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. 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
twofingerstoGideon · 05/12/2016 15:01

It was about Nottingham lace and how much it is in demand internationally.
That's all very well until the bottom falls out of the doily and antimacassar market.

Cupofteaandtoilet · 05/12/2016 15:11

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0848m8x#play

From 25"

squoosh · 05/12/2016 15:14

The government's QC Eadie doesn't appear to be completely furnished with the facts of the Great Repeal Bill. Bit amateurish no?

twofingerstoGideon · 05/12/2016 15:14

Okay... Leprechaun man has a Wikipedia entry.

Cornelius "Neil" Horan, sometimes referred to as The Grand Prix Priest or The Dancing Priest (born 22 April 1947). He is a defrocked Irish Roman Catholic priest who is noted for his interference with the running of the 2003 British Grand Prix and the 2004 Summer Olympics men's marathon in order to promote his religious belief that the end of the world is near. He went on to appear on Britain's Got Talent in May 2009.

Sorry for thread derail, but I wonder why he was defrocked?

squoosh · 05/12/2016 15:17

Oh him! He's a cause of great national shame. I'll never forget that poor Brazilian athlete whose race he ruined in the 2004 Olympics. Poor guy was on course to win a medal too.

Attention seeking twat.

RedToothBrush · 05/12/2016 15:30

What's Lace?
I blame the rise of the shell suit in the 1990s. That was obviously the cause. Yep even I had one

If it hadn't have been for shell suits the Nottingham lace industry would be just fine.
Misses point entirely

Back to A50 case

Government Ouch No1.

In referendum to the long title of the European Communities Act 1972
Jo Maugham QC ‏@JolyonMaugham
Eadie: We say (of the long title) that there is nothing in it that supports the weight attached to it by the Divisional Court.
Eadie says that because other Acts "make provision for and in connection with" that makes a difference. SC seems underwhelmed.

Law and policy ‏@Lawandpolicy
Weakest legal point ever.
Never a good sign if you are relying on a point in the long title of an Act.
Desperate, like citing Denning.
(David Allen Green had said earlier today that Lord Denning was 'the worse civil appeals judge this jurisdiction has ever known' to emphasis the desperation of the government's appeal)

Government Ouch No 2.

From this morning:

Schona Jolly @WomaninHavana
Lord Sumption: How does this fit into scheme of your submissions? Does not one have to ask first what is nature of the prerogative power?

Law and policy ‏@Lawandpolicy
Very hard tackle in from Lord Sumption: did the prerogative power ever extend to decisions which affect domestic law? Heart of case.

Law and policy ‏@Lawandpolicy
Difficult questions are often the straightforward ones.

Point returned to this afternoon:
Law and policy ‏@Lawandpolicy
Lord Sumption returns to his difficult question as to whether crown ever had power to use prerogative to affect law.

This is possibly significant - Sumption is usually the most sceptical of public law challenges to government action.

Schona Jolly @WomaninHavana
SC - Govt has to answer this: If our accession was a result of joint effort of Plmnt & prerogative, should departure not equally be so?

Law and policy ‏@Lawandpolicy
Government really struggling with this question.

Possible Government Ouch No 3.

Schona Jolly ‏@WomaninHavana
Oooh. Eadie asked about any evidence re Great Repeal Bill. Court thinks it might be relevant to know what Plmnt is going to be asked to do.

And a sideways slap:

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam
First mention of Luxembourg court - not in context of referral, but the right to have a referral, being one right "destroyed" by A50

Oooh the irony.

Sounds like the last hour the Supreme Court judges have been giving the Government's Eadie a right grilling.

Meanwhile on Conservative Home
The drive for privatising everything and destroying education,, welfare and the NHS continues:

www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2016/12/howard-flight-we-are-spending-too-much-on-health-education-and-welfare.html
Howard Flight: We are spending too much on health, education and welfare

OP posts:
Cailleach1 · 05/12/2016 15:36

Speaking of plans, could they be scuppered. What if Spain as part of EU side says we won't sign anything with the UK if we don't have joint power wrt Gibraltar? Similarly WTO, I wonder if Argentina can say we want Malvinas or we won't agree to even WTO admission as a non EU UK.

I suppose we needn't worry, the very intelligent ideologues have it all sorted and under control. They wouldn't drive the country into the ground in order to satisfy their wishes or the billionaires bank rolling them or the newspapers/media tycoons advocating a leave vote.

RedToothBrush · 05/12/2016 15:45

I'm watching the Supreme Court coverage on Sky. They have just cut to a report about communities being more and more divided. They were doing interviews on the doorstop. One old guy said he wouldn't like it if Asian's moved to his street and would want to move out. When asked why, he said, because of the smell of the food.

My 2 year old is going through a fussy eating period. He currently is refusing to eat his dinner most nights unless its curry. I've been tearing my hair out for months about his eating habits, so I'm rather pleased that he finally is eating anything.

To emphasise MY TWO YEAR OLD can cope with more than a racist from Oldham.

OP posts:
MangoMoon · 05/12/2016 15:55

I wonder if Argentina can say we want Malvinas or we won't agree to even WTO admission as a non EU UK.

I'd like to think not.
The people of the FI had a referendum in 2013, where they were asked about their sovereignty.

91.94% turnout
99.8% voted to remain under UK sovereignty.

I think it's fair to say that the people of the FI do not wish to be 'The Malvinas'.

Castelnaumansions · 05/12/2016 15:56

Missmoon
Andrew Neil ‏@afneil Bar heartlands of Renzi and his party, nearly all of Italy voted NO.

MangoMoon · 05/12/2016 15:57

RTB, the divided communities thing is on the back of a report that's just been released by Dame Louise Casey.

TheBathroomSink · 05/12/2016 15:59

Sorry for thread derail, but I wonder why he was defrocked?

Because he was accused of indecent assault in 2004, on a girl who was 7 at the time, acquitted and then danced a jig in celebration outside the court. It was the dancing that got him defrocked.

I didn't realise it was him. Now I very much hope he isn't working in a grotto somewhere.

Cailleach1 · 05/12/2016 16:04

Argentina, as a WTO member won't be calling them the Falkland Islands. They refer to them as the Malvinas. Rather like the UK call Ireland part of the 'British Isles'. Ireland don't refer to their own country as being part of the British isles.

The question is whether Argentina can block non EU Uk membership of the WTO. Blackballing, if you like.

mathanxiety · 05/12/2016 16:06

CupofTea - my guess regarding Nottingham lace is the clue lies in its name. This is a unique or niche product that is not in competition with anyone else's lace. Expensive lace tends to be very specific to place. Nottingham spare parts for Ford vehicles would most likely not be exportable.

mathanxiety · 05/12/2016 16:09

The British Isles is the name of the 'region' in which the islands of Britain and Ireland lie. I learned this in school in Ireland back in auld god's time. The name doesn't imply British ownership of Ireland by Britain.

Falklands/Malvinas is a different story.

Cailleach1 · 05/12/2016 16:10

The Irish school atlas has been changed. It does not give that designation now.

mathanxiety · 05/12/2016 16:11

But I do think the UK has a lot of hostages to fortune out there..

squoosh · 05/12/2016 16:14

'British Isles' is a geo-political term that I've rarely heard used by an Irish person.

RedToothBrush · 05/12/2016 16:14

I am aware Mango. Its very depressing.

Sadly I have worked with someone who has an equally poor attitude. Its just quite something to see someone openly saying it on tv though, with no idea of what a big baby he looked. Not just a racist bigot.

If that is the best argument you can come out with, regarding not wanting to live in the same area, then its a pretty desperate one and it does just play to my unpolitically correct feelings towards a certain generation unfortunately (which doesn't help social cohesion in itself).

There is just nothing you can do to argue with that mentality, as its just so irrational. And that's essentially what politics has come down to. You are never going to win an argument with someone who has a mentality that can be trumped by a two year old.

Anyway here's another statement that Liam Fox has 'slipped out' today about the WTO.

Sir Paul Jenkins ‏@sirpauljenkins
Extraordinary quietly to slip this out. Note this will be done 'in dialogue with the WTO membership'. Do Govt admit we need WTO agreement?

OP posts:
mathanxiety · 05/12/2016 16:16

It is the internationally recognised and generally used name for the 'region' still. 'These islands' is what the two islands are often called in recent treaties and speeches. Alternatives are in the works, but none have been made official yet.

Cailleach1 · 05/12/2016 16:17

Also, politically, I think EU documents have used other references for Ireland.

Wikipedia I know, but there are other reference materials.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Isles_naming_dispute

It has been a thing for a while. Iona, island of the north atlantic and the british isles and ireland.

MangoMoon · 05/12/2016 16:18

*Argentina, as a WTO member won't be calling them the Falkland Islands. They refer to them as the Malvinas. Rather like the UK call Ireland part of the 'British Isles'. Ireland don't refer to their own country as being part of the British isles.

The question is whether Argentina can block non EU Uk membership of the WTO. Blackballing, if you like.*

I would be horrified if a country (Argentina) was able to block another country (UK) on the basis of deciding that they(Argentina) think they should 'own' a completely different country (FI).

It matters not what Argentina want to call the FI - the islanders themselves are categoric that they do not wish to be 'owned' by anyone, especially Argentina.

Cailleach1 · 05/12/2016 16:22

Also, the Irish government doesn't use or recognize the term. So rather a parallel with calling the Falklands the Malvinas whether they like it or not.

lalalonglegs · 05/12/2016 16:25

And on this I agree with you Mango but Argentina might argue that the British have colonised these (formerly/briefly Argentinian) islands and ethnically cleansed them in the process in a much slower and smaller-scale version of what the Chinese have done in Tibet.

Cailleach1 · 05/12/2016 16:30

The thing is you can be horrified all you like. I'm sure many countries may be horrified with other countries defending their interests in many different ways. Even the UK selling military and arms to Saudi to kill ordinary Yeminis at work and at play, while being outraged at other countries propping up their favourite despots. Teaching them how to target for killing as per Hammonds memo.

The really important part is if they can do it. And if they can, will they?