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: Ding Ding Ding! All Aboard! Boris’s Brexit Bus gets going.

999 replies

RedToothBrush · 26/01/2017 14:08

The Judges have Ruled.

They have restored parliamentary sovereignty to the people from the crown. Hard line Brexiteers don’t like it. This is how democracy looks though. Everyone gets a say, even people who you don’t agree with. Bloody Bremoaners. If irony wasn’t dead on 24th June, it was hung drawn and quartered on 24th Jan. I hope in time Gina Miller will get the recognition she deserves in history.

What does it actually mean for Brexit though? Can Brexit be thwarted by the decision?

Short Answer: No Brexit can not be stopped. The ‘Will of the People’ will be respected ultimately. (Though also worth stating the ‘Will of the People’ is not a fixed thing. The 23rd June vote was a mere snapshot of a moment in time. The Will of the People is ever changing and this should never be forgotten).

A majority of MPs have pledged to vote for a50. Whether the LDs, Greens, Labour Remainers and SNP oppose Brexit is ultimately irrelevant. Talks of ‘frustrating Brexit’ is nothing more than hot air from people frustrated they are not getting everything on their terms alone.

Why is the ruling important though? What next? What you should look out for? (Trying to keep this as brief as possible on immediate effect)

  1. There is no reason (at this point) to suggest that May will miss her March 31st deadline.

  2. The European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill is scheduled to go through the HoC between Jan 31 and Feb 8. Two days of debate will be in the HoC on Tuesday (with parliament sitting until midnight) and Wednesday with the key vote on Wednesday. The following week on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday will go to the committee and report stages and for the third reading (See this FT article Brexit bill likely to face biggest trials in House of Lords for details of what happens at what stage). That makes 5 days total and is significantly less than other important European decisions. It is being viewed as an attempt to gag parliament by many.

  3. The opposition normally agree to common’s timetabling before making such announcements. Several Labour and Conservative MPs are calling for Labour to vote against the timetable. It is not clear normal procedure has been followed, on this occasion, however Corbyn has imposed a three line whip on it after a heated shadow Cabinet meeting. This seems to suggest Labour whips agreed timetable. A large scale rebellion and (more) shadow cabinet resignations could well be on the cards.

  4. Lords could yet, get more time to debate the bill than Commons, due to government not setting debating time. That alone would be something of a scandal.

  5. The government have conceded over the publication of a white paper and say it now will happen, however rumours are that the government are trying to delay its publication until AFTER the a50 debate has finished. This makes the whole thing a farce. Its not obvious what Tory Rebels will do under the circumstances. It is theoretically possible there may be enough for a government defeat, but that is a now an extreme possibility with Corbyn imposing a three line whip. (That in itself might embolden a few Tories though).

  6. When MPs voted to support a50 in December this only passed due to an amendment requiring the government to produce a plan. Always worth remembering this important caveat. It will be omitted by a lot of media coming media coverage if MPs support any amendments or seek to obstruct a vote due to a lack of detail as a ‘betrayal’. It is not. It is a consistent request and a necessary part of scrutiny.

  7. The Brexit Select Committee which is supposed to scrutinise the government just got more important. Its recommendations carry weight and will influence the decisions that MPs make.

  8. Amendments to a50 law will be crucial. The SNP have suggested they want FIFTY. Most will just be rubbish, but they hopefully would have at least generate proper debate. This could be a worthwhile process regardless of how it might be framed, however the timetable makes that difficult if not impossible to do. Rather than frustrating things it could have been part of a positive process to help build consensus and tackle certain concerns.

  9. Labour has been handed a chance to get out of the government blaming them for a bad deal. It gives them a chance to hold the government more accountable and get their teeth into things. It is their chance to throw away. They need to stand up and not roll over. Corbyn's Three Line Whip is exactly that. Now is the time to pester MPs over amendments. (Equally applies to Leavers concerned about Tory Brexit).

  10. Chuka Umunna has suggested an amendment to give £350 million to the NHS. It would be an opportunity to draw some much needed battle lines about the future of the NHS and a chance to make ground to protect it which would be an important position for Labour. I don’t see it happening, but you can hope.

  11. The danger for Labour is to join SNP in a ‘road block’ of amendments. They will need to be selective in their approach.

  12. What Rebel Tories do next is important. These are both Leavers and Remainers and this should not be forgotten. It gives them a lot more power.

  13. The Supreme Court ruled against the devolved assemblies. This has two effects. It might heighten the temptation and support for Independence. It might also force nationalists to work with their English peers where there is common ground. Thus unifying opposition in the United Kingdom.

  14. The legal position is now established as the GFA only refers to NI’s place in the UK, not the EU. This leaves the door open for NI to choose Ireland and the EU. Similar rejection of the Sewell convention having legal effect, makes the case for a new Scottish Independence bid.

  15. How 10) and 11) are handled is crucial to the country’s future. May needs to be more sensitive. Whilst there is no appetite for independence / reunification at present this may yet change as a result of Brexit. It does not necessarily weaken the nationalist’s hands in the long run. Amendments relating to assurance around devolution could still be a sticking point if other parties support. (I think fair chance they will in order to try and prevent break up of the UK. England & Wales dominated by Conservatives forever otherwise). It also put DUP in interesting position.

  16. May is doing more shit stirring in NI saying the IRA needs to be investigated more and suggesting soldiers were ‘persecuted’. This is inflammatory stuff. If she carries on, don’t expect the GFA to last. At this point, I might be tempted to say, that she wants it to break so she can enforce Brexit and remove the Human Rights Act.

  17. The issue of a50 reversibility has not gone away. The positions of the Labour Party and the Lib Dems would be vastly strengthened by reversibility. This is not to stop Brexit as such, but because it strengthens their demands to get a deal that they think is in the best interests of the UK because it would be potentially easier to reject a Tory Brexit. The legal case to try and get an ECJ referral is ongoing in Ireland and is important.

  18. The possibility of a second referendum, has also not gone away gone away. If EU states have to agree to a deal and some put it to their citizens, that makes it more politically difficult for it not to be put to the British.

  19. There is still a strong chance of more legal challenges to Brexit. There are lots of unresolved issues relating to rights which the Supreme Court did not resolve through the a50 challenge. This is for government to decide upon – and if it does not address those issues, then individuals will have no alternative to go through the courts to seek clarity on their positions. Most notably is positions of British Citizens abroad and EU citizen married or with children in UK.

  20. Government has made a notable backtracking about the role of the rule of law and the authority of the courts. This is progress and perhaps an acknowledgement of how they handled it so poorly in December and how they can not act unopposed.

  21. May’s speech last week was protective against this, so she can make the political point that she tried. She has in some ways protected herself against a Kipper backlash by actually proving it was not possible to carry out some of their proposals. This might actually be good in the long run for fighting the far right in the UK.

  22. The Government Appeal was effectively totally unnecessary. Expect a FOI request to give someone a stick to beat the government with.

  23. Don’t forget the Lords. They ultimately won’t oppose a50. It threatens their existence and would provoke a constitutional crisis which most will seek to prevent. Their job is to act in the national interest, to act for the best interests of the people, to uphold democracy and our constitutional framework. That means they can not ultimately block a50. They might insist on amendments though, especially if the Commons don’t do their job properly.

  24. The Stoke and Copeland By-Elections are unlikely to be too affected by the ruling at this stage – as it is unchanged from Dec This might change though. If a50 going through parliament has been concluded by 23rd Feb, Remainers are most likely to be unhappy. If a50 bill looks like it is being ‘road blocked’ Leavers might get more enraged and motivated to turnout.

  25. None of this means that Hard Brexit won’t happen. The EU still has the upper hand here. The deal we are seeking might not be possible. It does however mean that parliament rather than the government should have a more active role in proceedings.

  26. Final point is that the ruling gives a chance of consensus in the National Interest and not just that of Hardline Leavers. The wording of the bill, perhaps doesn't. It looks like May’s Tory First Policy, is still full steam ahead. I thought it would change the tone of debate as the government would be forced to change tact. Its not looking likely.

Next stop on the Brexit –Aeroplane-- Bus; Trump's America.

That’s sure to be guaranteed torture to witness.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
19
woman12345 · 29/01/2017 09:55

What a difference 12 hours makes:
David Gauke, representing UK govt on Marr, says Trump's ban "divisive" and could be "counterproductive".

What did I say about my postcards working! Grin
Write to them

Kaija · 29/01/2017 09:58

"The campaign to leave the EU and Trumps race to the White House were intrinsically linked. "

Absolutely. Even used the same company, Cambridge Analytica, to target voters.

Peregrina · 29/01/2017 09:58

Why hasn't Farage spoken? He can't usually wait to open his mouth.

missmoon · 29/01/2017 09:59

woman I'm going to write to my Tory MP again today. I'm wondering what would be the most effective thing to say. She's a career politician just starting out in a (roughly) 52% Remain seat. Only opposition around here are the Lib Dems. I want to say something relating to Trump and Brexit.

RedToothBrush · 29/01/2017 09:59

Less extremism requires indentity what it is. It is not extreme to be angry at people who have sought to justify the home office's actions and behaviour towards people lawfully here. Nor is it extremist to point out that the home office has acted in an unlawful manner on numerous occasions in recent years. Nor is extremist to point out how immigrants have contributed to this country.

If you are suggesting that the centre ground is now the extreme than that's where we have a problem.

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 29/01/2017 10:02

Sorry this should read Nigel. Damn autocorrect.

Big has popped up going on about how popular Trump is in the UK. This is like trump going on about the size of his crowds. Trump's approval rating are arse in us. I'm sure they are so much better here. Refuse to link article.

OP posts:
HesterThrale · 29/01/2017 10:05

Woman, yes to postcard pressure!

Let's start with these (in Remain seats):

www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/help_persuade_these_25_remain_voting_mps_to_oppose_article_50_1_4867076?%20sh

woman12345 · 29/01/2017 10:10

And just written again to MP and nice local councillor: local and national organisation.

Headfullofdreams · 29/01/2017 10:13

I wrote to my MP last night but he is a turd of the highest order. Won't hold my breath.

woman12345 · 29/01/2017 10:18

And local politicians, really interesting to get inside story on where leave and remain is place locally so can target actions.

BromptonOratory · 29/01/2017 10:20

If you don't condemn the way in which the home office has been acting and the consistent use by MPs in describing EU citizens as bargining chips and their unwillingness of parliament to guarantee the rights of EU citizens unilaterally

In a word - yes

I think you often talk a lot of sense Red but I think you are wrong here.

You see, I don't think EU citizens in the UK are being used as bargaining chips by the government any more than UK citizens in the EU are by the EU (and as an aside it does amaze me that for all remain believers think the EU is such a wonderful democratic institution, I don't think I have ever on these threads heard one saying what they would like the EU to do in terms of the Brexit negotiations. Odd isn't it, it's almost as if people think the EU is not influencable or open to changing with changing circumstances).

I think that the "bargaining chips" label refers to trying to ensure the position of UK nationals in the EU is protected. I'm not sure why you think their rights should be sacrificed for those of EU nationals' in the UK.

You can carry on calling everyone a fascist sympathiser who disagrees with you on one point which you chose as the arbitar of moral and political rectitude. All you are doing by this is weakening the currency (as has happened with "racist" what with so many people defining it as "anyone who disagrees with me on immigration policy"). You are weakening the currency, and stoking division.

woman12345 · 29/01/2017 10:23

missmoon this is borntobequiet's template used with her permission from
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2839859-Its-been-just-over-a-week-and-what-a-week-Amazing-So-good-The-best?pg=23

Text of my email to my (female, Conservative) MP:

I write to express my concern about the current state of affairs in the US and our Government's reaction to it.

Mr Trump's administration has banned immigration from a number of countries and this will affect a number of British citizens who hold dual nationality or who were born in those countries. Your colleague the Conservative MP for Stratford upon Avon is one of these people. I used to live in Stratford, have met him and find the situation both ridiculous and chilling.

Mrs May has not commented on this so far and I would like her to condemn it in the strongest terms. Though I accept that she played her meeting with Trump cleverly in some aspects - for example wrt NATO - I found pictures of her hand in hand with the self confessed sexual predator and obvious racist quite sickening.

The parallels in the US with the rise of Hitler in the 1930s are far too striking to be ignored. Does Mrs May want to be seen as a latter-day Chamberlain? We are in tremendous danger from this horrific state of affairs and I hope the Conservative Parliamentary Party will make it clear to the Prime Minister that we have a moral duty to make it clear to the Americans that no trade deals will be forthcoming with such a repugnant US Administration, one that silences its scientists, encourages religious and racial hatred and wishes to remove women's rights to reproductive medicine - especially as we are most unlikely to benefit from any agreement that enables US big pharma to get its hands on the NHS.

SapphireBird · 29/01/2017 10:23

Can anyone PM me and help me formulate my letter to my MP? I'm only getting angry rants constituent at the moment Hmm

I like in a conservative safe seat - my mp has to do no work to get elected in. According to online sites (they work for you), my mp has voted the opposite way to the way I would in parliament (he comes across as a self serving bigot when you see how he's voted), he also responds to almost no correspondence Shock.

I just don't know where to start Angry

SemiPermanent · 29/01/2017 10:27

YY to Brompton's post at 10:20.

missmoon · 29/01/2017 10:28

Thanks for the letter woman, very helpful!

SemiPermanent · 29/01/2017 10:30

Though I accept that she played her meeting with Trump cleverly in some aspects - for example wrt NATO - I found pictures of her hand in hand with the self confessed sexual predator and obvious racist quite sickening.

Bit of trivia wrt the hand holding - Trump apparently grabbed her hand as they walked down a small slope - he (allegedly) has a 'fear of slopes'....

(Can't remember where I read that now though).

RedToothBrush · 29/01/2017 10:31

Let me just say on that, that an early resolution was possible. The first time May laid out her intent was at conservative conference where she normalised extreme views after weak leadership and criticism over racist attacks in UK. Then Amber Rudd's speech.

At this point it was difficult to take a soft line on anything for the EU. We were treated in the same way Trump is now.

Yet the way this is perceived is as if it's down to the EU.

No it was a conscious choice by May that left the EU with few places to go.

May has had many opportunities to soften tone on this. To condemn racist attacks etc. She has not. She has ploughed on.

The EU being to blame has been normalised and accepted by people on both sides. That's simply not true. It was a decision to burn bridges.

OP posts:
SapphireBird · 29/01/2017 10:32

X post. Thank you!

BromptonOratory · 29/01/2017 10:32

Less extremism requires indentity what it is. It is not extreme to be angry at people who have sought to justify the home office's actions and behaviour towards people lawfully here. Nor is it extremist to point out that the home office has acted in an unlawful manner on numerous occasions in recent years. Nor is extremist to point out how immigrants have contributed to this country.

If you are suggesting that the centre ground is now the extreme than that's where we have a problem

You are misunderstanding me. I am not saying that any of these things are extreme or that the centre ground is the extreme. I am saying that it is extreme to right off anyone who disagrees with you, even if their views are no more extreme than yours, just different, as a fascist sympathiser.

And I agree that there are some parallels between Brexit and Trump. There are also a lot of non-parallels, and I get the feeling some on this thread are saying, if you don't support Trump you must admit you were wrong on leaving the EU (obvs I'm simplifying) and I think this is a non-sequiter.

Arborea · 29/01/2017 10:35

I am beyond shocked and sickened at the US travel ban, and more than that the changes to the Security Council (which is IMHO what the dead cat of the travel ban was intended to distract from).

However I do wonder whether the reason May balks at criticising Trump's government by executive order is that it is remarkably similar to her desire to use Henry VIII clauses to the same ends.

And can those people who are now decrying Trump, but who thought that last week's Supreme Court judgement was anti democratic and unnecessary see the irony?

GloriaGaynor · 29/01/2017 10:39

If you want to leave the EU, are unhappy with freedom of movement and support TM and the government continuing to implement the referendum outcome (with parliament's input) then you are agreeing with what Trump is doing over immigration/refugees/etc and are tantamount to a fascist sympathiser?

Then you have backed a regime and a PM who is perfectly happy to do business with racists and human rights abusers Trump and Erdogan.

The clues were in the racist adverts, in the overt racism the lies totally lack or moral integrity of the Leave campaign. In the pro-Trumpism of Farage.

You voted for some very unsavoury people and now you're whining because you didn't see where could lead.

Well Remainers did.

And as for alienation. This government and the leave voters couldn't give a toss about alienating the Remainer half of the population who have been ignored. Requests for a 'middle way' that does not wreck the economy have also been ignored. So forgive me if your appeal to find a 'middle way' now sound hollow.

GloriaGaynor · 29/01/2017 10:40

*in the overt racism, the lies, and the total lack of moral integrity

Piggeligg · 29/01/2017 10:46

IMO all MPs, from any party and regardless of their or their constituency's position on leave/remain, should vote down the Article 50 bill as a strong and united message that the UK is still a parliamentary democracy not an elected dictatorship.

Until Parliament is given a reasonable amount of time to debate this properly then I don't think even leavers should be supporting this bill at this time.

woman12345 · 29/01/2017 10:46

As has been pointed out on this and other threads, not all leavers are trump supporters.
Nuanced views are part of a healthy democracy.
Accommodation of minority views also.
If any leavers want to help protest against Moslem ban they're more than welcome, in fact, needed!

RedToothBrush · 29/01/2017 10:52

Let me clarify. I think there were many reasons for leaving the EU that not everyone shared. Not all leavers are the same. Even on the grounds of immigration.

I don't agree with the immigration argument but where it exists it still has nuances.

It's the tone and approach that matters. It is the lack of speaking out on occasions where people should have and instead too many people have find ways to justify May's hard line rather than a more reasonable and frankly humane approach.

I get why it has happened. It's still not acceptable though.

The nuasances are the important thing.

Citizens of nowhere was always about alienating people and making them unwelcome in their own homes. Making people fear for their future. Stirring and normalising to deliberately shift the centre ground for political self interest rather than national interest.

Despite the public outcry in October over this, the home office has taken an ever more aggressive line and posters have sort to blame and question EU citizens over their immigration status repeatedly on MN. Why didn't they do this before? Why have they not completed forms properly? Why did they fail to supply passport? Etc etc.

It's one thing to be anti immigration in principle. This type of behaviour to MN EU citizens is quite another.

THAT is what I have the problem with.

OP posts: