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. Boris we wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy Constitutional Crisis?

990 replies

RedToothBrush · 09/12/2016 00:03

Its twelve days to go until the end of the HoC 2016 calendar and we can already tell that everyone is wishing it was Christmas already. Poor Theresa though, she doesn’t get to play with toys on the last day of term. Instead she has a grilling on the lack of spending on health and social care spending by a commons select committee.

Hopefully the next couple of weeks will calm down a little though as thoughts turn elsewhere.

The A50 case has come to an end. There is no way of telling which way the judges will go but the decision to appeal may yet haunt the government as it will bring the issue of devolution to a head, whether they win or lose. The ruling is due in mid January.

Win and they are going to have to amend the Devolution Acts and potentially impose Brexit on people with certain national identities who voted against it. This is profoundly undemocratic and a betrayal of the principles of Devolution and the expectations of the will of the people.
Lose and they could face a full blown constitutional crisis, with NI or Scotland or both having a veto over Brexit, and the government effectively unable to trigger a50 in line with our constitutional requirement. Which is again, potentially profoundly undemocratic and against the referendum and the expectations of the will of the people.

It was a scenario that predictable and avoidable at several junctions yet the government under Cameron and May ploughed on regardless. It a scenario that we are now locked into, due to deciding to use the courts rather than just go through parliament.

It could also massively restrict the power of the executive under the Royal Prerogative. Ironically this is something that David Davis has campaigned for, for years so I guess he gets a victory however the decision goes.
So the chances of some kind of crisis with regard to our constitutional makeup and the union seem inevitable in the new year.

The government despite a defeat in Richmond Park continues to lean right and characterise anyone with concerns as unpatriotic or not honourable. This is the last resort of the desperate.

They have however, conceded to Labour that they will publish a report on their Brexit plans before a50 is triggered. In return Labour have promised that they will let a50 be triggered by the end of March. Is this a good thing? It remains to be seen. In some ways this is a blinder for Labour.

They are pro-Brexit but anti-lack of plan in theory. This only works if the plan actually has substance. If there is no substance in the plan and its nothing more than empty words then they face having to go back on a commons vote committing them to a deal with the Conservatives. It could therefore be a trap for them. It marginalises the none English Nationalist voices too. Voices that are important and deserve to be heard. Voices that if they are not listened to, will have consequences.

What will the Sleaford and North Hykenham (yep again) by election bring?

A vote of confidence in the government, a new ever growing and rising fear of UKIP or something else. How will this colour the start to the New Year?

I don’t know. 2016 has apparently been the year of gin as people turn to the drink to cope. Everything is now Brexitty and Red, White and Blue.
But whose’s? Britain’s? The USA’s? Russia’s? Or France’s?

We look forward to, or more to the point we fear what 2017 could bring. A feeling we have not felt to this degree in many years. A General Election with a UKIP breakthrough. The end of peace in NI. A repeat of the age old betrayal of Scotland’s by the English. The Welsh damned to irrelevance and marginalisation. Brexit vettoed and the subsequent political fallout. The end of the NHS. A bonfire of rights. A new Italian PM and possibly new Eurozone economic crisis. Fillon or Le Pen and at last a real victory for the far right in Europe. The chance of Merkel’s Last Stand. Putin’s partnership with Assad and a new genocide we are powerless to stop. Erdogan pulling the plug on the EU door and unleashing a new wave of refugees onto European shores. The horror of ISIS both within the West and within the Middle East. Trump’s neo-fascism and rise of a New World Order. There is something in there for everyone to dread.

Which will it be? Probably something we have not yet foreseen such are these times.

Act 2 of Brexit in Westminstenders land is bound to be just as dramatic and of course, we leave 2016 in true soap fashion on a real cliff hanger.

All the more reason to enjoy the holiday period and break whatever your politics.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
18
BigChocFrenzy · 19/12/2016 14:16

May is continuing the sorry tradition of British PMs working as Murdoch's glove puppets

TheNorthRemembers · 19/12/2016 14:37

Lico When did a Tory government ever care about women?! Sad

Sorry about your MIL.

howabout · 19/12/2016 14:45

I admit to very very seldom reading the tabloids. However to the extent I am influenced by them I would see the Remain supporting Daily Record and Evening Standard.

If I want to get the view from both sides South of the Border then I watch Kevin (The Mirror) and Andrew (The Mail) giving the opposing positions on The Sky Newspaper review.

I think it is problematic to infer influence purely from print circulation and I think it is also difficult to discern whether papers are reflecting or influencing their readership. Kevin and Andrew make me laugh because you can often see them putting on their "disgruntled union rep" / "pearl clutching" facade before pontificating forth.

Interesting that Murdoch hedged his bets between The Mail, The Mail on Sunday and The Times and The Sunday Times.

Corcory · 19/12/2016 15:03

Lico - this seems a ridiculous situation to be in with regard to showing 5 years continuous employment when it comes to a partner who has given up work to look after children or isn't working for any other reasonable reason.
I would suggest you contact your M.P. about this. I really can't think that this was done intentionally to discriminate against women!
As a leaver I certainly don't think it should come to this that people here from the EU have to become citizens in order to stay anyway. As for the assertion that 'somebody' made that the Tories don't care about women! What on earth's that about?

Peregrina · 19/12/2016 15:29

Lico - this seems a ridiculous situation to be in with regard to showing 5 years continuous employment when it comes to a partner who has given up work to look after children or isn't working for any other reasonable reason.

I suspect that this is poorly drafted legislation. However, when May was at the Home Office she showed quite clearly how much of an anti-immigrant zealot that she was, so I could quite easily see her throwing people out simply because those are the rules. The word Compassion doesn't seem to appear in her vocabulary.

Tories don't care about women - that is the impression I get from them. It tends to be women who are in poverty, but who have we seen bear the brunt of austerity but the already poor? Who has been getting the tax cuts, - already wealthy business men, as can be found in May's cabinet.

lurkinghusband · 19/12/2016 15:30

As for the assertion that 'somebody' made that the Tories don't care about women! What on earth's that about?

Viewed in a certain light, the child benefit cap might have the appearance of being directed at women ?

Brewdolf · 19/12/2016 15:34

I'll give you my local Tory MPs views on women.

They're fine to be at work and if single and childless its fine they should be in high powered roles. But if they have children then they need to accept they are no longer capable of doing anything meaningful as they'll be all distracted and should be concentrating on their homes. But they can't stay at home, that's just laziness.

Figmentofmyimagination · 19/12/2016 15:37

The Today Programme is inviting a professor of history onto the programme each morning to say which year 2016 reminds them of and why.

This morning, it was Margaret MacMillan a Cambridge professor and author of The Uses and Abuses of History.

After adding a few caveats, she said that she wished it wasn't the case but that the historical parallel that resonates most closely with her is 1914 - the same sense of complacency in the face of danger.

This afternoon I was Christmas shopping in my home town. You can't help looking around at people jostling in the Pandora queue etc and wondering about the future. I find it frightening.

Peregrina · 19/12/2016 15:49

Didn't Andrea Leasdom want small firms to be exempt from offering Maternity Leave? Since men never get pregnant, that would be a measure which only affected women.

TheNorthRemembers · 19/12/2016 15:51

corcory www.theguardian.com/society/2015/may/28/women-austerity-charities-cuts-gender-inequality
Yvette Cooper has written extensively about the subject.

Have we already forgotten all the Tories schmoozing Mumsnetters before the election and around the child benefit debacle?

merrymouse · 19/12/2016 15:53

As women tend to be carers, I'd say that cuts to the welfare state tend to affect women more than men.

Of course caring responsibilities should fall equally on men and women, but we are a very long way from that.

howabout · 19/12/2016 16:11

I think it is somewhat myopic to lay the blame for current anti-women focus in the Austerity Agenda solely at the door of the Tories.

It was the Lib Dems who proposed the increase in the tax free allowance which disproportionately favours FT workers. They supported restrictions to CB. Student fees disproportionately impact women who are more likely to have career breaks to raise DC.

I was practically throwing things at the TV when Harriet Harmen of all people came out in favour of the 2 child limit on tax credits.

Labour and the Lib Dems have sacrificed the social safety net in favour of "equality" in taxation, the workplace and childcare.

90% of single parents are women and 80% receive no support from the fathers of the children. Yet even in MN the debate is generally couched in terms of mothers "affording their DC". The restrictions on working age benefits disproportionately affect those raising children. However I think it is a societal malaise to disinvest in families rather than a Tory attack. The Tories will always support self-reliance over those in need of State support. It is just a happy convenience for them at the moment that Society does not value the next generation.

RedToothBrush · 19/12/2016 16:13

Andy Burnham’s Brexitential Crisis and Why This Might End Up Being a Big Problem for Labour in 2017

I think this is a big story to watch out for next year. Andy Burnham is standing for the Mayor of Greater Manchester. The election is due to take place on the 4th May.

On face value, it looks like he should be a shoe in for the job. I think it’s worth watching though.

Last night, Mike Smithson of Political Betting posted this:
Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB
Latest Gtr Manchester Mayor odds from @LadPolitics
@JaneBrophyLD in from 50/1 last night to 16/1

That got my attention.

Why the big shift, suddenly?

Of late, Burnham has been going very anti-immigration. Are the two related? And if they are, will this make a difference to views of the Labour Party, both within Manchester and outside of it.

I know a couple of people have said Burnham has ‘lost the plot’. Has he?

So, I decided to take a look at this more closely. Why is Smithson raising the question of whether Burnham is bound to win?

Firstly the voting method makes a huge difference; Its supplementary vote. This should get alarm bells ringing. It’s definitely not as straightforward as normal constituency elections, nor local elections.

The SV system is very similar to the AV system. Under SV, voters are limited to a first and second preference choice. A voter marks a cross in one column for their first preference candidate and another cross in a second column for their second preference (if they wish to do so).

The ballot papers are counted and if a candidate received more than 50 per cent of the first preference votes on the first count, then they are elected.

If no candidate reaches the 50 per cent threshold, the two candidates with the highest number of votes are retained and the other candidates are eliminated. The second preferences on the ballot papers of the eliminated candidates are counted and any cast for the two remaining candidates are transferred. The candidate with the most votes at the end of this process is elected.

Of course, an anti-immigration ticket therefore might make sense. In first past the post, Labour would be competing for anti-immigration votes with both Conservative and UKIP votes. In a supplementary vote, he’s actively chasing Conservative and UKIP voters if he’s making a big deal of the immigration issue.

However, Manchester poses a problem for him if he seeks to go down this route. You might recall that Manchester itself voted Remain, but Greater Manchester voted Leave. The vote for the mayor covers Bolton, Bury, Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, Tameside, Trafford, Wigan. When you add this all up together it splits 46% Remain 54% Leave. I would be cautious about divide though. Its not necessarily going to go in Burnham’s favour. Neither is how many votes Labour got at the last general election. When you add all those up for the 5 main parties, Labour got 46% of the vote. This is crucial. It misses out on the magic 50% with SV.

With that, his position really starts to make sense.

Let’s look at the other parties in 2015. The Cons were on around 26% of the vote, UKIP 16.2%, LD’s 7% and Greens 3.5%.*

Again, that looks pretty safe for him on an anti-immigration ticket. I’m not so sure it’s that clear cut.

In 2010 the result for the whole of Greater Manchester worked out as Lab 42%, Con 28%, LD 25%, Green 0.5% and UKIP 3.5%.*

(*This is roughly done and ignores the votes cast for any other party just for the purposes of this, so naturally there is a significant number of votes this doesn’t include, but should give a rough idea. These parties are the only ones standing candidates).

The key questions are therefore; could there be a swing back to the LDs, how will the date of the election affect the result, what will people vote for as a second choice, what will turnout do to the vote and will the Leave / Remain split make a difference? This is where it starts to get more interesting.

Greater Manchester, has a particular divide. The North and East is less affluent and the South and West fits the Liberal Metropolitan Bracket far more, and perhaps has more in common with London in places than it does with the north of the city. This is reflected in voting. The north has traditionally voted for donkeys wearing red rosettes whilst the south and central, is more competitive with bigger opposition from the Conservatives and the LDs. This was also reflected in the referendum. I think this could really have an impact on the result, simply because you would expect higher turnout in the more affluent Conservative and Lib Dem parts of the authority. That immediately makes that 46% - 54% EU referendum divide look shaker.

How will the date affect the result?
The first thing about May, will be whether a50 has been triggered or not and how this affects people’s moods. What Labour do, might have a really big impact. It could go either direction. Plus we could still have a General Election at the same time. Students are also more likely to still be in town (unlike at the EU referendum). Will Kippers turnout if a50 has been triggered? Are they more likely to if it hasn't? And vice versa for the Lib Dems?

Could there be a swing back to the LDs?
First of all it comes down to who manages to come first in the initial round of voting. The GE would suggest it would be the Conservatives. What happens if Burnham tries to make it related to Brexit though? Would that, combined with a lower turnout, work for the Lib Dems putting them into the second round.

This is highly likely in Trafford and Stockport. Trafford is solid conservative BUT it also voted Remain. The LD candidate has previously stood in Trafford for the Altrincham and Sale seat. Conservatives in Trafford are the same kind of Tories that live in Richmond Park. The Lib Dems dropped a significant number of votes here in 2015. Stockport, has in the past, been prime Lib Dem country both on the council and with a MP in Cheadle. It also voted Remain. These two councils generally have the highest voter turnouts out in Greater Manchester. The Lib Dems have dropped between 13 – 22% in these constituencies.

If the Conservatives come second in the first round, he should be home and dry because UKIP, Lib Dem and Green votes are all discounted on the recount.

However if the Lib Dems do edge it into second this could well be a risk for Burnham. It would mean that only second round votes for the Lib Dems would count. Thus anyone voting Cons or UKIP on the immigration ticket would also be automatically discounted as irrelevant.

This makes Remainers votes REALLY important. For their first or second choice.

What will people vote for as a second choice?
Labour is likely to be the first and perhaps only choice for a lot of people. Swing voters and how people vote locally is probably in play here. In Bury and Bolton, its likely to be either UKIP or the Conservatives. Leave areas.
In the South of the City in Trafford and Stockport, the Lib Dem threat is very much present.

The curious areas are Manchester, Oldham and Rochdale. Although Oldham and Rochdale are strong leave areas, they have also had strong Lib Dem support locally in the past. Manchester is a Remain area with strong Lib Dem support.

The Lib Dems have also had strong council representation in Manchester, Oldham and Rochdale (they controlled the council in Oldham and Rochdale in the past).

Again if the Lib Dems can make it to the second round, the votes could stack up for them as Conservative and UKIP ones are discounted.

What will turnout do to the result?
Given Lib Dems are likely to be well up for a fight here, and see this as a target the Lib Dem machine will be out. It’s hard to argue the Conservatives have a real chance here, even with a good second round showing. Labour might struggle to get voters out. Turnout is likely to be low and not dissimilar to by-elections and council by-elections, which probably works best for Lib Dems over Labour ultimately.

Will the Remain / Leave split make a difference?
It depends on what the second choice of the 3rd, 4th and 5th place votes is. Kippers are unlikely to vote LD. But if they vote Conservative over Labour then they won’t help Burnham. The Conservative votes are the important ones. It depends on what type of Conservative they are.

Affluent liberal Conservatives are more likely to vote LD – there would be a lot of these spare in South Manchester. More anti-immigration Conservatives are in North Manchester – the danger is they could have more pro-UKIP sympathies and thus useless to Burnham and perhaps still adverse to Corbyn.

If Lib Dems do get to the second round, then their voters are perhaps more likely to vote Burnham, but this doesn’t help him as their first choice is the one that’s counted.

It’s easy to see why Burnham has gone anti-immigration. It’s clearly very tactical and based on the knowledge he is unlikely to win on the first round. The 'jellyfish' label will be used against him. Lots.

Mike Smithson also points out that the LDs have twice as many elected mayors as the Tories. The voting system, works well for them.

Greater Manchester is not the only mayor election in May 2017. There is also East Anglia, Lincolnshire, Liverpool, Sheffield, Tees Valley, West of England and West Midlands.

Burnham is the big name though, and will be the one that attracts the most attention. His campaign will be watched closely. Will he do a Zac Goldsmith? That’s his danger. Particularly UKIP have a vested interest in Burnham winning over their own candidate as Paul Nuttall then gets to stand in the Leigh by-election then.

If he does go all Goldsmith on the Labour party, then how does that sit with Labour voters elsewhere on a national level? Will it save their necks in the north? Of course this could undermine them in other areas… I’m sure there are parts of the media who will be quite happy to deal another hammer blow to Labour, and the trouble is, in this case there is every reason for the Lib Dems to also get into the act for their own benefit. I think it could get ugly.

Unfortunately for Labour, even if Burnham wins (which I think is still the most likely outcome) he could also wreak havoc for the party.

OP posts:
howabout · 19/12/2016 16:20

Lico I just did a quick check because I have several friends and relations in similar circumstances to yours and their understanding of the rules is different to your own.

www.gov.uk/apply-for-a-uk-residence-card/permanent-residence-card

There seem to be rules for dependants which are not related to recent continuous employment? This may / will change after Brexit but not yet.

MangoMoon · 19/12/2016 16:31

It's not a recent thing that Andy Burnham is addressing the issue of immigration & the divide between labour voters - he was talking about it well before the ref even.

2010 he said:

“We were in denial. We were behind the issue all the time, and myths were allowed to develop. There’s still an ambivalence among some in Labour about discussing immigration. I’ve been accused of dog-whistle politics for doing so.”

2015:

“For too long, we have argued that free movement across Europe benefits everyone and affects all areas equally. That’s just not true … Labour hasn’t faced up to that, and that’s why we look out of touch.”

He's not UKIP light though as some people have accused him.
This was from Friday:

"But while it is right to point out that immigration provides an overall net benefit to the country, many of us have been slow to realise that it has a differential impact on different placess^. Free movement helped build the dynamism of our big cities but made life harder in places where there is a high concentration of lower skilled, lower wage employment. The Bank of England has produced evidence that, in the lowest paid occupations, immigration has created a downward pressure on wages. Big companies have used free movement to move people around like commodities to drive down labour costs and create a race to the bottom. What on earth is socialist about that?"

OlennasWimple · 19/12/2016 16:46

Yy MangoMoon - back in 2004/5 AB was a Home Office minister, who led the plans to implement ID cards and had parts of the immigration work in his portfolio (he was one of the ministers who took through the 2006 Immigration Act, for example)

howabout · 19/12/2016 16:46

Interesting analysis Red just adding my tuppence worth to better understand.

I would assume 46% Labour is fairly solid from 2015 given it is an increase on 2010 despite swing to UKIP (who therefore look more like ex-Tories). I would assume Greens second pref would be more likely Labour than Lib Dem and their 3.5% also looks solid. Could be sizeable Con / UKIP overlap and Con / Lib Dem overlap which would tend to cancel out on second pref?

I think if A50 has been triggered then the negotiations and the discussion of the "Great Reform Bill" will be under way and I anticipate this detoxifying Brexit for the PLP as all parties will be able to adopt more nuanced positions around specific policies as opposed to Brexit all or nothing.

howabout · 19/12/2016 17:02

This is Dennis Skinner on his decision to vote Leave and the impact of the EU on workers' rights.

www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-e4af-Beast-of-Bolsover-Im-voting-out#.WFgQS1WLTnA

In many ways the greater Derby area is similar in demographic to Greater Manchester, although having just checked I was surprised to see that Leave was up around 59% there, despite high profile Remain Labour MPs like Margaret Beckett to counter any "Beast of Bolsover" effect.

Peregrina · 19/12/2016 17:04

I don't think you can assume 46% Labour is solid based on 2015. I think they went and picked up some disaffected LibDems, who will now might well be prepared to swing back. So I think the 2010 result is a better indicator.

Greens likely to go to Labour rather than Lib Dem? Impossible to say, I think they could go either way. For those Greens who were strongly Remain, then the Lib Dem party is the obvious one because they are also Remain.

Peregrina · 19/12/2016 17:12

Dennis Skinner's Leave vote is coming from a very different place than that of IDS, Redwood and Co. Personally, I respect him as a man of integrity, which I don't think I can say of the other two I mentioned.

OlennasWimple · 19/12/2016 17:12

Poor Vernon Coaker is being sent out on a New Year road trip to find out what's going wrong with Labour...

howabout · 19/12/2016 17:15

Peregrina I was struggling to understand where the disaffected Lib Dems from 2010 had gone (25% drop to 7%). Could be Labour with a compensating cross over from Labour to UKIP accounting for the increase in Labour being only 4%. However it looks to me more like the West Country where Lib / Dems decided to go Tory and be done with it? That is why I opted for a Con / UKIP / Lib Dem proposition.

howabout · 19/12/2016 17:17

Agreed on Dennis Skinner but I would also put AB in that category.

merrymouse · 19/12/2016 17:36

Talking about the Morning Star:

www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-1bff-Why-the-Morning-Star-supports-a-Leave-vote#.WFgYrTTfXCQ

The referendum doesn't give TM any kind of mandate to interpret Brexit.

To be fair, I suspect the Morning Star's influence is quite limited, but I still don't think anybody really knows what people were voting for. Dennis Skinner? Rees-Mogg? Michael Gove?

Peregrina · 19/12/2016 17:40

A cartoonish response is:

Skinner - the EU is all a filthy capitalist plot, what about the workers?

Rees-Mogg - Yes, it's a capitalist plot, good for me.

Gove, um er well, I thought it might be a good idea.

Swipe left for the next trending thread