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

Westminstenders: The wheels on bus start to fall off, start to fall off…

999 replies

RedToothBrush · 06/04/2017 21:42

The wheels on bus start to fall off, start to fall off…

Since Article 50 has been triggered – 8 days ago:

  1. A week after a terror attack in London, the government threatened to stop co-operation over security issues with the EU. This was quickly retracted as ‘not being a threat’. Except it was.

  2. The ‘Great’ Repeal Act White Paper was published. Its vague, lacks detail, does not have a draft bill and there is no plan for a public consultation over it. It proposes sweeping powers for the government without parliamentary scrutiny using Henry VIII powers.

  3. HMRC have said the new computer system planned for launch in 2019, won’t be able to cope with the additional work which leaving the Customs Union would produce. It would be five times the work load which sounds like a lot more red tape.

  4. Spain have said they would not oppose an Independent Scotland being in the EU.

  5. May’s article 50 letter did not mention Gibraltar and after the publication of the EU draft document on how the Brexit process would be handled, this looks like a massive error and oversight. One of the clauses was that any future arrangements with regard to Gibraltar had to be settled with Spain bi-laterally rather than by the EU and the UK’s agreement with the EU would not apply to Gibraltar, unless Spain agreed. This has been taken as an affront to Gibraltar’s sovereignty, although the document says nothing about sovereignty. Michael Howard, however, decided this was sufficient grounds to threaten our ally Spain with war.

May has not condemned his comments, and laughed it off. Though she was happy to get worked up about the word ‘Easter’ a couple of days later.

Of course, this situation was entirely predictable and was predicted yet this situation seems to have taken the government by surprise. Our reaction, in the context of everything else, has made the UK look like a basket case.

  1. The government’s plan to run talks on the UK’s settlement on leaving the EU in parallel with talks on the UK’s future relationship with the EU has been rejected by the EU. Instead we must do things in stages, with advancement to the next stage only possible after completing the last: Stage 1 – Exit, Stage 2 – Preliminary agreement on future relation, Stage 3 – Exit/Transition Deal, Stage 4 – As third country status enter a new deal.

The effect of this also means that deals we currently have with counties like South Korea through the EU need to be revisited. There is no guarantee these countries will want to continue trading with us on the same terms, if they do not want to.

  1. The EU has set out its own red lines. Our deal 'must encompass safeguards against...fiscal, social & environmental dumping'. Our transition deal must not last longer than three years and individual sectors, like banking, should not get special treatment.

Donald Tusk has said we don’t need a punishment deal as we are doing a good job of shooting ourselves in the foot, whilst Guy Verhofstadt said Brexit is Brexit is a 'catfight in Conservative party that got out of hand” and hoped future generations would reverse it.

  1. May has admitted that we might well have no deal in place by the time we leave the EU. Until now we have been told we would have a deal in two years. She has also admitted an extension of free movement of people beyond Brexit.

  2. The Brexit Select Committee published their report which warned about the dangers of exit without any deal, as well as talking about problems relating to the ‘Great’ Repeal Act, Gibraltar and NI. This is sensible and you’d think uncontroversial, but the Brexiteers threw the toys out of their pram saying it was too pessimistic. The government’s job is, of course, to plan for problems no matter how unlikely – such as disasters – and to hope that never happens. It seems that these Brexiteers don’t want to act responsibility or do their job.

  3. Questions at the WTO have been asked about how Brexit will affect them. Interest in the subject came initially from Indonesia about Tariff Rate Quotas, but other parties who were watching closely were Argentina, China, Russia and the United States.

  4. Phillip Hammond has openly said that there are a number of Tory MPs who want us to not make any agreement with the EU and to crash out in a chaotic exit.

  5. Polling has suggested that people want Brexit to be quick and cheap. Not only that, but the word ‘Brexit’ has started to poll badly. Instead the Brexit department are advising officials to use the phrase “new partnership with Europe”. Lynton Crosby, the mastermind behind 2015’s Conservative victory has also warned that the Tories would probably lose 30 seats they gained from the LDs at an early election.

Of course, even a 2020 election might prove challenging with a transition deal still likely to be unresolved as Brexit drags on. Government strategy is, apparently, to hope that Remainer's anger will have dissolved by 2020.

Eight days in, and the Brexit Bus looks like it strayed into 1980's Toxeth and got torched, its wheels nicked, and graffitied with obscenities over its £350million pledge.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
Kaija · 11/04/2017 22:59

I'm fairly heartened to see Brexiters on here dissociating themselves from the far right given the horrors coming out of Leave.EU lately.

