Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

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
BigChocFrenzy · 12/04/2017 21:55

The US sometimes refer to "suicide by cop" but imo this is not appropriate when the suicide is a byproduct, iyswim, of politically motivated murders.

BigChocFrenzy · 12/04/2017 21:59

Loners who just want to kill at random, without any political motive, are classed as "spree killers" not terrorists. So, like Hungerford.

Horrible that we have so many named classes of mass murderers: serial killers, family annhilators, spree killers etc

However, a political - or nationalist motive - is imo a terrorist act, regardless of the mental health / race / religion etc of the perpetraor

whatwouldrondo · 12/04/2017 22:01

There is always a problem of definition given that all human behaviour is on a spectrum. In two dimensions you can draw a line that defines terrorism at sophisticated planned attacks involving organisations / networks / cells or at lone wolf attention seekers with MH issues exploiting a political cause.What I have a problem with comfort is adding a third dimension to the spectrum and making any sort of distinction on the basis of the cause or ethnicity of those carrying out the attack. Nobody throughout the 80s and 90s and all the bombings and terror I lived through in London suggested that immigration / borders etc were the issue (though borders were obviously a cause). A terrorist with a cause does not give a shit about borders, if they did not grow up and live here then they will get on a plane, unless you are advocating banning tourists, or indeed a wholesale ban of anyone from certain countries a la Trump's idiocy. Quite clearly white christians are no less likely to indulge in terror than any other group so do

whatwouldrondo · 12/04/2017 22:02

we close our countries to all foreigners?

whatwouldrondo · 12/04/2017 22:08

What is obnoxious and racist is for the likes of Farage to treat each new tragic loss of life as an excuse to blame immigration, and when it became clear that that it is homegrown to have a go at multiculturalism, something that is actually working so well for the majority of people who live with many cultures that they don't have a problem with immigration and were much less vulnerable to the Leave campaigns appeals to Xenophobia, which were far more effective in parts of the country who have few immigrants.

woman12345 · 12/04/2017 22:10
Just posted this on another thread, it's the great Chris Hitchens, on religious extremism and totalitarianism, and it's so pertinent now. And to what's behind the different varieties of totalitarianism/terrorism we seem to be being afflicted by atm, in Europe, US and ME. (including what he says about right wing extremist twits in Israel).
comfortandjoyce · 12/04/2017 22:10

whatwouldrondo

Quite clearly white christians are no less likely to indulge in terror than any other group

Do you have statistics to bear out that statement in 21st century Europe?

Mistigri · 12/04/2017 22:10

I think that classifying lone wolf killers as either "terrorists" or "spree killers" is incredibly unhelpful. These are almost invariably unwell people who have a bee in their bonnet about something; what that "something" is may be essentially random.

What's more important is restricting the access to deadly weapons for people who may "crack". This is why there are far fewer mass killings in Europe than in the US: because it's harder for unstable people to arm themselves with weapons capable of killing many people in a short time.

There are exceptions to the above of course (eg Breivik), but arguing about whether he is a terrorist or "merely" a psychopath seems rather unhelpful to me.

Mistigri · 12/04/2017 22:17

Do you have statistics to bear out that statement in 21st century Europe?

Here - www.datagraver.com/case/people-killed-by-terrorism-per-year-in-western-europe-1970-2015 - goes back to the 1970s but you can see figures from 2000. The spikes in 2004 and 2011 were white, presumably christian groups or individuals - the Madrid train attack by ETA and then Breivik in Norway. If you go further back, terrorist deaths were much higher and with the exception of Lockerbie mostly perpetrated by white, often christian groups (IRA, ETA, Bader Meinhof etc - latter possibly not overtly christian, but certainly from a white Christian culture).

comfortandjoyce · 12/04/2017 22:17

Mistigri

There are exceptions to the above of course (eg Breivik), but arguing about whether he is a terrorist or "merely" a psychopath seems rather unhelpful to me.

A good case in point: Breivik was a mass murdering, far right, white supremacist, psychopathic terrorist. Naming the problem correctly is the first step towards understanding and tackling it.

woman12345 · 12/04/2017 22:17

Rather a peculiar looking web site comfort but Christian atrocities going back 2.300 years.
www.truthbeknown.com/victims.htm

More recent ones here:
www.salon.com/2013/08/03/the_10_worst_examples_of_christian_or_far_right_terrorism_partner/

Watch Chris Hitchens, he's good, explains why they do it.

Kaija · 12/04/2017 22:18

Just seen the footage of Leicester fans in Madrid.

Just when you thought your national shame levels couldn't get any higher.

comfortandjoyce · 12/04/2017 22:22

Mistigri

Um, I hate to break this to you, but the last graph on that website (updated for 2016) clearly indicates that the majority of 21st century Western European terrorism is "Islam inspired / Jihadist". The huge amount of "Other" terrorism that peaked from 1970-1990 has fallen away almost entirely.

Mistigri · 12/04/2017 22:22

I should think that police forces in major European cities will be hoping that brexit applies to European football too :-/

Mistigri · 12/04/2017 22:30

Um, I hate to break this to you, but the last graph on that website (updated for 2016) clearly indicates that the majority of 21st century Western European terrorism is "Islam inspired / Jihadist". The huge amount of "Other" terrorism that peaked from 1970-1990 has fallen away almost entirely.

Since 2010 that is undoubtedly true, but you don't get to cherry pick (you're talking to grown ups on this thread). I would be prepared to bet that ETA has killed many, many more people in Europe than Isis-linked terrorists, and this is certainly true for Irish terrorist groups. In neither case was terrorism solved by demonising whole religous or national groups, but by good police and military intelligence, and by negotiated settlements.

Of course negotiated settlement isn't possible with ISIS, but the experience of the UK - which since the London attacks in 2007 has seen no large-scale Islamic terrorism - suggests that good intelligence and decent community policing (something France and Belgium notably lack) are probably helpful in preventing "home grown" attacks (which account, I believe, for the great majority of deaths from ISIS-linked terrorism in Europe).

HashiAsLarry · 12/04/2017 22:31

A terrorist with a cause does not give a shit about borders, if they did not grow up and live here then they will get on a plane, unless you are advocating banning tourists, or indeed a wholesale ban of anyone from certain countries a la Trump's idiocy.
I've been unfortunate enough to be caught up in 3 bombings in my relatively short lifetime, all of which were carried out by Brits - 2 catholic, 1 islam. So as far as I'm concerned as long as we get rid of all those religious brits then it'll all be fine. Oh no, hang on Confused

whatwouldrondo · 12/04/2017 22:31

Comfort The evidence has already been provided. It says everything about the sources of your perceptions that you have not the slightest clue that the IRA waged a far more pervasive terror campaign than anything we have seen since www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/24/westminster-attack-not-new-london-safe

Mistigri · 12/04/2017 22:34

Correction: not "since 2010"; it's only in the last two years that Islamic terrorism has dwarfed deaths from other types of terrorism. Before 2015 the 21st century was a remarkably quiet time for terrorists, except for the Madrid and Breivik attacks.

comfortandjoyce · 12/04/2017 22:37

Mistigri

Since 2010 that is undoubtedly true, but you don't get to cherry pick (you're talking to grown ups on this thread).

Since I am talking to a grown up, I'll expect you to have read the graph in the website you yourself cited: the big red spike occurs in 2004, not 2010.

I would be prepared to bet that ETA has killed many, many more people in Europe than Isis-linked terrorists, and this is certainly true for Irish terrorist groups.

True, but then they've had much longer to do it.

Of course negotiated settlement isn't possible with ISIS, but the experience of the UK - which since the London attacks in 2007 has seen no large-scale Islamic terrorism - suggests that good intelligence and decent community policing (something France and Belgium notably lack) are probably helpful in preventing "home grown" attacks (which account, I believe, for the great majority of deaths from ISIS-linked terrorism in Europe).

I agree with most of this. But how easily you mention "Of course negotiated settlement isn't possible with ISIS" as if it were a throwaway point and not the crux of the issue. If negotiations with the other side are impossible, then the problem will never end for good.

comfortandjoyce · 12/04/2017 22:39

Mistigri

Before 2015 the 21st century was a remarkably quiet time for terrorists, except for the Madrid and Breivik attacks.

Oh you are a card - does September 11 2001 ring a bell?

Mistigri · 12/04/2017 22:43

It's simply a fact that negotiating with ISIS is not possible. Your preferred solution appears to be the demonisation of entire national and religious groups; you'll need to provide evidence for how that helps. My preferred solution - since most terrorism is home grown (in the sense that perpetrators are not recent immigrants) - is improved intelligence and better community relations. Something that the UK was reasonably good at compared to much of Europe, until 23/6/2016.

HashiAsLarry · 12/04/2017 22:43

What happened in Western Europe then?
Straw man again there.

That graph is bloody encouraging. Says a lot about how well we all got our shit together to sort al-qaeda out. Shame ISIS has worked well enough to pull divisions. And helps prove how shitty TM is to threaten security co-operation.

comfortandjoyce · 12/04/2017 22:49

Mistigri

My preferred solution - since most terrorism is home grown (in the sense that perpetrators are not recent immigrants) - is improved intelligence and better community relations.

That's almost exactly the same as my preferred solution - improved intelligence, better community relations, and strict controls on immigration.

Something that the UK was reasonably good at compared to much of Europe, until 23/6/2016.

We'll continue to be far better at it than most of Europe long into the future.

woman12345 · 12/04/2017 22:50

Interesting article on USSR's influence on terrorism and makes one wonder about Russia's more recent influence on it:
www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/12/how-the-soviet-union-transformed-terrorism/250433/

You have to wonder who's paying the piper in all this malarkey. Or who's getting paid to supply the arms.

You also have to wonder in whose benefit the terror works.

My preferred solution is improved intelligence and better community relations
and dedication to peace achieved in the GFI which May is in danger of destroying.

Mistigri · 12/04/2017 22:52

I'll go and read that now woman, though it helps to remember that America essentially created and armed the Taliban ...