Thu 20-Jun-19 09:31:11

Much that remain is the 'sensible' thing to do, I feel that the UK needs to leave to get it's unrealistic 'superiority complex' out of it's system.
Having a vast Empire 150+ years ago by a process of murder and exploitation has ingrained a 'bad attitude' and it has not learned to integrate properly with others and the failings of previous governments to address issues in a responsible manner is coming home to roost.
The fact that all 4 of the PM 'hopefuls' are still lying to the world, even though many things are being called out as lies but they are still repeating them suggests to me that the UK needs to leave.
It is of course a tragedy as many senior Civil Servants have the depth of knowledge and diplomacy but they are being ignored.

SegregateMumBev Thu 20-Jun-19 09:08:50

Is Johnson maverick enough to revoke A50 at some point (late in the afternoon on October 30th perhaps)? Believing in his narcissistic way that the people love him for who he is, and therefore he can do whatever the heck he feels like.

lljkk Wed 19-Jun-19 21:50:27

I imagine BJ will have to tell country in late October that he is asking EU for another extension after all. The truly interesting question is... will EU agree to extension? Macron will argue hard why EU shouldn't agree to it. I think more tolerant voices will prevail & UK will get extension.. But maybe not. And how long for? I could imagine EU extending for a fixed 5-10 yrs with agreement from UK to the next 5-10 yr spending plan.

In meantime, BxP MEPs will get lots of publicity for being vandals in EU Parliament.

Could be very rocky GE campaign in 2020.

noodlenosefraggle Wed 19-Jun-19 17:34:21

He was talking about GATT 22 terms. they only apply if the parties are nearing a trade deal but just need a bit more time to sort out the ins and outs. We wont be there on 31st October. We will crash out on WTO rules. Even Boris isn't stupid enough to let that happen because, as Jeremy Hunt pointed out, the 40% tariffs the EU have will kill UK farming stone dead. Unless that's what Boris' intention is all along, so he can walk a trade deal with the US which will have to include agriculture. Its one of the reasons my family decided to go vegetarian last month.

BackInTime Wed 19-Jun-19 17:30:54

I think you are right OP. There is no reasoning with those that are willing to risk the breakup of the union and economic catastrophe to deliver Brexit. The only way through now is to let Boris mess it up and hope that perhaps we can pick up the pieces and move on.

noodlenosefraggle Wed 19-Jun-19 17:29:58

To be honest, I think whoever wins this time round, it doesnt really matter what they say. They will die on the hill of Brexit, just like the others. They could promise the moon on a stick, but when they cant get us out of Europe, they will be gone before they can do anything. That's why I don't really care whether Boris gets in. It will kill him off once and for all.

DGRossetti Wed 19-Jun-19 17:25:37

I for one was always willing to listen to leavers and always respectful.

I'd like to think I was. Right up till a vacuous soundbite was provided instead of the specific reply requested. At which point I drew my conclusions about the merits of further debates accordingly.

I've also noted how it seems that Remainers get put to the proof for every assertion (and then rubbished) but Leavers seem to be allowed to spout any old tosh without fear of challenge.

Songsofexperience Wed 19-Jun-19 17:19:54

I for one was always willing to listen to leavers and always respectful.
Supporting no deal deserves no such respect.

DGRossetti Wed 19-Jun-19 17:17:19

What makes you think Boris won't be able to deliver Brexit? If he does nothing at all we will automatically have no deal Brexit on 31 Oct. Even if parliament says they don't want it. It is the effect of getting to 31 Oct with no deal and no extension.

But is that "Brexit" or merely the beginning of Brexit ? So we're out. Whoopee do. Now what ? How do we replace all the deals we currently trade under and lose when we leave ? How do we sort out the outstanding debt to the EU ? What happens to EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens in the EU ?

Any one of those questions has a myriad of possible answers. They all need answering - and pronto.

No deal is most emphatically not "Brexit". Moreover, it's certainly not the Brexit Boris promised us before - and after - the referendum when he said that there was no danger of the UK leaving with no deal.

Of course he's entitled to change his mind over that. But then we all are, aren't we ?

As a remainer, I would view a no-deal Brexit as a total failure of the entire Leave campaign and it's ragtag leaders. Whether the electorate does is another matter. It all depends quite how bad the no deal experience is, really.

1tisILeClerc Wed 19-Jun-19 17:16:17

Of course declaring the UK is leaving is only the start. No prime minister in the world would want to be in the position the UK PM will be in, with the exceptions of maybe N Korea and similar 'forward looking' democracies.

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in