Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Westministenders. For God sake Boris, is that the best plan you can come up with?

967 replies

RedToothBrush · 30/11/2016 10:25

Its now five months from the referendum. Plans for leaving should be well advanced by now. Shouldn't they? We should have got past this ridiculous idea that we can have our cake and eat it. Yet the plan is a secret, well apart from when the EU leak things to the press or junior ministers let their underlings carry their notes for them.

A photo taken this week outside Downing Street, suggests that the ‘Have Cake And Eat It’ Plan really is seriously being considered by the government. This plan is 'clear' it has been spelt out many times by the government and yet no one has a fucking clue what it is apart from a car crash of utter nonsense, wishful thinking and fingers in the ears. Its so clear that Theresa May has admitted she is losing sleep over it, and has faith that God will steer us through via her moral compass (which I suspect to have been left on top of a rather large electro-magnet given her track record so far)

Still this, however, seems to be better than the ‘Fuck You’ Plan (or should that be 'Fuck EU') that is official UKIP policy and is to ignore a50 and leave the EU unilaterally. And possibly illegally, so no one will ever want to make an international agreement with the UK.

And this, is still at least better than ‘We Have No’ Plan that Labour have.

Other suggested plans are:
The ‘Lets Leave the UK and Screw Ourselves Another Way’ Plan as supported by the SNP which the majority of Scots seem to be against
The Welsh are quietly cultivating the ‘Shh Nobody Mention We Voted Leave But Are Now Going to be Difficult’ Plan as they suddenly realise they are about to be shafted financially and might lose the Welsh Assembly in the process.
NI might still go down the ‘Lets Unify Ireland and Start Another Chapter in Violence’ Plan though, the alternative might well be the ‘Lets Stay in the Union and Start Another Chapter in Violence’ Plan anyway, so they are screwed due to the immense thoughtfulness of the English.
Meanwhile the Lib Dems are all about the ‘Lets Just Not Do This and Instead Risk a Revolt’ Plan.

If anyone does actually have a coherent plan, then there are lots of parties who would love to hear from you.

Lets be honest about the secrecy though. Its not about the EU knowing our plans. They already know what all our options are, or more to the point, aren't. The government want to keep it out of parliament because they want to control it, and because they don't want the press to know. They do not want transparency, as they are so weak and so fearful that they will be shown up for what they are, even when there is no opposition.

So we are screwed. Unless somehow someone comes to their senses and puts it to the EU that a50 isn’t fit for purpose and that a new treaty must be done to respect the democratic will of the people and the EU let us go down that route (Hey didn’t I say that months ago?).

Tomorrow we have the completely pointless and costly vanity by-election for Zac Goldsmith. The referendum about Heathrow and not at all about Brexit. Latest betting 2/7 on Goldsmith and 5/2 on the Lib Dems. I think Goldsmith with his good looks will just sneak it, unless turnout is really low. But it will be close.

Sunday we have the Italian Referendum, which some have suggested would the Italian Bank Melt Down (and start of a new Eurozone Crisis) though many here say this fear is massively over stated through Brexit tinted spectacles. Sunday also sees the Austria Presidential Election Re-run with the Far Right Candidate currently looking like he has the slight edge.

A50. The Supreme Court case starts next week. Scotland say they have a veto. Wales say they are worried about the Devolution Problem. NI still might have their defeat in the High Court overturned and there is the Good Friday agreement. The Supreme Court might insist that the Great Repeal Act might need to be passed before we can invoke a50. And the plan if the government lose is merely a 3 line Bill which they want to rush through in 5 days no one would dare defy. Well except the Lib Dems are already saying they want amendments to ensure parliamentary scrutiny and what is the point of the Lords if they don't. So there is a fair old chance that if the government loses given the wider scope of the Supreme Court Case, a 3 line bill simply won’t cover everything it needs to.

We still don’t know if the ECJ might get involved. It seems the Republic of Ireland, might have a say in that too. An ECJ referral would mean a 4 to 8 month delay, even with the sensitivity and the importance of the case.

Don’t forget if you were planning on going/worried about it the 100,000 March on the Supreme Court is off. Due to not being planned in the first place although Leave.Eu will tell you different.

Speaking of the Great Repeal Act. This is supposed to be started in May. This would give it less than two years to be ready before we left the EU. Yet it has a load of hurdles to leap in its sheer complexity, and there is a real danger this will not be long enough. If not done correctly it has the potential to mean the legal system would “fall over”. This is basically the legal equivalent of when you mean yourself in a time travelling sci-fi creating a paradox which threatens the very existence of time itself.