Mistigri · 11/04/2017 23:47

Marine Le Pen's problem is her father

She has her own problems too - like two (or is it more now?) judicial investigations, the part-suspension of her MEP salary, and a habit of saying stuff which gives away the fact that she is very much her father's daughter. The latest is that apparently she thinks there were no French collaborators.

Won't matter: people who support Le Pen, Farage, Wllders et al are not deterred by a little casual anti-semitism.

HashiAsLarry · 12/04/2017 00:04

The latest is that apparently she thinks there were no French collaborators.
Angry
There were some brave brave people in the Resistance. Why did they exist then? We're the others all just quiet plodders who go on with things? Clearly that can't be true, we even had them FFS.
The white washing of history, for want of a clearly far better expression, infuriates me.

scaryteacher · 12/04/2017 00:12

Mistigri What about the skeleton in the Macron closet that I read about last week? Not exactly a skeleton either from the pictures of him.

Dannythechampion · 12/04/2017 00:15

Doesn't everyone have skeletons in the closet in French politics? Whether it be financial ( which appears to be all of them), sexual they all seem to have them. Although Le Pen's seem to be darker than others.

Mistigri · 12/04/2017 05:53

Le Pen's family history is obviously darker but she has very similar legal issues to Fillon.

I'm not sure what scaryteacher is referring to, but anyone who's been in politics risks having past errors of judgement magnified in a close election; if nothing serious has been found then it's not for want of trying. FWIW I think he is probably clean (note that it's my DH who is the Macron fanboy not me).

Round here, in a rural area that has traditionally voted socialist but where the FN has had support in the towns, I think Melenchon is going to get a massive vote, based on the number of posters everywhere and my FB feed. I also think he will mop up some of the FN vote. I'd be hesitant to extrapolate this though.

woman12345 · 12/04/2017 07:19

^Foreign states may have interfered in Brexit vote, report says
MPs are concerned about allegations governments including Russia and China may have interfered with EU referendum website^
www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/12/foreign-states-may-have-interfered-in-brexit-vote-report-says

Donostia · 12/04/2017 08:32

More joy this morning! www.google.es/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/money/2017/apr/11/student-loan-interest-rate-rise-uk-inflation-brexit

Whilst others enjoy low borrowing rates, student loan interest rates are jumping significantly due to Brexit vote/fall in pound.

RedToothBrush · 12/04/2017 08:55

Just a quick reminder. There are two days left to register to vote for local elections. EU citizens resident here are eligible to vote (even if they are getting letters telling them to prepare to get kicked out).

OP posts:
Between4and30characters · 12/04/2017 09:39

The latest is that apparently she thinks there were no French collaborators

Can some one spell out/deconstruct what Marine Le Pen said please and why it means this? I have read a couple of articles and she did not explicitly say this.

From what I've read she said

“I don’t think France is responsible for the Vel d’Hiv.”

She added: “I think that, generally speaking, if there are people responsible, it’s those who were in power at the time. It’s not France.”

Le Pen later issued a statement saying: “Like Charles de Gaulle and François Mitterrand … [I consider that] France and the Republic were in London during the occupation”. She added that the Nazi-collaborationist Vichy regime “was not France”.

“This does not at all exonerate the actual personal responsibility of those French who took part in the vile Vel d’Hiv round-up and all the atrocities committed in that period,”

www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/09/marine-le-pen-denies-french-role-wartime-roundup-paris-jews

It reads to me that she was saying that the responsibility lies with the authorities and collaborators who took part in the atrocity rather than with France as a whole.

I know very little about French history, and am fully prepared to be told there is some nuance or subtext, or translation issue here but please can someone explain this to me?

SapphireStrange · 12/04/2017 09:51

Going back a bit, but the 'neo-liberal' conversation: I thought the term for what we seemed to be talking about ('low government intervention in markets, low taxation, low to no levels of public provision of services')
was more correctly 'libertarian'?

'Liberal' to me still means left or centrist and societal.

Mistigri · 12/04/2017 10:51

t reads to me that she was saying that the responsibility lies with the authorities and collaborators who took part in the atrocity rather than with France as a whole.

Are you seriously defending her?

What is a country if not the citizens living in it? The French who collaborated were just as French as those who resisted. That does not of course make all modern French people personally responsible for the rounding-up of Jews by collaborators (any more than ordinary Germans are responsible for Nazism), but it does place a responsibility upon them to be honest about their country's history.

