Westministenders. Boris and co learn the basics - and limits - of British sovereignty and democracy.

[RedToothBrush]

There is a plan.

It is not a very good one, but May says she has a plan.

As May declared a revolution and set out her vision for a Britain ‘open’ for free trade and hard working people she managed to further drive in the wedge of division into a society which needed measured and sensitive handling.

Her speech was met, with much derision and horror both here and abroad. Even UKIP voices say the Conservatives went too far.

Brexit began to take shape. It appeared hard and fast. Without the consent of parliament. It was to be run by the executive alone. As the ex-Polish Foreign Minister points out, the shape of it decided because it was viewed as the ‘easiest’ option. Not the one in the best interests of the country. Leaving the EU has become indistinguishable to the Single Market. We are told by Mr Davis that there is no down side to this.

Then something else began to happen and the plan is beginning to not look so clever…

The pound plunged.

Mr Hammond, who has seemed to have resisted the urge to take the hallucinatory drugs being handed out in vast quantities around the Cabinet Table, came out saying that we must consider the economic reality of Brexit.

It was followed by a leaked paper that put the cost of Hard Brexit at between £38bn and £66bn a year. Our EU membership cost £8bn last year. Where are those NHS buses now?

The government response? Oh that was George. He just made it up for ‘Project Fear’. Or something to that effect.

The government on the one hand were saying how great Brexit will be, yet were not prepared to make the case in parliament. The Times editorial came out as categorically for the Single Market. Even the Sun on Sunday editorial spoke up for the Single Market (though was still in the land of cake wanting immigration control too).

David Davis took to the Commons to answer questions and was met with a chorus of rising alarm. Whilst he confirmed that the majority of EU citizens here do have their right to remain here as being their legal entitlement, it does not guarantee their rights under this. He echoed the language of the citizen of nowhere in May’s speech and, perhaps can be seen to make, the stark message that you should consider taking on British Citizenship.

Parliament has started to wake up to what is at stake. It is not just whether we stay in the EU or not, but Brexit presents a challenge to democratic processes and threatens to bypass the checks and balances to power that parliament is supposed to provide. It is a threat to our international reputation as a champion of liberal values and democratic stature. It is a threat to our economic security. It is a threat to our diplomatic relations, with the reckless comments and language coming from some. .

The stirrings of rebellion and a credible opposition come from a variety of quarters. From both leavers and remainers alike. From every party including the governments. Initially the government refused to give, so Labour announced an opposition debate on transparency of Brexit and it all started to fall apart. Faced with a vote they could not get enough support to win they made an apparent U-Turn and agreed to parliamentary scrutiny of the government’s position ahead of a50 within certain limits.

Keir Starmer, making the point that Human Rights Lawyers are not to be messed with, has written 170 questions, one for every day before the end of March when a50 is due to be triggered, for Davis to respond to.

However, the agreement to this debate on negotiations is none binding and there is no date for it as yet. The government must not be allowed to pay lip service to rebels. They must be held to this reversal.

Today’s opposition debate seems to suggest that the government definition of scrutiny is wheeling out David Davies and get him to waffle a lot and not say anything. This has gone down like a lead balloon. The government can not maintain this. Something will give. He has still refused to release a green or white paper which many expected.

May’s choice will be blunt. She either keeps pretending Santa is real and can deliver the pony whilst losing the house in the process or she owns up to the looming cold hard truth of reality.

May might be fully committed to taking us off the cliff top no matter what but she’s going to have to fight to get there.

In the best interests of the country the pressure must be kept up. There must be resistance to the ‘Little England’ mentality and orders by the Mail and the Express to silence those unpatriotic ‘agents of Brussels’ who are raising legitimate concerns that need to be considered as part of the process.

Its either this or we will have to rely on the proposed new Royal Yacht to send Kate off round the world begging for trade deals “to once again project the prestige of this nation across the globe” as Mr Gove says. Prestige we still had before the referendum was announced.

I don't think I have ever said anything of the sort. My preferred option would be that we forget about the EU entirely and concentrate on the problems you have just identified. The EU is absolutely not causing those problems. In my opinion conservative and coalition policies have exacerbated them horribly. Leaving the EU will do a lot to worsen and entrench those problems, making us poorer and more insular. I don't want anyone to suffer, actually, and I believe Brexit will bring nothing but suffering.

Muppet, who wouldn't be? Better than a Going to Hell in a Handcart Club.

Again, Cecile, apologies if unclear, last paras were not directed at you personally.

BoredofBrexit, it's quite possible that you're right in your picture of what might happen.

You can't really blame people, though, for not being reassured by lots of very big 'ifs', and rather a lot of 'perhaps' and 'hope'.

Particularly given the very large likelihood of a lengthy period in power for the Conservatives, and the vanishingly small likelihood of them doing anything meaningful to build schools or create (secure, well-paid) jobs (and you forgot the housing situation).

I wonder if there's a more psycho-societal dimension to this debate ?

Being only half English, I grew up with a foreigners view of England to "keep it real", so consequently am happy (unlike my DM) to accept that the world does not revolve around London - let alone England. I have no illusions about the UKs place -or otherwise - in the world. However, the Farages, Johnsons and Goves appear to have swallowed the "Victorians guide to the world" (a slim pamphlet, naturally) and got people to sign up to it.

Now it's time for a reality check, and it seems that despite Brexit, the world - rather annoyingly - is still turning.

The reason I mention it, is being surrounded by a bunch of Brexiters on steroids, it seems their entire view of the situation is that "that Europe" will have to kow tow. Not because of any overwhelming political, financial, or diplomatic reasons. But - simples - because we're British.

As my American relatives have commented ... "Brexit ? Is that in Cornwall ?".

(Actually I made that up. What they did say was that it seemed strange the UK thinks it can put itself ahead of any queue where the EU also queues).

Being born pre-1973, my DF sagely registered me and my siblings as Italian citizens. When I understood what this meant, I asked why, and he commented that much as he loved my Mum, he could never trust the English. (Italians have a funny relationship with the other parts of the UK - growing up we knew loads of Scottish, Irish and Welsh friends who were all 2nd, 3rd generation immigrants).

Bored, you came here saying YOU knew more and it was 'Simples'. I hardly think you are in the position to start going on about who knows more when you made that accusation yourself.

Personally the 'Hard Brexit' or 'No Brexit' from Tusk, I believe is about the inability of the EU to agree deals rather than a political position on negotiations. As the current situation with CETA seems to indicate. If CETA fails then the chances of a Brexit deal narrow dramatically. The Hard Brexit he refers to in this case, is the one where there simply is no deal - a chaotic Hard Brexit - and therefore would mean a hard border in NI and queues at Dover as we simply don't have the time to recruit much less train people.

I also think that in that speech he was saying that one of the reasons for this, was the tone the UK was taking with its EU partners and how it was coming across as fascist and this was at odds with the core values of the EU. Such an approach means that freedom of movement will be regarded by the EU as a red line that they are even less willing to compromise or make concessions about. The references to the 1930s throughout his speech were extremely extensive yet for the most part were largely ignored by the media in favour of cake and hard/no Brexit.

I also got the impression that he was trying to lower expectations about what a deal could look like - given the wild promises that our government have made - and try and focus the UK to be more realistic about what can be achieved than the noises coming out of the mouths of Davis, Johnson and Fox.

May has made promises to Nissan which frankly she isn't able to make as she's not in the position to. She can only keep them if the EU agree to a transitional deal (which is likely to last years - certainly more than the 1 - 2 I've seen quoted and even this will not go down well with a lot of Brexit voters) or if they don't agree to this - we stay in the EU.

There is a realistic possibility in the situation where Hard Brexit (as in no deal) is looking inevitable, that Nissan would have no other option but to reconsider its position in the UK due to its complex supply chain.

This would be diplomatically a nightmare for May and ruin any chance of a trade with Japan and of course would devastate Sunderland and probably would lead to riots.

I personally think that Tusk's message is simply one that the UK needs to get a lot more honest about the situation and to stop acting like a bunch of dickheads.

Though I'm sure that others will interpret it completely differently, I'm led to believe that Tusk is regarded as a pragmatist rather than an EU ideologist. I was frustrated by the reporting of the speech in the UK media as I think it missed huge points and context.

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam
in Brussels Lab leader @jeremycorbyn has just told me he is inviting some European leaders for a Brexit summit in February, weeks before a50 & Corbyn tells me he detected from the four EU PMs he met in Brussels that they are "more than a bit disappointed" "that British government has been very much less than clear with them about what Brexit actually means"

Long and short - we need to get our act together, present a rough idea of what we want (which is not giving away our position - its presenting our case so that everything they can do to meet it can be done).

www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/phil-hogan-only-no-brexit-gives-us-irish-border-as-is-now-1.2836906
Phil Hogan: Only ‘no Brexit’ gives us Irish Border as is now
Agriculture Commissioner spells out potential Brexit issues to Oireachtas committee

It was obvious, he continued, that Brexit concerned Ireland almost as much as the UK, and he predicted that conversations between Dublin and Brussels would be almost as significant as those between London and Brussels.

No, no problem Bored. I just get quite upset about people lumping other people together in a group of sixteen or seventeen million and assigning characteristics to the lot of them, or making them responsible for something one person has said or promised. For example, I think many of those who are less well off and who also voted leave will suffer badly for it, and not in a way they earned or asked for.

This would be diplomatically a nightmare for May and ruin any chance of a trade with Japan and of course would devastate Sunderland and probably would lead to riots.

If the 1980s have taught us one thing, it's that the Tories modus operandi in these situations is (a) deploy overwhelming force against the slightest whiff of protest, and (b) not give a shit about anywhere north of Watford. I believe it's called "channelling Churchill".

I want to see Nissan sue the British govt for billions.

Why would there be riots if Nissan left? The people of Sunderland knew what they were doing.

Sorry for any vagueness, but I'm sure there is a psychological phenomenon about those who are fortunate falsely assuming they got there by virtue of their own actions and therefore assuming that the less fortunate must be inferior. I think that is there in that British attitude and also the whole philosophy of the conservatives, when really it is historical accident.

I want to see Nissan sue the British govt for billions.

Even if the government lost, they can just change the law retrospectively. It's not like they haven't been practising.

Party: Then we should hold the Conservatives accountable and pressurise them to address these issues. (On a side note Osborne is positioning for a leadership bid so there will be calls for assistance for the north and other similar areas.)
Cecile, in a financial sense the less well off may - in fact will suffer in the short term. But they knew and still voted, because the need for their plight to be heard, or to feel that for once they were of equal standing to others, this was visceral, stronger than their fear of hardship. They were already suffering. Someone said 'I have nothing, all I have is my life and I value my life more than my money'.

Sorry for any vagueness, but I'm sure there is a psychological phenomenon about those who are fortunate falsely assuming they got there by virtue of their own actions and therefore assuming that the less fortunate must be inferior.

Is that the Victorian guide to life, page 1 ? At least they then mitigated it by making it a moral duty to "help others" if you were lucky enough - although ensuring women could do little else in society probably had an effect too.

Oops, meant PATTY

Has anyone explained why Sunderland voted Leave? I find it fascinating, any theories?

many Leave votes were protest votes at inequality and so on. If, during the period when negotiations are taking place, efforts were made to look at the causes and remedy same, domestically, I think it would take the heat out an inflammable situation and thereby perhaps widen the (acceptable to the uk voters) range of options at our disposal re leaving. If a more equitable uk was doing well, schools were being built, jobs created, who would care about eu fees or immigration? That is the answer, not to say 'you idiots, you deserve to suffer' and generally talk the country down. We should be hoping that we an cut new trade deals - doesn't mean we have to give up the ones we already have (if we remain in SM), but all we hear is sneering about biscuits. Sigh.

In other words you're admitting that many Leave voters, it's impossible to establish the true proportion, voted out of the EU for reasons that are nothing to do with the EU.

Which is one of the many reasons that this vote should never have been put to the public: some people are not intelligent enough to vote on the actual issues, or even understand them.

I don't disagree that this vote is the result of inequality to which Osborne's disastrous austerity policies contributed, but all those people who voted Leave on that score will be incomparably worse off after Brexit.

As far as trade deals are concerned it is imbecilic to 'hope' for something rather than acquainting yourself with the reality of the options available.

Bored If, during the period when negotiations are taking place, efforts were made to look at the causes and remedy same, domestically, I think it would take the heat out an inflammable situation and thereby perhaps widen the (acceptable to the uk voters) range of options at our disposal re leaving. If a more equitable uk was doing well, schools were being built, jobs created, who would care about eu fees or immigration?

If you regard taking measures to create new schools in order to help tackle inequality as important why did you ignore my earlier point that the proposal to allow those places to be provided by Grammar and Faith Schools signalled that TM has no intention of tackling that issue, but will continue to pander to the Tory vote. Different faces, same elite.......

bored so you are suggesting that the protest vote for Leave has a lot to do with the neglectful policies of successive (mainly Tory) governments through the decades? Si it's not much to do with evil Brussels then? Maybe if we start accepting that protest as what it was, we can all agree that the current development towards even more pain is not very wise?

Haven't read the full thread for two days now but I came back here to say that I watched Hypernormalisation by Adam Curtis for which some posters recommended here and watched themselves. I basically stopped watching it after Curtis implied that Khomeini legitimised suicide bombing in Islam. For all the idiotic things the mental mullahs have done so far, this is a obviously wrong "fact" in there. I couldn't figure what to trust and what not to trust in there after that.

jaws Bloody Southerners, metropolitan elite, EU, immigrants, globalisation. It all amounts to the same thing if you live in a deprived area with no job opportunities, shit schools, shit housing etc. Actually I have noticed it amounts to the same thing even if you have a comfortable life in a beautiful part of the north. Even those in work rarely appreciate the connect between the larger picture and how it affects e.g. Nissans business strategy and their actual jobs. Why would you if you have never had to think about it. Business Strategy and politics were not on the curriculum of any school I attended?

I speak as a northerner but also somebody who has had to manage frontline staff in the North, and London come to that, and be involved in trade union negotiations (through admittedly the trade union reps were often higher calibre than their first line supervisors).

rondo that's very interesting first hand information. It also brings to mind that the curriculum in European education teaches children about the EU and its place in history, also how it directly affects areas such as environment protection. This has not happened in UK, the only everyday mention of the EU has been from the relentless propaganda from the Mail, Express and later UKIP, who have made a huge point of reaching those communities. These papers and UKIP then placed their hatred of EU in the same discourse as mistrust of Londoners and metropolitan ideas which developed into the "citizens of the world"/"metropolitan intelligentsia" discourse we saw during the Leave campaign and then the Tory conference.

I started watching it, Valentine but there were so many psychedelic flashy bits and flickery backgrounds it gave me a migraine so I had to stop. I had only got to the start of the Khomeini bits.

The EU has tried to provide information in local areas in the UK as to its contributed - but it has resulted in tabloids screaming 'EU propaganda' Brainwashing our kids etc'.

I couldn't figure what to trust and what not to trust in there after that.

I think some of Curtis's "facts" are questionable. I don't think it takes away though. Part of the point is that he asks you to think critically and challenge what you have been told and accept as "fact". That's the thing with post-facts: you've got to the point where you don't know what to believe and not believe and you question the source from which it comes from as being trustworthy or not.

I don't take Curtis as gospel. Nor should you. Its more about the mere fact that he does challenge traditional thinking in such a plausible way that people might believe it.

I take it more as a way of illustrating multiple truths. I think he does fail at certain points and falls foul of his own criticisms about narratives.

That said I think the criticism is fair point. There were things in there I thought 'hmm' not sure about that.

As is criticism of the flashing bits (incidentally this is a type of editing deliberately used to make you feel uncomfortable and find it jarring to help with the story it tells. Giving you migraines might not be quite what was intended but its not far from it either.)

I think if we're honest a remain campaign that included both Heseltine and supposedly Corbyn hadn't got all its ducks in a row either.

Nobody really knows what anyone was voting for because 'leave the EU' is such an ill defined proposition.