A127. Another treaty, another challenge? Possibly, but maybe only a way to bargain for the EEA rather than something more. But it just shows the legal headache Brexit is. We still could end up in the ECJ on any number of other issues – not just a50. You know this legal headache the government is ignoring by having no lawyer in the Brexit Cabinet, and UKIP are just plan delusional about.

Anyway UKIP have a new leader. Paul Nuttalls. (sic – see Stuart Lee). He wants to privatise the NHS though he denies having said it either on camera or on his blog. Everytime anyone says ‘Paul Nuttalls to you, remember to say ‘Oh the one who wants to privatise the NHS?’ Just to make sure everyone is away that he wants to privatise the NHS. Repeat Ad nauseam. Hell this is what Labour are going to be doing, as they are bloody terrified. Why? Simple. He will, of course, be hugely popular despite this cos he’s got the right accent and says the ‘right things’. By ‘right things’ I mean cos he spouts utter bollocks. Which probably means he’s also electable seeing as utter bollocks is now political currency. Plus Labour are rather lacking in any policies, so utter bollocks policies easily fill the void.

Talking of utter bollocks, I haven’t mentioned Trump yet. The Greens have requested a recount and are supported by the Democrats, though they say they haven’t found anything dubious themselves yet. Trump says it’s a scam. Goebbels once said when telling the Big Lie accuse your opposition of what you are guilty of yourself, so I'm not betting either way given that is the political strategy Trump has employed with gusto. I dread to think of the mess that would cause if the recount came out in favour of Clinton.

So another couple of fun weeks on the cards, which will have you reaching for the gin and wondering if there is anyone left alive who actually gives a toss about what happens to real people and isn’t prepared to commit economic and democratic suicide.

Only another month to go before the 2016 Repeal Act comes into force. 2017 looks smashing.
Shamelessly stolen from David Allen Green

OP posts:
Thread gallery
17
user1471448556 · 02/12/2016 09:51

Well done to the Lib Dems for Richmond. The political landscape is shifting. At the moment, the Lib Dems are the only pro-Europe party. Remainers are being ignored by all other parties.

Peregrina · 02/12/2016 09:58

I muse over what the result would have been had the Tories put up a candidate in Richmond Park. I think the cynical stance taken by the Tory party in not fielding a candidate will have angered some.

harvestmoon32 · 02/12/2016 10:00

I think the other issue raised by this result is how remain Labour MPs are feeling this morning if their constituencies voted for Brexit. You can see why UKIP is targeting the North of England labour voters now.

Hung parliament in 2020?? Despite polls saying May has massive lead.

RTB - maybe you are right about the 3rd runway falling into the mire of the legal system. I still don't really understand why they didn't go for Gatwick instead. I'm not exactly objective though.

whatwouldrondo · 02/12/2016 10:07

harvestmoon stuffed full of bankers Hmm Lets resort to comfy stereotypes, eh? I don't think it was the "bankers" that won it for Olney, I suspect that demographic, which I would define as those Tory voters who liked Zac because he was good looking and the right sort still voted for him in thousands. I was patronised by a fair few on the doorsteps of Barnes

The vote was swung by all the others many who live in the less affluent parts of the costituency, the 48 from that post referendum letter in the FT [https://www.ft.com/content/1faa1b6c-3d3e-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a], They voted because they are fed up of the shitshow that Brexit is turning out to be, and were not prepared to be represented by a misogynist racist who stood for a buccaneering hard Brexit. Thanks to all who dropped leaflets or donated. Flowers nurses hangover

whatwouldrondo · 02/12/2016 10:10

Too hungover to make any of the Mumsnet thingys work!

www.ft.com/content/1faa1b6c-3d3e-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a

howabout · 02/12/2016 10:11

Peregrina I was wondering the same thing. It doesn't really look like much of a win for the LD when their total vote is less than ZG's majority at the GE and also less of a majority than they had before they lost the seat to him in 2010. Very much looks like a lot of people stayed home in disgust at the whole thing and felt as I would have that there was no-one to vote for. I am a left leaning ex Londoner. The only party I would never vote for are the LDs - nothing to do with Brexit but everything to do with their prediliction for political expediency. However after the mayor campaign I would also never vote for ZG.

Mistigri · 02/12/2016 10:23

I was wondering the same thing. It doesn't really look like much of a win for the LD when their total vote is less than ZG's majority at the GE and also less of a majority than they had before they lost the seat to him in 2010. Very much looks like a lot of people stayed home in disgust at the whole thing

I think this is a faulty analysis, given that the turnout was actually quite high for a by-election.

What it really means for the LDs is not clear yet. They burnt a lot of political capital in the coalition, mainly through naivety but also due to an unfashionable pragmatism. I don't think those votes are coming back soon.

