Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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
lalalonglegs · 02/12/2016 11:57

Yes, Misti, I thought the Guardian summary was unusually gloomy (considering this is the first time this year many of us moderate progressives have had anything to smile about). The victory in Richmond Park was an absolute triumph of tactical voting and people putting an issue above party loyalty - I think the Tories should be really worried. And possibly the Labour party too.

RedToothBrush · 02/12/2016 12:00

Jessica Elgot ‏@jessicaelgot
#RichmondPark is first time Labour got less than 5% in contested London by-election since Croydon in 1909. But who's counting?

OP posts:
howabout · 02/12/2016 12:05

If Brexit is a done deal before the next GE as TM intends then an anti-Brexit stance all the way up to that point is a high risk strategy for the LDs surely?

Even NS and the SNP are starting to back away from the position of Scotland seeking to rejoin post Brexit. RD was interesting on QT last night as it is the first time I have heard her risking a pragmatic Brexit position.

TheNorthRemembers · 02/12/2016 12:18

If Brexit is a done deal before the next GE as TM intends then an anti-Brexit stance all the way up to that point is a high risk strategy for the LDs surely?

What have they got to lose?

prettybird · 02/12/2016 12:40

Not sure I've seen anything about NS and the SNP backing off Scotland seeking to rejoin post Brexit Confused. Can you provide a source for that?

Motheroffourdragons · 02/12/2016 12:43

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ on behalf of the poster.

RedToothBrush · 02/12/2016 12:55

Nick Cohen ‏@NickCohen4
Why Richmond by election matters 1/ First time since Brexit the nationalist Right has lost
2/ Moderate Tory MPs may just find the courage to tell May no one in Britain voted to become poorer
3/ May, who voted Remain don’t forget, could find the strength of character to stop the Brexiters running her government
4/ The incredible shrinking Labour party carries on vanishing before our eyes. It no longer matters in most of Britain

Hugo Dixon ‏@Hugodixon
Sarah Olney speech - the woman who defeated Brexiter Zac Goldsmith. Bravo.
2. Well done Greens for standing aside in Richmond Park. Labour got what it deserved after insisting on standing. Lost its deposit.
3. Richmond Park result shows combined power of pro-European alliances and tactical voting. Triumph over Zac, UKIP and hard Brexiters
4. Congrats to Clive Lewis, Lisa Nandy & Jonathan Reynolds for saying Labour should stand aside. Shame on Corbyn for insisting on running.
5. Chances of ever-cautious @theresa_may calling early general election have probably fallen further. She won't want to risk losing.
6. Come next election, we'll need alliances and imaginative voting on a grand scale.
7. Tories say Richmond Park loss doesn't change their Brexit policy. True. But in times to come this may be seen as moment fightback began

Laura Kuenssberg ‏@bbclaurak (from yesterday)
David Davis gives another Brexit hint, says govt will guard against labour shortages - biz need for EU migrants will trump #euref promises

Law and policy ‏@Lawandpolicy (again yesterday)
Boris says Freedom of Movement; Davis says Single Market; and Fox is being sent to Australia.

Odd that happened yesterday? Or a realisation of how things might go and the timing meant they could start softening tone and then point at Richmond after the fact, even though said before result announced.

Davis saying he wanted low skilled migration skill is something of a shift.

Also doing the rounds is this retweeted by david allen green. I don't suggest you take it literally for the UK (though I think what it says about the US is more accurate) but more as an explanation re: 'post truth politics':
Elliott Lusztig @ezlusztig
1. Hannah Arendt in her book The Origin of Totalitarianism provides a helpful guide for interpreting the language of fascists
2. She noted how decent liberals of 1930s Germany would "fact check" the Nazis' bizarre claims about Jews like they were meant to be factual
3. What they failed to understand, Arendt suggests, is that the Nazi Jew hating was not a statement of fact but a declaration of intent
4. So when someone would blame the Jews for Germany's defeat in WW1, naïve people would counter by saying there's no evidence of that
5. What the Nazis were doing was not describing what was true, but what would have to be true to justify what they planned to do next.
6. Did 3 million "illegals" cast votes in this election? Clearly not. But fact checking is just a way of playing along with their game.
7. What Trump is saying is not that 3 million illegals voted. What he's saying is: "I'm going to steal the voting rights of millions of Americans".

An example for the UK that I've noted this morning:
www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/faith-schools-academically-no-better-than-any-others-epi-report-religion-catholic-church-england-a7451676.html
Faith schools academically 'no better' than any others, major new report suggests
Government plans to encourage more faith schools to open 'would come at the price of increased social segregation', Education Policy Institute warns

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “Our proposals to expand the choice of good school places available to parents will help more young people, irrespective of their background, have the chance to go as far as their talents will take them.

"Faith schools are a vital part of this – they are among the best schools in the country and places are in high demand.

"That’s why we want to remove the ineffective faith cap to establish even more good schools, while introducing new measures to improve inclusivity and diversity.”

Then the Independent also have this article today from the chief executive of the humanist society:
www.independent.co.uk/voices/religious-schools-christianity-selective-schooling-cap-segregation-a7451716.html
British people don't want religious school selection – so why is the government pushing ahead with it?

So even if you think more religious schools are a good idea, there is no good reason to support dropping the cap. All the evidence points to such a move being actively harmful, increasing segregation by dividing thousands of children on the basis of their religion, ethnicity, and social standing. No wonder that, in a time of an increasingly divided society, it’s also a highly unpopular proposal, with even 63 per cent of Catholics, 82 per cent Muslims, indeed a majority of every religious group, against it.

Now you tell me why, May and the Conservatives would want to go against this evidence, when she has pledged to end social inequality, and support faith schools.

How do you persuade agnostic and atheist (and even other faiths) to send their kids to a Christian school?

By telling them, in spite of the evidence, that they are better because its a statement of intent to set them up regardless.

Its also political decision, to create more conservatives in younger generations too...
by telling everyone they were better performing (which does not appear to be true). Could the answer be political as well?

Westministenders. For God sake Boris, is that the best plan you can come up with?
OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 02/12/2016 13:00

Simple question. In order to get migration down to 100,000s can I ask what exactly we are doing to address non-EU migration?

What is our policy there? Seeing as we ALREADY have control of this. Where are we going wrong?

Westministenders. For God sake Boris, is that the best plan you can come up with?
OP posts:
howabout · 02/12/2016 13:00

www.heraldscotland.com/news/14935305.Should_Nicola_Sturgeon_stick_or_twist_on_a_second_referendum_as_Britain_heads_for_Brexit_/

More my sense of the mood music rather than a policy position pretty.
fwiw I think NS is being pretty adept at dealing with redefining her position.

what have they got to lose?

If Brexit is a done deal and the LDs are still arguing the toss they risk looking even more irrelevant than usual.

TheNorthRemembers · 02/12/2016 13:06

howabout True. But there is very little prospect of Brexit being done and dusted by the next election. We are not even in the planning phase, it seems.

Fawful · 02/12/2016 13:10

Mother all three parties have made serious sacrifices in order to get to power in the last few years. If your conscience is telling you that it's worth risking a hard Brexit so you don't have to vote LibDem, then follow it. We all have our red lines.

Motheroffourdragons · 02/12/2016 13:14

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ on behalf of the poster.

TheNorthRemembers · 02/12/2016 13:15

Motheroffourdragons I am with you on Labour. I can vote for anyone though, as I live in such a safe Labour seat that neither the Tories or Libdem would ever get a look-in. They do not even campaign here, ever. UKIP could stand a chance I guess, but I do not even think they have any councillors.

Motheroffourdragons · 02/12/2016 13:18

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ on behalf of the poster.

TuckersBadLuck · 02/12/2016 13:19

Oh Red, that DMGT link! Grin

Mistigri · 02/12/2016 13:21

I will have to vote tactically next time if he is still leader.

But I will eat horse manure before my vote will go to the Lib Dems, it will have to be Green for me.

Unless you live in Brighton, that's a protest vote (of the sort that won Trump the election), not a tactical vote. Ideologically pure, tactically inept.

harvestmoon32 · 02/12/2016 13:28

There may be trouble ahead if Italy votes against Renzi this weekend in the referendum....

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36708357

The EU is not in great shape and what we will be negotiating with at some point in the next 2 years may look nothing like the EU we know today...

Motheroffourdragons · 02/12/2016 13:34

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ on behalf of the poster.

Mistigri · 02/12/2016 13:36

What is our policy there? Seeing as we ALREADY have control of this.

Our policy is apparently to damage the economy so that fewer of them will no longer want to come. It's not entirely stupid (as long as you don't care about impoverishing British people unnecessarily): it's a rare example of a government policy that is guaranteed to work.

Btw, excellent post above (about the pointlessness of fact-checking), one of your all-time best.

Mistigri · 02/12/2016 13:37

"so that fewer of them will want to come", teach me to proof read after editing!

harvestmoon32 · 02/12/2016 13:37

whatwouldrondo - Surely you can't deny that RIchmond is one of the wealthiest places in the country? here is an article that highlights just how wealthy Richmond is compared to the rest of the country. Maybe "stuffed full of bankers" is a bit of a sweeping statement, but with average house prices >£800,000 in Richmond and average household income of £58,000, it is a directionally correct comment

www.homesandproperty.co.uk/property-news/richmond-upon-thames-named-the-happiest-place-to-live-in-london-a103706.html

Mistigri · 02/12/2016 13:46

Surely you can't deny that RIchmond is one of the wealthiest places in the country? here is an article that highlights just how wealthy Richmond is compared to the rest of the country. Maybe "stuffed full of bankers" is a bit of a sweeping statement, but with average house prices >£800,000 in Richmond and average household income of £58,000, it is a directionally correct comment

I don't know modern Richmond well enough to comment specifically, but I would say that you would most likely get similar figures for average income and house prices in any inner London borough including many where there are quite high levels of poverty. And does it not strike you that, in an area where the average price of a house is £800k, that a household income of £58k is an astonishingly low figure.

£58k is two new-graduate salaries. When I was a youth, two new graduate salaries would have bought a decent sized flat pretty much anywhere in zone 4 or 5.

Kaija · 02/12/2016 13:54

It also includes New Malden - part affluent, part fairly normal outer London.

From my very admittedly very unscientific survey on the doorsteps yesterday I would have to say that it was the most affluent who were backing Zac.

Peregrina · 02/12/2016 13:56

In the Ferndown Dorset CC the Tories gain from UKIP. I would like to think that's good, but instead I think it shows just how far the Tories have lurched to the far right.

Conservative 2046 [57.0%; +13.1%]
UKIP 1092 [30.4%; -14.2%]
LD Jason Jones 260 [7.2%; 7.2%]
Labour 190 [5.3%; -6.1%]
Majority: 950
Turnout: 22.08%
Conservative gain from UKIP
Percentage change since 2013

It is a pretty dismal turnout, if that makes much difference.

harvestmoon32 · 02/12/2016 13:58

Misti - I'm not looking for a bun fight. The point I'm trying to make is that it is a very wealthy area. I agree, London is stuffed full of bankers, given the City is located there, and house prices are unaffordable to most non City types. Richmond is one of the those London boroughs where they live (As is Westminster, K&C, Ham and Ful, Wandsworth etc) - all unaffordable to normal people. Maybe I should have said stuffed full of bankers and overseas property investors that don't live there.

Here's some property porn in Richmond - 2 bed flats for the grads on £58,000...! By page 18-20 the cost is nearer £400,000 and down.....

www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/Richmond-Upon-Thames/2-bed-flats.html

Swipe left for the next trending thread