AIBU to think the country needs some consensus politics on Brexit?
MakingMerry · 13/06/2017 20:46
… Or do you want Brexit only to be negotiated by your preferred party?
So, the clock is ticking on Art 50. It looks as though Theresa May will enter into an arrangement with the DUP and (implications for the peace process aside) will be left with a slender majority of 13. Both main parties have pledged to deliver Brexit, but without an overall majority the Conservative’s manifesto lacks a mandate and what Brexit might look like is, once again, wide open.
Is now the time for politicians to consider putting forward a cross-party group to negotiate Brexit, so that decisions are not held up in Parliament by the necessity to secure every possible vote, and to give the Brexit agreement greater legitimacy and public buy in? Neither the hard right, nor the hard left, are likely to want a consensus approach, but most voters aren’t hard right or hard left.
AIBU to think this could work, and would be sensible given the very tight Brexit deadline, and the importance of the agreement to the country as a whole? Or am I living in lala land because consensus politics do not work in the UK, as the fate of the LibDems shows?
PaintingByNumbers · 13/06/2017 20:55
the uk doesnt agree on it though
tories got us into this, let them fuck it up some more, its their mess. it always gets blamed on someone else eg lib dems in coalition, labour now for not letting tories get massive majority. they can fuck off and take responsibility for a change.
Cuppaoftea · 13/06/2017 21:28
This whole dialogue around 'Soft Brexit' and 'Hard Brexit' has been created by Remainers but I agree with David Davis in not recognising the terms. Leave means leave, staying in the single market while ending FOM isn't on the table in Brussels and Leave won largely due to immigration concerns as well as money and law.
We need to negotiate what happens to EU citizens already here, how much money (!) we pay on leaving and then hopefully a trade deal.
Labour are in disarray over Brexit post election. They need to come to a consensus on their policy so they can provide effective Opposition when it comes to all the new domestic laws that will need to be passed once we leave. That is the time I think a cross party debate will be useful.
We've had the referendum, we've had the General Election. Time to get on with leaving as swiftly as possible.
MakingMerry · 13/06/2017 21:32
scary I agree we won't get a consensus which will satisfy all the electorate, but the UK is not going to get something which satisfies all the electorate anyway, because the agreement has to be ratified by all 27 European states. The UK will have a starting position, but where that ends up who knows.
Painting I take the point, but I think no deal is worse than a bad deal. If we end up there in twenty month's time I think it's a triple lose. The Conservatives lose, undoubtedly, but the electorate also loses, and the Labour party, while being able to say 'we didn't cause this' will still, as a political party, have to operate in the aftermath, which will continue for a long time. And as always with these events, like the 2008 financial crash, it's the most vulnerable members of society who take the brunt.
I know what Labour want, I think. Right now they want another GE and to deliver Brexit themselves. But no matter what the party in power, this seems big enough to me to require a cross-party team.
BurnTheBlackSuit · 13/06/2017 21:36
I would like to see a "all party Brexit committee" negotiating - including all the nations as well. This is far too an important issue to involve squabbling. We're leaving - let's pull together and make the best of it as it's in all our interests.
However, I do think that's a fantasy.
MiraiDevant · 13/06/2017 21:42
I agree that we want consensus.
On the surface it appears that we are divided more or less 50/50 and the election exacerbated that. In reality it is a spectrum. Some Tories are quite liberal and centrist - especially the younger ones, some are more old-guard but experienced. Same with Labour; there is a real range. Some Leavers voted for sound economic/legal reasons, some Remainers were anti-immigration but worried about their jobs if we left.
A cross-party, consensus-based negotiating team would surely benefit everyone and do much to ease this Them and Us mentality. I have already written to my MP about this.
GraceGrape · 13/06/2017 21:43
I like the idea of more consensual politics, but the trouble is, nobody really knows what the electorate wants. Polling about Brexit, unreliable anyway, has had mixed results. The only thing that might settle it is if another referendum.was held on whether or not people want to remain in the single Market. And even then it would only be valid if a significant enough proportion of the electorate voted one way or the other.
One advantage I can see of a cross-party approach is that it would take some of the electioneering out of the debate. The Tories were clearly going for a hard Brexit because their aim was to woo the UKIP vote, rather than doing what was best for the country. The same could be said for Labour's lack of opposition.
If Brexit was negotiated across party, no one party would be held responsible for the outcome.
Biscuitsneeded · 13/06/2017 22:08
Yes, ideally that would be best. But I can't see them doing it. I feel thoroughly depressed about the whole thing. I don't know a soul in real life who thinks Brexit should be happening, and yet happening it is, and in the hands of the most untrustworthy, self-serving, duplicitous and incompetent bunch of sorry excuses for elected representatives. They should at least be prepared to listen to the more reasonable members of their own party even if they haven't got the balls to involve other parties. Otherwise we are monumentally fucked and will be an international laughing stock (a very poor one at that) for decades to come.
BrexitSucks · 13/06/2017 22:28
Interesting question... the earliest reference I can find to "Soft Brexit" is in the EU Observer, April 2015.
Hard Brexit was common parlance in many publications in December 2015, but hard to find specific dated mention of that phrase before.
What a disaster. Triggering Article 50 & then wasting 8 weeks with a pointless election. ARRRGGGGHHHHHH.
scaryteacher · 13/06/2017 22:28
making I think I read that the terms of the Brexit deal was now to be done via QMV fullfact.org/europe/how-eu-works-leaving-eu/ so, that may not be the case. See also the Guardian article below on that.
FlourishingMrs · 13/06/2017 22:37
Funny how some people who claim to like democracy have trouble accepting results.
Brexit won, labour lost so tory's should crack on with Brexit. I don't think cross party politicking is the answer. Sounds like public sector steering groups for this that and the other and nothing gets done.
Let's get on with it.
BrexitSucks · 13/06/2017 22:46
Earliest mention of "hard Brexit" that I can find is an Edinburgh commercial law firm, blog entries. 29 November 2015.
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.