But at the same time, there are a lot of effectively disenfranchised remainers out there. Many of my friends will never vote labour again due to their willingness to court the kipper vote (this includes me). And there are many, many Tory remainers, in the South East in particular, whose votes are up for grabs.

Peregrina · 02/12/2016 10:29

I agree Misti - I think the moderate Labour voters were lost when the LibDems went into Coalition, (which I always thought was a mistake0. They voted tactically to keep the Tories out, not put them in.

I do think, in the S East especially, that there are a lot of moderate Tory votes up for grabs; people who are utterly appalled by the 'BlueKIP' stance of May's Government.

Mistigri · 02/12/2016 10:35

Actually I don't think moderate labour voters are a lost cause. I have a lot of moderate labour voters on my FB timeline, and the more committed they are to the labour cause, the more utterly disenchanted they are with the Corbyn leadership. Many of these people are educated, pragmatic people who will vote tactically.

I also have a few corbynite friends, but mainly they are people who deserted to the greens during the new labour years and are now prepared to give the new leadership a go. These are not potential LD voters, but they may not vote labour either if labour moved in more pro-brexit direction - they will defect back to the greens.

Small sample, but probably rather typical of thinking among the liberal elite ;)

Mistigri · 02/12/2016 10:37

Younger voters will be a different kettle of fish of course as they were more directly affected by ths student fees debacle. Those young votes may be lost for a generation.

merrymouse · 02/12/2016 10:39

I would be less angry about Brexit, if they could formulate a proper plan, instead of the pie in the sky nonsense we have heard for the past 5 months.

I think momentum is growing behind the idea that it's one thing supporting the 'will if the people', but another thing to blindly follow a government that Won't tell anyone what it is doing.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/11/27/the-only-rational-choice-available-to-any-mp-is-to-say-no-to-article-50/

Peregrina · 02/12/2016 10:41

I am not entirely sure on the Student fee issue - 3 in my family give that as a reason for no longer voting Lib Dem, but their student days were already well over, so it never seemed an entirely convincing argument to me.

Cameron being canny and getting the LibDems to take the blame, yes, I agree. Most annoyingly, when he resigned, the only triumphs he could claim were won with LibDem or Labour support. Still karma got him in the end.

missmoon · 02/12/2016 10:44

I disagree, I think is huge for the Lib Dems, as confirms that the new strategy of targeting moderate, centrist and "liberal" Tory and Labour voters is paying off. This is much more sustainable in the long term than targeting students and those on the left of labour. They will also get some of the student vote back. Psychologically it's a very big boost. The alliance with the Greens is also very interesting.

missmoon · 02/12/2016 10:45

Just to add, I work in a university, and the Lib Dems tuition thing is much less of an issue now, the Lib Dem society is very popular. Tuition fees pale in comparison with Brexit.

Fawful · 02/12/2016 10:51

Re: the Lib Dems 'prediliction for political expediency': given that Cameron promised the referendum for political expediency and Labour was quite happy to invite the whole of Europe over in the 90s only to turn against us when the wind turned, I think all parties are guilty, and you can (and do, I'm sure) make your political choices on something else than political integrity. In comparison, student fees (that are made into a loan that can be paid back or not) feel to me like a moderate 'political expediency'.

merrymouse · 02/12/2016 10:52

I was wondering the same thing. It doesn't really look like much of a win for the LD when their total vote is less than ZG's majority at the GE

The point is that, Brexit aside, this should have been an easy win for the Conservatives. I don't think anybody believes that the lib dems won because the people of Richmond Park like what they have to say on tax or because they honestly think Olney could do a better job on Heathrow.

20,000 people who 18 months ago voted Conservative either stayed at home or changed their vote because of Brexit.

We have been told over and over again that 'remoaners' are just poor losers whose opinions no longer matter. If nothing else, this result is a reminder that the 48% exist.

whatwouldrondo · 02/12/2016 11:08

Howabout A lot has changed in this part of London since Richmond Park was a Libdem seat. Zac's victory and then increased majority reflected that the constituency was becoming more affluent and more naturally a Tory seat. The council has stayed Conservative twice too, and of course Vince Cable, a hugely popular local MP with far more of a "personal following" than Zac, lost to the very wet Tania Mathias next door in Twickenham.

This was a massive achievement in the face of those demographic changes, and from the doorsteps I would say represented a triumph of thinking over divisive tribal politics. Instead of following a natural tendancy to vote Tory people thought about the way the government was handling Brexit (I am quite sure those notes on the Brexit cake and eat it strategy helped crystallise a lot of people's concerns, they were mentioned to me spontaneously by quite a few voters) and Zac's personal values and decided they wanted to make a stand on liberal values as represented by Sarah Olney, and very well expressed in her victory speech.

Peregrina · 02/12/2016 11:15

ron so this sounds as though Zac lost it as the main reason? There may well be people who were annoyed at what they saw as an unecessary by election. Zac could have saved face by saying that now wasn't the time to make a stand, but that he continued to oppose the Heathrow expansion, and would not seek re-election.

Someone asked what the Tory majority was, now and I don't think it was answered? Excluding the DUP and after Robert Courts victory in Witney it was still 12. This would mean that it would now be 10, but there is still a by-election pending, so technically it's 9, but I imagine will go back up to 10 next week.

howabout · 02/12/2016 11:26

Worth noting there are roughly the same number of DUP MPs as there are LD MPs. Also Douglas Carswell will vote with the government on Brexit and lots of other things.

RedToothBrush · 02/12/2016 11:37

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam
ex MP Stephen Phillips told me he didn't stand for election on a "Ukip-lite" manifesto - many "yellow" Tories agree - as awkward as €sceps

That's a interesting way of wording it.

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam
Remember - Conservatives owe majority to winning LibDem seats - those Tory MPs will be rather concerned about this Richmond result...

I do not think that the Lib Dems can get back to level of 2010 seats. But the majority is just 10...

OP posts:
PattyPenguin · 02/12/2016 11:37

The Grauniad's take on what the Richmond Park result means
www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/02/ten-lessons-from-the-richmond-park-byelection-result

One of the ten lessons is that tactical voting is back.

RedToothBrush · 02/12/2016 11:45

You know the saying about Turkeys voting for Christmas?

Well this makes for some amusement:
inews.co.uk/essentials/news/business/daily-mail-fears-brexit-will-negatively-affect-newspaper-profits/
Brexit may negatively affect our newspaper profits, Daily Mail & General Trust warn

The owners of The Mail are warning that the leave vote could seriously damage them by reducing advertising revenue.

And that's before you start to talk about any possible boycotting

OP posts:
Mistigri · 02/12/2016 11:46

Bit dubious about some of those grauniad conclusions:

Few Tory MPs will worry about a remain backlash as strong as the one in Richmond Park

It doesn't need to be such a "strong backlash" in seats where the Tory majority is smaller than ZG's was. There will be a number of constituencies in big cities and in the "tech belt" (M4 corridor and around Cambridge) where Tory voter defections could make a difference.

I think there are many people in my company's head office (Cambridge area) who have been reliable Tory voters in the past but would vote tactically against a brexit-supporting MP.

Peregrina · 02/12/2016 11:50

Misti - I think in Oxfordshire too. Not just Brexit supporting MPs but ones who supported Remain, but are now toeing the Tory Party line, so you no longer have a clue what it is that they stand for.

RedToothBrush · 02/12/2016 11:55

Well this is an interesting blog from a freelance journalistwww.palmerreport.com/politics/ahead-of-recounts-erred-trump-favor/306/
Ahead of recounts, three states admit they “erred” in Trump’s favor by thousands of votes

If you recall, on election night, they don't actually count votes in the US. They guestimate them. And then call the election. Which sounds bonkers to us.

In other words the USA literally counts its chickens before they have hatched.

The latest revelation comes from Pennsylvania, where the state’s own voluntary revision of its vote totals – before any external recount has even gotten underway – now have Donald Trump’s winning margin plummeting from 70,638 votes to now just 46,938 votes. Again, this voluntary revision from the state is based on precincts correcting their own mistakes and adjusting their own numbers accordingly, and is not a result of the recount effort. It merely proves how wildly inaccurate (or possibly rigged) the vote counting was to begin with, and demonstrates the need for a statewide recount to catch all the other “errors” that have not already been corrected voluntarily. But Pennsylvania is not the only state trying to clean up its own mess.

Even before the current recount process in Wisconsin got underway, the state had already voluntarily reduced the size of Donald Trump’s victory by nearly five thousand votes. These revisions were made even more odd by the fact that they resulted in not only Trump’s lead shrinking, but his vote total shrinking. Trump now officially has around five thousand fewer votes in Wisconsin than he did the day after the election.

And in Michigan, where a recount is also about to get underway, the state has already voluntarily revised its vote totals such that the size of Donald Trump’s victory has dropped by more than two thousand votes.

In addition to 19 counties in WI refusing to show votes for a recount, Trump's legal team set about blocking a recount in Michigan yesterday.

I think I am beginning to develop a worrying twitch in stroking my chin thoughtfully.

OP posts: