Westminstenders: Boom. The Brexit Backlash starts to hit.

[RedToothBrush]

So it turns out that immigration figures that stated students overstayed were wrong. The home office knew this. And sat on it. Since 2015. Under Theresa.

That smells a bit doesn't it?

Imagine it: "Let's do lunch Paul. I'll cover up and give you a nice immigration story for your front page. In return, crown me PM."

Then tonight BOOM. Labour look like they have made a move. Soft very swishy Brexit. Even less brexity than the Beano Brexit that the Tories have been trying to announce on the quiet over the summer whilst Brexiteers are on holiday.

amp.theguardian.com/global/2017/aug/26/labour-calls-for-lengthy-transitional-period-post-brexit
Labour makes dramatic shift on Brexit and single market
Party opens clear divide with Tories, with support for free movement and paying into EU budgets for up to four years

Labour is to announce a dramatic policy shift by backing continued membership of the EU single market beyond March 2019, when Britain leaves the EU, establishing a clear dividing line with the Tories on Brexit for the first time.

In a move that positions it decisively as the party of “soft Brexit”, Labour will support full participation in the single market and customs union during a lengthy “transitional period” that it believes could last between two and four years after the day of departure, it is to announce on Sunday.

This will mean that under a Labour government the UK would continue to abide by the EU’s free movement rules, accept the jurisdiction of the European court of justice on trade and economic issues, and pay into the EU budget for a period of years after Brexit, in the hope of lessening the shock of leaving to the UK economy. In a further move that will delight many pro-EU Labour backers, Jeremy Corbyn’s party will also leave open the option of the UK remaining a member of the customs union and single market for good, beyond the end of the transitional period.

Why would Labour suddenly do this? It's not just because of the youth vote. What about their leave voters?

Faisal Islam on the subject:
2. On Labour Leavers is very very interesting and involves quite the psephological judgement re the election....
...the calculation appears to be that Labour Leave voters had the chance to vote for Theresa May's brand of Brexit, and bar 5 seats, said No
Was that because Lableave voters were already signalled "hard Brexit"? Or many millions such voters much more concerned about other things?

Have Labour been polling their voters on this?

Theresa has also apparently set her sell by date: Friday 30th August 2019.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-sets-date-shell-quit-11061894.amp
Theresa May sets date she'll quit as Prime Minister - giving herself time to see Britain through Brexit

The longer the transition and the squishier it gets, the more the more you wonder.

Mr Barnier will enjoy his coffee and newspapers tomorrow as he prepares for round two of Brexit talks starting next week.

The question on his mind most: Will David Davis remember to bring his notes this time?

Beautifully put, bigly^

thecat Looking at this from a wider historical perspective I wonder if the stagnancy of the Leave rhetoric also reflects that it is essentially rooted in going backwards, in a nostalgia for what is seen as "the past" which in itself is a construct rather than the reality in all it's complexity There is a tendency to see History as an evolving purposeful progressive narrative, as taught in UK schools it is essentially the story of powerful white men building empires, look how Gove tried to eliminate any messy other realities in his curriculum reforms. What the Leave campaign did was to exploit the dissonance between that "great British Imperial past" that people feel is part of their identity and which is presented to them neatly tied up with string in the right wing media and the messy complicated interconnected global reality. The rhetoric cannot move on because it is a reaction not a revolution, it cannot move towards the reality because it is defined by its opposition to it. All the elements of leavers bingo are part of a backwards looking parcel of emotions and ideas and perceptions. As soon as you raise awkward questions about where the posters think events are are actually going, what will be the benefits, what will our competitive advantage be, etc they evaporate or bring the discussion back to that comfortable parcel of nationalism / xenophobia, Great Britain / bad EU....

woman12345 I agree with you, in what you have written to Peregrina and Bigly.

Ron That is interesting, and I like the idea. The article was very interesting, too.

Very well said bigly

That might not be far from it Ron.

Uncredited on twitter.

Its fair.

Looking at this from a wider historical perspective I wonder if the stagnancy of the Leave rhetoric also reflects that it is essentially rooted in going backwards, in a nostalgia for what is seen as "the past" which in itself is a construct rather than the reality in all it's complexity There is a tendency to see History as an evolving purposeful progressive narrative, as taught in UK schools it is essentially the story of powerful white men building empires, look how Gove tried to eliminate any messy other realities in his curriculum reforms

PARKLIFE !

Ah, a thought provoking arguement you have there somecatch. Excuse me while I stroke my beard and consider its many intricacies

Keeping the peace in Europe for 70 years had far more to do with NATO

Lets give you the benefit of the doubt for the sake of argument and say you are right.

That then begs questions about what the future of NATO is....

...answers on a postcard to D. Trump, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue please.

If Donny Whito decides it doesn't have a future, what's our next best option?

Obviously its fucking off out of the EU and pissing them off.

facepalm

In all honesty peace in Europe has been a combination of military strategy as well as building ties through trade as this builds trust and friendship and a common interest in not blowing the shit out of each other with guns and bombs.

One without the other probably wouldn't have been as effective. I don't see the point in arguing about whether its NATO or the EU for that reason.

As it stands we could well end up without either.

This is not a good thing, nor one we should aspire to. Nor should we be trying to actively drive a wedge between ourselves and our European neighbours who we share so many common interests with, because we think we are superior to them. Mainly because this superiority shit was the thing that fuelled lots of bad things in the 1930s.

We are not superior. We have strengths we should use as a foundation to build on the weaknesses we have. We have a lot of those as a nation, and want to blame our inability to trade with places like China on the EU rather than facing up to our weaknesses. Despite Germany doing a cracking great job of trading with countries without an EU trade deal.

I genuinely want to know what we seek to gain from leaving the EU, that can not be achieved in the EU. Why do we need to be outside it?

I seriously am yet to receive an answer on how we can improve this country as a result of Brexit.

Most things that were touted during the referendum have been admitted by government in one way or another as unviable.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/german-police-raid-homes-right-wing-men-plot-kill-left-wing-leaders-mecklenburg-vorpommern-a7916786.html
German police raid homes of men ‘plotting to kill left-wing leaders’

I see you're trying really hard there bigly

Though tbf it does prove that you write to some people with more than 140 characters it's won't get through. A world of tl:Dr

Tl:dr-ers that should be.

The 2 organizations were founded for different purposes:

1. The Coal & Steel Confederation that morphed into the EEC, EC and now EU were intended to stop Germany attacking France again, because each time this happens, Europe is devastated: Franco-Prussian war, 2 x WWs

• and btw the UK is always dragged in to protect its own interests (WW1 & 2 are what ended the British Empire and allowed the US to take over Britain's role as the world superpower)

2. NATO is intended to stop USSR / Russia invading Western Europe -and again they'd eventually cross the Channel if not stopped earlier

(of course, the US keeps using / abusing NATO for its own goals too)

Excuse me while I stroke my beard and consider its many intricacies

Wow. You really are Russell Brand aren't you?

One reason why it is proving so complicated to disentangle the UK from the EU is because it has always been a fundamental aim to entangle Germany and France so closely that neither can leave.

That's why even the threat of Frexit was far more horrifying to the EU leaders & organization than the reality of Brexit

It was most interesting that Putin - and ISIS - heavily supported Brexit and still do.

When your most dangerous enemies want you to do something, it's time to seriously consider whether you want to continue.

Some really excellent posts, from bigly and ron and cat.

I'm not sure that the brexiters POV hasn't changed, though. Under what they perceive as attack, many have doubled down and hardened their positions. Eighteen months ago, hard brexiters were a fringe; even the rabid paid-for posters on MN (remember SpringingIntoAction?) were promoting, variously, the Norway/Swiss/Iceland models and insisting on "no change to EU citizens rights". Now, pretty much all the brexiters who care enough to pursue the issue on social media are in favour of the hardest of hard brexits and the removal of EU citizens' rights.

It's not an evolution so much as a retreat, though.