NinonDeLenclos · 12/04/2017 11:09

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the FT is reporting that:

Business leaders find access to PM elusive and there are unwritten rules

The prime minister’s team admit she has chosen “a different way” to engage with business but deny she has closed herself off. Indeed, senior lobbyists say it is relatively easy to meet officials in Number 10 — provided you want to talk about Brexit...

Mr Cameron’s business advisory group, which met once a quarter and had about 20 members from some of Britain’s biggest businesses, was abolished and Mrs May’s team promised “a different approach” to engaging with business.

Carolyn Fairbairn, head of the CBI employers’ group, was initially frozen out after she accused the prime minister of “closing the door” on Britain’s open economy...

But recently the mood has changed, as Mrs May and her ministers face the necessity of engaging business over Brexit. Lobby groups say Downing Street is now eager to hear from a range of sectors about how they will cope with the UK’s exit from the EU and the regulatory challenges this could bring...

"What really gets you a good hearing is if you come in and say that you see opportunities around Brexit and come up with solutions to any problems,” said one corporate adviser...

Getting beyond the gatekeepers for a face-to-face meeting with Mrs May is more problematic. There are notable but relatively rare exceptions. Mrs May met Nissan chief executive Carlos Ghosn over post-Brexit investment plans for its plant in Sunderland.

NinonDeLenclos · 12/04/2017 11:11

An FT reader comment is worth quoting:

This is unnerving, but true to form given TM's record in the home office. It also helps explain why business opposition to Brexit has been so muted.

The effect is corrosive though. I was reading through an 'independent' institutes report on one of the technical aspects of Brexit and the customs union last week - there was a real lack of intellectual rigour, and 'solutions' were proposed that in the real world have significant problems attached to them (and on which the evidence base is weak). The motivation of the institute is obviously to retain access and influence, even at the cost of providing 'the unvarnished truth'.

If these are the rules of the court for the courtier then the ruler will make bad decisions. A fatal mix of overconfidence for one and deference from the other.

Between4and30characters · 12/04/2017 11:32

Are you seriously defending her?

I thought I explained my question, which was a question, not a defence of anyone. I explained that this is not a subject I know much about. I asked for someone to explain this to me as to me, on the face of it saying "a country" is not responsible for something but rather the individuals concerned doesn't seem massively controversial. Clearly trying to have a conversation to, genuinely, try to understand where people are coming from, on a subject I understand little about, to broaden my understanding is just going to lead to me being called a fascist sympathiser, which seems a shame.

It's all getting a bit Orwellian for me.

RedToothBrush · 12/04/2017 11:40

Today's 'outrage' article on Twatter is this delightful one, which has liberals spitting out their tea:

news.sky.com/story/sky-views-thin-skinned-millennials-need-a-spanking-10834132
Sky Views: Thin-skinned Millennials need a spanking

How the world has changed in 12 months...
Not content with shafting their economic prospects and hopes and dreams, Millennials need beating too.

(The funny bit is more about how the guy who wrote it is getting rinsed on twitter for going to a 'posh school', doing PPE at Oxford, studying mime and dropping out of the army to focus on his studies).

www.ft.com/content/32cd1e87-c7d1-3026-86fc-bce5229711d1
Brexit: why did the ECJ become a UK ‘red line’?
David Allen Green

Long and short of it. To do with rights - and its led by Johnson (possibly influenced by his wife) and former Home Secretary Theresa May.
Punishing people is no small part of it.

tradebetablog.wordpress.com/2017/04/12/eu-uk-wto-services/
If the EU and UK fall back on WTO commitments what does this mean forservices?

Its not as straightforward as made out. By any means.

www.research-live.com/article/opinion/hearts-and-minds/id/5021112#.WO3ynVKyvsE.twitter
Hearts and Minds
What people say can be at odds with what they feel, even when it comes to voting, says ICM’s Martin Boon, who believes this insight could be at the heart of anew way ofpolling.

Fascinating article.

The EU referendum is a great case in point – arguments about the perceived failure of ‘Project Fear’ have largely been impressionistic and assumptive, but our tests during the referendum campaign revealed that ‘Taking Back Control’ had twice the emotional power of ‘Project Fear’.

and

The Sugar Tax, too, is as much an injection of energy to the emotional coffers as a post-lunch chocolate bar is to a tired child: 59% support it explicitly but this rises to 77 when we factor in the emotional component. And you know that age-old ropey premise about people being willing to pay extra in tax if the proceeds were ring-fenced for the NHS (but then voting for someone saying the opposite)? Guess what: 42% still say they would support this, but the PECS score plummets to only 15. Look forward to seeing that one on Jeremy Corbyn’s manifesto suicide note.

