Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Westministenders. Boris worries about the land of his birth and simply wonders, what the hell next!?

999 replies

RedToothBrush · 11/11/2016 21:26

Of all the Westministers intro I’ve done to date, I think this has been the hardest to write.

My first thought is where on earth to start, and then where to stop with how Trump’s victory affects us in the UK. It completely changes international relations. The political fall out is going to be considerable and potentially radioactive in its toxicity.

To hardened Brexiteers, America falling to Trump represents the domino effect in progress. It will embolden them. And the fear is that on 4th December both Italy and Austria could fall next as they respectively, face a referendum and a re-run of the presidential election.

And then there’s France…

All of this is a threat to the EU. It just leaves everyone, including the UK asking what next? And what of our relationship with the US? Who knows? It makes it look around and say, can we rely on the US, and without the US surely we have no choice but to grow closer to the EU. Perhaps there is a role for us in-between but there really are no guarantees and do we want to make that choice?

The suggestion is that May has no love for Trump. And whilst the hard right might harbour fantasies about becoming the 51st State, which seem to be led by Farage himself, this exposes the one red line that could bring the fury of the country down on the government to its extinction. The NHS. Its not for sale. Its not to be subject to a trade deal.

In a curious turn of events, rumours grow that the government will contend at the Supreme Court that a50 CAN be reversed afterall. Davis had personally been responsible for the original line that its not reversible. This was a political decision to tie us into leaving, and show intent and seriousness to Leavers. Yet it was always a crazy one that is not in the national interest.

Going back on this totally changes the game.

It would be a move that will go down well with Remainers and Liberal Leavers but will enrage the hardliners especially if the ECJ is part of this new tact.

It off loads a pile of risk and it is the prudent and sensible approach. It is much needed to protect the best interests of the country overall. Its also that magic ‘Get Out of Jail Free Card’ for that promised Nissan deal.

The change of tact would also help to appease MPs and much opposition to Brexit. And in doing so, also lessens the chances of a HoC rebellion against May and also reduces the chances of an early election, thus is perhaps a more stabilising way forward. It encourages negotiation of a good deal that other parties and rebels will also find agreeable rather than them feeling like they are being held to ransom on.

It would almost certainly delay things and might interfere with May’s precious timetable.

But there’s France… and the Presidential elections are in April/May

Do we really want to trigger article 50, if post Trump, the domino really is likely to fall there too and Le Pen wins the Presidency? There is suddenly a potential ally for major EU reform. Or even its collapse. Now is not the time to do something rash and drastic but to hold our nerve just a little longer.

It makes sense to everyone to hang fire and delay. If only briefly to see what now happens.

There are dangers in doing this though. The prospect of the ECJ being involved in a case which is in essence about our Constitution, is not only embarrassing but could be explosive. It will raise fears of leavers that Brexit will not happen. It will play to the extremes and the agenda of UKIP. It exposes judges to the press and criticism that they are activists and also trying to stop Brexit. Though Gove seems to have changed his tune and is defending them rather more than he was previously...

With tensions running high will Farage get his 100,000 march? Maybe, maybe not. Only time will tell on that one. He is trying to win through intimidation though, and that makes people fear him if we don’t do his bidding and what’s happening over in the States only emboldens him and makes others fear him more. He is divisive and never will be able to serve the national interest, because of it no matter how honest his delusions of being an ambassador to Trump are.

It just adds to the growing sense of helplessness and growing question of whether the proud tradition of British liberalism can even survive? It becomes appears to many this is ultimately the goal of Mr Farage – and not the EU. The EU is just a protector of it.

Well I don’t believe that Farage does have it all his way and has the monopoly on people power, nor a connection to the public that no one else has.

One of the themes developing on twitter, is one about passion, hope and a new sense of purpose. One to defend British values and not become like Trumpland. We have a warning and an example of how it really could be worse and it’s not a pretty sight.

I remember during the referendum one poster unsure of how to vote, asking simply:
“I don't want to spoil my vote. I want to vote, and vote with conviction”.

It was a question I found difficult to answer at the time. To me it highlighted how much people did want something to believe in and to not having that. We must start to build on that, and provide that alternative.

But I do believe those things to believe in were there all along. The NHS and our open democracy, whatever the flaws and imperfections of our institutions they have endured and survived for a reason – and not just for the benefit of the ‘elite’.

We just took them for granted, and now we are going to have to stand up and make sure people know that by speaking out, and know that while moderates might have it in their nature to compromise there are also some things we just can not loose in the process. We must not be drawn into a battle along violent lines as it will be used against those who do. We can’t loose our soul in trying to defend what is precious, nor should we try and reassure ourselves by finding justification for things that can not and should not be justified.

The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius wrote in notes to himself;

"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.”

I think that message rings true now both for Leave and Remain supporters alike. You might have made a decision on 23rd June but you still have other choices to make now.

Choose to stay sane.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
RedToothBrush · 12/11/2016 18:57

Nerdy Election Fact of the Day:

James Pethokoukis ‏@JimPethokoukis
Some eye-popping numbers on Clinton's growing popular vote lead, via at @TheAtlantic

"We probably have about 7 million votes left to count," said David Wasserman, an editor at Cook Political Report who is tracking turnout. "A majority of them are on the coasts, in New York, California and Washington. She should be able to win those votes, probably 2 - 1." By mid-December when the Electoral College officially casts its ballots, Wasserman estimates that Clinton could be ahead by 2 percentage points in the popular vote.
She's likely to be a couple of million votes up on Trump.

And some stuff on a new poll on Corbyn versus May and public opinion on Trump

www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/11/12/comres-indysmirror-poll-finds-sharp-rise-in-the-economic-trust-lead-for-mayhamond-over-corbynmcdonnell/

OP posts:
merrymouse · 12/11/2016 19:25

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/us-election-hillary-clinton-more-votes-popular-vote-any-candidate-barack-obama-donald-trump-a7413596.html

More on the popular vote.

Presumably the states that voted for Hillary really voted for Hillary.

I wonder how that will play out over the next 4 years.

Ohchristmastreeohchristmastree · 12/11/2016 19:51

Is the baby formula thing part of the WHO and UNICEF 'baby friendly initiative'?

TheNorthRemembers · 12/11/2016 20:14

The NAFTA thing is very interesting, and whether we need to make a choice between the EU and the US trade agreement.

My entire US politics knowledge is based on House of Cards and other seminal TV work, so please bear with me. On TV the presidents always have trouble building coalitions and doing deals to have their ideas passed. 99% of the negotiations are about local projects (pork) and personal ambition, so it is not even about ideas or party politics. Is this not really the case in real life? Or how will Trump overcome this straight away even if the the Republicans hold both houses?

twofingerstoGideon · 12/11/2016 20:38

.

StripeyMonkey1 · 12/11/2016 20:45

Headline in the Independent today reads Theresa May could try to overturn Brexit court ruling by claiming Article 50 won't affect UK citizens' rights

There isn't much else in terms of content in the article which I presume is because the government lawyers haven't released the basis for this argument yet. I do wonder though, whether they will be saying anything substantively new, as I can't believe this point wasn't raised before the High Court.

Of course, if this argument works for leaving the EU, then it is also likely to work for the European Convention of Human Rights. How convenient (and undemocratic) would it be for the government to be able to take us out of the ECHR without consulting parliament.

RedToothBrush · 12/11/2016 20:53

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prime-minister-theresa-set-go-9249312
Prime Minister Theresa May set to go to war with the Queen as she axes 7 of Her Majesty's royal charters

The attempted power grab continues.

Science being lined up for political interference.

Theresa May faces a showdown with the Queen – over scrapping ­seven of Her Majesty’s royal charters.

The PM plans to take them away from the UK’s research councils, which invest £3billion a year so university science teams can make ground-breaking discoveries.

^The royal charters guarantee that scientists are independent of the Government and can carry out whatever research they choose.
They are now concerned they will lose that freedom and might be subjected to political interference.^

This is HUGE.

Politics in science... no problems there historically...

Or how will Trump overcome this straight away even if the the Republicans hold both houses?
I'm led to believe that the President has the power to simply rip up trade treaties as they see fit. I'm not sure how the reverse is true, but I would assume that if he can rip them up without consultation, he probably has significant power to do the reverse.

OP posts:
Ohchristmastreeohchristmastree · 12/11/2016 21:04

Last night this thread drifted towards talking about what kind of peaceful protest could be done to

How about a 'You can't have your cake and eat it peaceful protest'

On the weekend before the court hearing (so not to directly go up against Farages lot). People gather with a small cake/cupcake each. (Flask of tea optional). For a time everybody eats cake with placards for pro EU/ allowing parliament to vote on article 50 etc. We all leave having eaten our cake.

  1. Proves the point that you can't have your cake and eat it. Which has been a longstanding argument for remaining in the EU.
  2. It is very Peaceful thing to do.
  3. It is very British.
  4. Hopefully it would remain very peaceful. You'd hope no rogue BNP supporters would start on someone drinking tea and eating cake.

How about it?

TheNorthRemembers · 12/11/2016 21:29

The royal charters thing is not that surprising, though alarming. There were lots of restrictions what and when you can publish from government funding. They clearly do not believe in freedom of thought.

I love the cake eating protest.

lalalonglegs · 12/11/2016 21:36

The scientific research community is a baffling target for May. Even if she had legitimate reasons for removing the Royal Charters (I can't think of any but I don't know much about them), she must know that it would look so bad to do that.

Love the cake protest, christmastree

HummusForBreakfast · 12/11/2016 21:43

TM is a small dictator in making.
When are people going to wake up to that and stop accepting everything wo blinking???

Peregrina · 12/11/2016 21:47

The PM plans to take them away from the UK’s research councils, which invest £3billion a year so university science teams can make ground-breaking discoveries.

I wonder how much power the Queen really does have in this. I remember one year in her Christmas Speech she made what was quite a pointed comment about being Queen of a United Kingdom.

What on earth has Theresa May got against scientific research? She's happy to let Universities bleed staff, because they are from other EU countries, despite being both a high earning and prestigious sector for the UK. What sort of UK does she think will be open for business? I didn't like Thatcher, Blair or Cameron, but in her few months in office I have begun to loathe and detest Theresa May.

TheNorthRemembers · 12/11/2016 21:48

Farage in Trump Tower. For all we know he went to pick up a cup of coffee.

Boredofbrexit · 12/11/2016 21:49

Following on from Stripeys post, I've been thinking about the a50 situation. What do you think of this reasoning?

If reversible it can be argued that it doesn't remove rights so can go through by RP. This has obvious initial advantages but means the 'door isn't shut', its less final and open to challenges until the point where a deal is agreed, arising from say, changes in the circumstances or opinion of the EU or UK. The government may wish to avoid this. From the point of negotiations with the EU, if they are minded to cut a deal, they might prefer if it was reversible.

However, if the UK governments intention - as yet undeclared - is really for a hard - or rather, a complete - exit, it is preferable to regard the a50 as irreversible, psychologically, as once its served there is no way back. And, if no deal can be reached they can walk away and say 'well, we tried'. They might prefer this approach as it puts the EU under pressure of time to do a deal - assuming they do (open to debate!) but not such a good position for the UK if they approach as 'supplicant'.

mathanxiety · 12/11/2016 21:50

Whatwouldrondo - indeed, the label 'hispanic' is flawed. www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/06/15/is-being-hispanic-a-matter-of-race-ethnicity-or-both/ - look at the comments too.

I have a lot of South American relatives thanks to the fact that my great grandparents on my dad's side emigrated from Ireland to Argentina. My grandmother was born there and most of her brothers and two sisters stayed there. Their descendants are spread out in Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay predominantly. The third cousins' family from South America who have made the most contact with their relatives in Ireland have heritage that includes Serbian, Irish, English and Italian.

I toyed with the idea of ticking the 'hispanic' box when filling out my census form.

Hispanic tends to be short for Mexican or Central American and it tends to assume 'poor/peasant' and also 'not integrated into the rest of society'. It ignores the variety of heritages that make up the Central and South American population.

I am not sure how my DD3's roommate identifies when census time comes around - her mother is Mexican from Mexico and her father's ancestors emigrated from Ireland.

StripeyMonkey1 · 12/11/2016 21:55

Bored - yes I agree and I think Red has said something similar too (but please let me know if I'm misrepresenting you Red!.

It would be in our interests as a country for article 50 to be reversible, and it gives us another option in our hand with the EU.

It might however not be in the interests of the hard Brexiteers for article 50 to be reversible as they want to leave the EU at all costs. The idea that anyone, be it parliament or the people, should have an opportunity to say what should happen when they know what deal is going to be on the table, is unacceptable to them.

Mistigri · 12/11/2016 21:57

Looks like the British right wing press is not going to give the pro-Trump faction in May's government an easy ride. Sunday Telegraph headline: "Trump-Putin alliance sparks diplomatic crisis".

RedToothBrush · 12/11/2016 22:07

Bored that's more or less correct and the situation we are in. However it does require a ECJ ruling to confirm that a50 is indeed reversible.

It is my opinion that is in the national interest to go down that route but politically is going to be difficult to sell going to the European Court to determine the British future to a significant percentage of Leavers as they will see it as another challenge to Brexit and might threat it ever happening.

We already have Farage planning to march on the Supreme Court as it is. Saying we need an ECJ ruling isn't going to help persuade people sympathetic to Farage's point on this. It is one reason why the proposed march is really unhelpful. If people do want to protest, I think that their right but I think the target and the reasoning is off and doesn't consider how the Supreme Court action could in fact, be to everyone's benefit even if it is a bitter pill to swallow.

I thought this before Trump, but I think the case for doing this has a lot more weight now.

If nothing else a delay whilst we seek a referral probably will push a50 to after the French Presidential Election, and I see no reason why this is a bad thing from a British point of view.

I know some will argue that means Brexit becomes an issue for the French Presidential election, but I can't see why it won't be anyway really now.

I do think that triggering a50 as early as March was always a poor decision. If its going to be done then towards the end of next year as an earliest point is a far more sensible and stabilising way to do it, even if the uncertainty is drown out further. If only for us to buy some more time to get things in place for 2 years after that.

OP posts:
merrymouse · 12/11/2016 22:08

Can't help thinking that the whole Farage thing shows just how much control the post Brexit UK has.

I'd feel a lot more comfortable on team Merkhel than team Trump.

Peregrina · 12/11/2016 22:15

I can't for the life of me see why Brexiteers want the job to be rushed, and don't want it to be worked through properly. Better to have a good settlement after 4 years, rather than a bodged job which takes 20 years to sort out, I would have thought?

I can see it's different for Theresa May, she has now become totally power crazed, so she has to push it through come what may. If it's her undoing, I won't shed any tears for her.

Boredofbrexit · 12/11/2016 22:18

Peregrina, I'd offer that leavers fear that with the passage of time will come opportunity to kick leaving into the long grass. There is huge mistrust that any delay will be to facilitate efforts to change the direction of travel.

RedToothBrush · 12/11/2016 22:19

Team Merkel's hand is weakened by Trump, even if we do decide we want to stay close to the EU (whether that be in it or some kind of associate to it). The potential for a federalised Europe has gone. There may be a central core that is possible now but its unlikely.

If this was, indeed, one of the biggest fears about the EU this now no longer exists.

Things have changed. The EU will have to change and the majority know this. There will be a few who will resist as a matter of principle at least initially. The penny has to drop there about the reality of things now, in much the same way that the penny has to drop here about the reality of things.

I do think its now about what guiding principles can be retained.

As for Johnson not attending an emergency EU Trump meeting I think that was dumb. He could voice his objection publically but still go. Its not going to piss Trump off that much given the circumstance in my opinion. Instead we are once again not at the table to know what others are thinking, even if we do happen to perhaps disagree.

Its unhelpful especially given its importance relating to Brexit.

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 12/11/2016 22:25

Bored there is mistrust on both sides though.

We can not go forward like that as a nation. We need to work to rebuild that trust bit by bit. We have to start somewhere.

A delay on those terms, works for remainers and should work for moderate leavers.

If it does get kicked into the long grass, there would need to be a legitimate argument to do so. This requires a SIGNIFICANT change in public opinion. Not just a small one. But some kind of major event. I can't see that at present. It might happen under a Trump Presidency, it might not - but that's the point. We need the flexibility to be able to respond to such a situation occurring if its possible.

Right now, we are tied into a plan which lacks that pragmatism and ability to respond to potential events in the world at a very uncertain and destabilised period in history.

As I just said in previous post, one of the threats of a federal EU really has now gone with Trump's election. Its politically all but impossible. This should in some ways reassure Leavers.

OP posts:
Boredofbrexit · 12/11/2016 22:26

I think Johnson is taking the position that he'd rather not know, to avoid being implicated in anything anti-Trump that emerges, and to ally UK with US. It is a payback to the EUs snub by not inviting UK to meetings after the referendum; UK is saying - or implying, more accurately - that they have a better relationship with the US than the EU. It's psychological gamesmanship - 'look how isolated you are going to be EU, without UK you've lost your link to US'. Security and intelligence and defence-wise, that will be a concern.

Boredofbrexit · 12/11/2016 22:28

Yes, RTB, those are the facts. But I don't know what the solution might be.Sad