Holocaust of 6 million Jews
Collaboration and collusion of the French with the Third Reich
Deportation of thousands of Jews from the Netherlands to the death camps of Poland

Actually, around the time of the French election we talked quite a lot about anti-semitism in France. This was partly because the FN although given a face-lift in recent years is in reality still the same old neonazi party that it always was (many of its senior members are on record as holocaust deniers). And partly because criticism of Macron from both sides (the pro-brexit and frexit FN, and the more mildly eurosceptic France Insoumise) made widespread use of antisemitic tropes. In France, as in the US, anti-EU sentiment and antisemitism go hand in hand.

I genuinely want to know what we seek to gain from leaving the EU, that can not be achieved in the EU. Why do we need to be outside it?

An end to Freedom of Movement

Wow. You really are Russell Brand aren't you?

Shock! Horror! My secret is out! Now I'll have to name change again, what a bother.

An end to Freedom of Movement

And that will make my life better because....?

What do you want to achieve by ending FOM ?

The right to lengthen the queue for NHS operations ? - a significant % of skilled surgeons are from the E27
The queues for many NHs services, see charts below for E27 surgeons & doctors in the NHS.

It takes several years to qualify as a doctor, then several more years in a speciality. So, it's not that you can move several thousand Brits from JSA into highpaid medical jobs.
Skilled professionals don't have to put up with Home Office threats of deportation, of xenophobic hostility in the street and even from patients

The right to do the physically demanding jobs like fruit-picking and careworkers for NMW
Or the right to pay higher prices and taxes if you raise those wages to make the jobs attractive to Brits ?
Or the "right" to have to go into a care home, because there are insufficient careworkers to support people in their own homes ?

I think maybe Gove had a point as Education Secretary

Maybe we do need to teach more basic history. Like the mistakes made after WW1, the causes of the Great Depression and some of the "economic" (and xenophopic) reasoning that lead to WW2 - and the aftermath.

It would appear that there are indeed still some ignorant people who do not know about lebensraum and the consequent invasions, nor how "easy" it was to vilify the Jews and blame them for the ills of the economy.

Of course, Gove wouldn't have wanted us to learn about how the UK mis-used its greater Marshall Aid (unlike Germany ) in its futile pursuit of holding on to its fading Empire.

It's difficult to know what the Tories plan for Brexit, but
they have said EU citizens will still be able to come to the UK
It's just they will have fewer rights

So most skilled professionals won't come - better offers in other countries

but unskilled / semiskilled workers will still come, probably for even lower wages - many employers will always prefer those workers with fewer rights, rather than Brits who can tell them to sod off.

Yes, Pretty It's amazing how many Brits have a grudge that other European countries somehow "pulled a fast one" to pull ahead after WW2

when the reality is that the Uk received more Marshall Aid than any other country, more than Germany or France

but those counties invested their Marshall Aid in rebuilding their infrastructure and economies
whereas the UK squandered it all on trying to keep its empire.

I keep thinking Brexit will be a pivotal event like Suez, in which Britain's dreams of grandeur were brought crashing down to the humiliating reality of its current position.

Lets not forget what Gove had in mind for the teaching of History, no doubt That would approve as his history seems to come from the same source, and to have the same extreme subjectivity.... www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/a-history-teachers-appraisal-of-michael-goves-approach-to-the-teaching-of-history-9047407.html

I would like to see more history taught on the reality of the British empire, the violence and oppression the British presided over and caused. I keep seeing the picture of the Empire as this great wonderland of milk and honey from the brexiteers, they conveniently forget the horrors that went with it.

Also, more of the complexity of the relationship between England and Ireland. I was appalled by the lack of understanding exhibited around the DUP and the convenient memory lapse when it comes to any English involvement in the situation.

And to finish off a bit more of the constant relationships of one kind or another between the UK and other countries. This mythical time when plucky little Britain stood alone with no need of ties to any other counties never existed. We can't go back to something that never was and can be!

I think some better history lessons may be just what we need right now. Of course, you can lead a nationalist to knowledge, but you can't make them learn.