(Obviously we are a nation of heartless cheapskates who want the moon on a stick but don't want to pay for it. Which might be a problem for Brexit in the long run...)

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/11/frontline-brexit-culture-wars-ask-comedian-al-murray?CMP=twt_gu
What’s it like on the frontline in the Brexit culture wars? Just ask a comedian
Al Murray (aka the Pub Landlord)

Love this just for the last paragraph:

So offering up no jokes about Brexit – or po-faced remainers, come to that – would be a terrible dereliction of duty. And, given that Brexit is a patriotic bunfight, surely it’s our patriotic duty, now more than ever, to laugh at ourselves, one of the chief pillars of ours being the Greatest Sense of Humour in the World? To flick British V-signs, not artless American single fingers, at our lords and masters? Get over it, you won.

Yep, its it British and Patriotic to take the piss out of Brexit. Lots. Its a good argument to use against anyone squawking about 'traitors within'. Our very British History is one of embracing immigration and being rebellious upstarts who put two fingers up against the government, often using dark humour in the process. It is fair to argue that if you aren't laughing about absurdity of Brexit, you're not really British (and Brexit is absurd even if you are a leaver).

OP posts:
BigChocFrenzy · 12/04/2017 11:40

I've always understood "NEO-liberalism" as being liberal economically, i.e. laissez-faire, free trade, as few restrictions as possible on business.
Low tax too, so lower welfare
That usually means being on the right, economically

What we mean by liberal wrt party politics is social liberalism.
So laissez-faire on social isssues - feminism, gay rights, abortion - but also actively campaigning against racism and discrimination of all kinds, supporting the vulnerable.
Sometimes (when they've the courage of their convictions) higher tax for higher welfare.
So, being on the left on those issues.

Maybe a simplification, but the NEOs tend to be concerned about issues that affect business and the very wealthy - making it easier for them to become even wealthier - whereas social liberals are concerned about the vulnerable and those who aren't rich.

Quite different aims and effects.
It's not straight left / right, because some people are neo-liberals economically and social liberals wrt discrimination and what we used to call "bedroom" issues.
However, they usually prioritise lower tax, hence are conservatives

Peregrina · 12/04/2017 11:48

The FT comment which I like best, so far, is:

The more I think about how TM (and her crew) behaves when it comes to critiques/opinons on Brexit, the more I think about the 1986 Challenger shuttle disaster and what the Rogers Commission stated about NASA's culture and decision making process...

Mistigri · 12/04/2017 11:48

between

Le Monde - which is the French equivalent of the Times (boring, conservative with a big and a small C) - said in an editorial:

Editorial du « Monde ». En affirmant, dimanche 9 avril, dans l’émission « Le Grand Jury », que « la France n’était pas responsable du Vél’ d’Hiv », Marine Le Pen a franchi une ligne rouge : celle du consensus national sur la lecture des épisodes les plus douloureux de l’histoire de France, en l’occurrence celui de la déportation des juifs de France sous l’occupation allemande.

Translation: Le Monde editorial. By claiming, on Sunday 9th April on the TV programme The Grand Jury that "France was not responsible for the Vél' d'Hiv", MLP crossed a red line on the national consensus regarding the interpretation of one of the most shameful episodes in French history, namely the deportation of French Jews during the German occupation."

I am happy to translate more of the article if anyone would like me to.

Mistigri · 12/04/2017 11:53

Just to add that the full article is here: mobile.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2017/04/10/rafle-du-vel-d-hiv-la-faute-de-le-pen_5108861_3232.html

It outlines how France's current national position on the atrocity developed, and emphasises that MLP's statement should be seen in the context of her position as the head of a party for whom the gas chambers were considered a mere "detail" until the very recent past.

Peregrina · 12/04/2017 11:58

This is not apropos of any particular conversation on this thread, but I am just reading a book of reminiscences by Dennis Skinner. He talks of an occasion when he was baiting a group of acolytes surrounding Thatcher. Almost as a postscript, he adds that these same acolytes were the ones who, a few months later, stabbed her in the back.

The same could happen to May, albeit I think she as one or two trusted advisers rather than acolytes. I don't doubt that they will jump ship when they see the rocks looming.

Between4and30characters · 12/04/2017 12:14

Misti Thank you for linking to the Le Monde editorial. I would be very interested in reading a translation of more of the article if you have time. It would help me understand the national consensus on France's role in the war and the context of Le Pen's comments, which I have little knowledge of.

woman12345 · 12/04/2017 12:30

Bravo 'Le Monde'. Shameful that there are no 'lignes rouge' in Britain. Pas une. Thanks for posting Misti.

Mistigri · 12/04/2017 12:30

between ok, will do a quick translation later, but the gist of it is that MLP's position harks back to the immédiate post war period when de Gaulle did not consider the Vichy regime a legitimate french government. Modern historians and politicians (since Chirac - a right wing president) acknowledge that French policemen carried out the atrocity under the orders of the (French) government under the occupation, and that France has a duty to the victims to acknowledge its responsibility as a country. There is no question of modern French people being held individually responsible any more than we hold Germans today responsible for the holocaust.

RedToothBrush · 12/04/2017 12:39

I thought I explained my question, which was a question, not a defence of anyone. I explained that this is not a subject I know much about. I asked for someone to explain this to me as to me, on the face of it saying "a country" is not responsible for something but rather the individuals concerned doesn't seem massively controversial. Clearly trying to have a conversation to, genuinely, try to understand where people are coming from, on a subject I understand little about, to broaden my understanding is just going to lead to me being called a fascist sympathiser, which seems a shame.

Every individual has a social responsibility. Even in authoritarian regimes.

To use the Nazi example. One of the things that was highlighted in the BBC's 'A Warning From History' series was how the Nazis took such control so quickly.

They looked about how the SS controlled towns and what they found from the records really surprised them as it was a very different dynamic to the one that they expected.

It was the sheer lack of officers. There were a handful for a population of hundreds of thousands. The Nazis didn't need to spy on all those people. People would do the work for them, and would report their neighbours for anything or everything that made them stand out and not conform, without being prompted or threatened.

One of the examples they used was that of a woman who was German and wasn't in anyway political. She was just 'different'. She was reported to the SS by several different people out of their sheer dislike. No one would have done anything to those people for not reporting this woman. Equally, no one stood up to defend the woman, for the same reasons.

You can not JUST blame the officials at the top for that type of reason. The rules are there, but can only be implemented with society conformity and adherence to those rules. In many cases, its not just a question of people being unwilling to turn a blind eye but people who actively went beyond the basic letter of these rules and contributed to expanding how they were enforced within society, and even made their own suggestions on how they could be expanded.

That's the essence of it all. Society is not solely dictated by the government. They can try and create certain conditions to control behaviour but ultimately its a herd mentality that allows things like this to occur.

The reverse can also be true, as was demonstrated by the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Society is everyone.

I think the whole debate over Holocaust Denial and Revisionism, is not just about legitimising and sanitising the horror of appalling acts during WWII, but also one which is about abdicating the responsibility for our own individual contributions and expectations of society. This is what creates the danger of such awful acts happening again.

An unwillingness to acknowledge both sides of this is part of the problem. There is a real problem with getting people to look at their own grotesque image in the mirror as it requires a certain about of humility and soul searching. Its easy to spot it in people in the public eye and pin all the responsibility on them, but at the same time these people can only do and say these things because no one challenges them. Apathy is as big a part of this as active involvement.

Brexit has come about in no small part because of certain conditions within society. It comes from a lack of awareness and sympathy for the problems that some people face and how that affects their opportunities in life which provoked a backlash. It also comes from a deliberation exploitation of this nastier side of human nature that is suspicious of those who are different and 'not like us'.

Again in the context of Brexit and the idea of attitudes to shared responsibility, I do think that the UK is suffering from a very real abdication of that. The idea that, 'X, Y or Z is someone else's problem not mine', is a mentally I think is deeply ingrained in British society - and business and probably one that is contributing a great deal to our lack of productivity.

Farage casting himself as some kind of victim despite standing in front of provocative posters is a good obvious example. The Daily Mail having a go about the horrific attack on a refugee asking where the hate came from, whilst having printed anti-immigrant stories on its front page for decades is another.

These perhaps are the extreme example, but there are much less obvious examples too, including from liberal circles. Its all about the disconnect between (and lack of responsibility for) the consequences of individual actions. Its about that creates a butterfly effect which is hugely amplified from the sheer number of those individual actions: which is the fabric and very definition of society itself.

OP posts: