Westmistenders: 'No Deal please; We're British'

[RedToothBrush]

It has to be said that its almost as if Tory Rebels are too polite to challenge the PM.

But the stakes are getting higher and higher as it becomes more and more apparent that it is a clear choice between a chaotic no deal situation or a BINO and there is no alternative to that.

If the Tory Rebels don't show their grit and are not prepared to be as strong in their determination as the Brexiteers - out of almost politeness and obligation - then No Deal awaits.

As things move forward, the threat to May once again re-emerges too. If May doesn't do what the ERG say they are minded and will try to oust her. They have nothing to lose by it.

The Tory knives are hidden behind backs one again. Waiting.

Which way will the Withdrawal Bill go? Which way will the Trade Bill later this month go?

We are running out of time and options: for either a deal or no deal.

Time has already run out for many ordinary people - they just might not know that yet, but the decision has already be made about their future.

The Galileo project is interesting, as it's one (and I am sure there are myriad) where the UK can't fudge it by having a UK company move an office into Brussels and carry on from there. It's UK companies that are being excluded because they are UK. No matter where they have an office. I suspect a further fall out from this will be EU companies divesting themselves of their UK subsidiaries or divisions.

www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-politics-health/uk-to-use-brexit-dividend-to-boost-health-spending-by-4-billion-pounds-daily-telegraph-idUSKBN1JB0QN

Which dividends is the governemnet going to use? I’m struggling to see where TM can find any dividends from Brexit....

Oh, and here's the real reason the US hates the EU

www.theregister.co.uk/2018/06/15/icann_whois_gdpr/?page=1

Domain name system overseer ICANN will spend millions of dollars arguing its GDPR case to the European Court of Justice rather than resolve its own internal disagreements.

The California based non-profit said this week it would appeal a decision against it in German court but also, bizarrely, announced that it would also appeal that court's decision to the European Court of Justice if it gave the wrong answer.

(contd)

TL;DR is a US organisation - like many - forgot that there is a "rest of the world" - and thought it could ignore the GDPR laws the EU drafted. It carried on assuming this even after being told that it couldn't (sound familiar) and carried on telling it's members "not to worry". Then when it started to get too real, they decided they needed more time (that's on top of the 4 years it was being debated) and told their members "not to worry; we'll get an extension just for us".

Now all the predictions have actually materialised, they're running around like headless chickens.

As well they might, as GDPR breaches can be expensive. We are talking millions.

Wait till Facebook and Google get hit.

(In other news, Privacy Shield is looking shaky too).

Domain name system overseer ICANN will spend millions of dollars arguing its GDPR case to the European Court of Justice...

This is just the same arrogance that underlies the Brexit approach to food and environment regulation.

The US company wants the trade but doesn't like the protections given to citizens. If ICANN doesn't like it, then it's simple, don't hold the data! Just hold data on US citizens instead as they have less protection.

^ If a company wants^ the data, then comply with the GDPR.

Organisations don't have to be based in the EU to be bound by the GDPR, they only need to be processing or holding data on EU residents in order for GDPR to apply.

I just don't understand why people don't get it. If you want the trade you comply with the regulations.

Surely brexiteers will be delighted that we have no more involvement with Galileo. After all they signed up purely for a trading market and didn't want all the other add ons.

(Takes tongue out of cheek.)

Susan 😂

if icann thought about it rather than ignored gdpr i'd expect them to be able to make a decent case.
the whole purpose of icann/nominet et al is to maintain a directory of domain name owners - its effectively a telephone directory

the purpose of the directory is to support contact with the domain owners so its debateable whether making contact details available is forcing consent to access the service - you have always been able to ask icann to suppress display of your contact details - they just charge you - whilst nominet get you to set a flag. (no charge)

presumably their lawyers dont understand the business let alone gdpr!

Writ large, it's an interesting clash of cultures, where a US behemoth used to getting it's own way in US courts runs slap bang into the real world.

Is anyone following the highly entertaining, if less publicized battle between Facebook and the state of Illinois ?

www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/30/us_judge_knocks_back_facebooks_last_minute_request_to_derail_facial_biometrics_trial/

The last was an absolute doozy. Facebook(s lawyers) tried to get the case thrown out because if Facebook were found against, it would cost them money.

If I ever have to go to court, I want these guys on my case:

Your honour, we respectfully submit that the charges against DGRossetti should be dropped, as there is a danger that if he's found guilty, it might cause him some inconvenience

Views of experts...

www.economist.com/leaders/2018/06/16/britain-is-heading-for-a-soft-brexit

"WHEN Britons voted to leave the European Union two years ago, they had no chance to say what sort of Brexit they wanted. But Theresa May, who became prime minister in the aftermath of the referendum, quickly decided that they wanted the most drastic break possible. Without consulting her cabinet, let alone Parliament, she announced “red lines” for her negotiation with Brussels that put Britain on course for the fullest of separations.

This “hard” Brexit—in which Britain would free itself from the clutches of European judges, trade policy and migration rules, at significant cost to its economy and security—has long looked inevitable. Parliament’s resistance to Mrs May’s extreme plan has been timid and the Labour opposition feeble. Yet this week the tide turned. Rebel Tory MPs look likely to wrest control of Brexit’s endgame from the government (see Britain section). Meanwhile, the penny dropped among Brexiteers that the Irish border presents a near-insurmountable roadblock to a hard exit. With less than six months of negotiating time left, it is becoming clear that Brexit will be softer than Mrs May set out. That is good news for Europe and for Britain."

Meanwhile, the penny dropped among Brexiteers that the Irish border presents a near-insurmountable roadblock to a hard exit.

can I just say, for the record, that I am sick and tired of the narrative being spun that Brexit is somehow "impossible" because of the GFA (despite being warned before the referendum that the GFA would prove problematic for any form of Brexit, but heigh ho ...).

The reason for this is because I do not want the moronic Brexiteers to try and spin any failure of Brexit as a rallying cry to somehow "do the impossible".

Brexit could have been quite straightforward, if the process had started with a revisit to the GFA and negotiations with the RoI over that. Which, assuming the UK was able to negotiate in good faith, would have been entirely possible (how probable I don't know).

However, that required a plan for Brexit, which would have scuppered Brexit at the start. Because as soon as the implications had to be considered, it becomes a no-brainer (which suggest Brexiteers are actually in brain deficit ?).

If Brexit fails, it's the Brexiteers fault.

Brexit could have been quite straightforward, if the process had started with a revisit to the GFA and negotiations with the RoI over that. Which, assuming the UK was able to negotiate in good faith, would have been entirely possible (how probable I don't know).
Time, I've always argued that what was needed to make Brexit as 'successful' as it ever could be was time. But time isn't politically expedient. Cliff diving is though.

The quote marks are purposeful

The Norway+ solution favoured by Barnier also works for the GFA - it can readily be negotiated so that no additional border infrastructure required.

It's Treeza's damn red lines, which are not necessary to honour the referendum
Norway+ is so obviously suitable for a narrow Leave win that most people could have been very happy with, if it had been presented positively as soon as she became PM

However, in the 2016 leadership contest, I think Loathsome and her backers only agreed to step back and let May become PM because a deal on Brexit terms was struck:
the red lines come from that deal.

Norway+ could also be used as a halfway house, if people really want a different Brexit

The Norths estimated it would take 10 years to move gradually away from the EU without economic disruption.
After 45 years of being entwined with European economies, trade & agencies etc, that sounds about right

The Times Red Box reports :

"something strange is going on elsewhere: young people are joining the Tories.

< impressed by May, DD, Bojo & Fox ? Really ?
or just angry at Corbyn, maybe even at Labour's anti-semitism and aggressive pushing of self-ID >

"Now this is from a low base, and is not on Corbynmania levels.
But insiders say there are signs that they are winning over a new generation.
A young person in the Tory party is basically anyone under 50, but new members in their twenties and thirties are said to be significantly on the rise.

Total numbers are closely guarded but one Conservative source tells me that in the past four months the party has added 1,000-1,500 new members each month, mostly from the younger end of the demographic chart.

It puts them on course to break through the 130,000 mark recorded under David Cameron in time for the party conference in October.

Conservative university groups are growing"

Time, I've always argued that what was needed to make Brexit as 'successful' as it ever could be was time.

That said, it's also unfair to blame Brexits failings solely on a bunch of Brexiteer tossers ... they are part of a wider issue with the entire UK political framework which prizes "strong government" over all else. Including what's best for the country. The ping-pong between Tory and Labour is hardly conducive to grown up debate. Anything which spans a parliament becomes subject to political interference of the most pernicious and debilitating kind.

I can tell people now, that in boardrooms all over China, there will be plans which are measured in decades, and which have aims for 2020, 2030, 2040 ... 2080.

Ideally the UK (well, what's left of it) needs to develop a constitution which is capable of reflecting an evolution in public opinion, whilst at the same time protecting it from snapshot landslides based on losing a football match. Personally I quite like the idea of a rolling HoC, where 1/3 of MPs are up for election every 2 years (cf. the US) although I am sure better minds than mine could come up with something less drastic, but as effective ?

I still think the upper chamber should be comprised of a run-off from the elections for the lower chamber. That would automatically balance the lower house with a recognition that not everyone voted for the winner.

It was reported they were down to 70k, so anywhere near 130k would be an astonishing upsurge
(and would need more than 1500 per month since those reports)
Maybe they found a few moe live members they'd forgotten and the base level wasn't 70k after all ?

.....or maybe it's just bluffing

DG I still want a federal UK, an upper chambers with equal representation for all 4 countries
say 25 each to form 100 members of the Senate

They would only vote on major changes to current status,
so their approval would be required to e.g.

declare war, abolish the NHS, leave / join a trade bloc and maybe approve FTAs too, leave / join a defence organisation like NATO, leave / join the EHRC etc

DG I still want a federal UK, an upper chambers with equal representation for all 4 countries

If that's what Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland want, that is ... I wouldn't blame them for respectfully suggesting independence instead, and to build their futures as separate counties by treaty, rather than some sort of pathetic "happy families" where "the family" is only happy if Dad gets what he wants.

Who knows ? Brexit resulting in a constitutional upheaval ? Maybe, just maybe, the Brexiteers have done us a favour

Lets be honest, Brexit was never designed to be successful.

Those that backed it financially ( both openly and those that were more opaque like the press barons), would like to be separated from the EU because of the regulations that stop them from having their dream free market economy of low tax and low regulation.

They need a political/economic shock to start doing that, people won't allow regulations and institutions that benefit them to be changed unless there is one.

Brexit is that shock.

One of the shortcomings of the Scottish Parliament is that it is unicameral (although understandable, given it is a devolved government).

The voting system adopted (a hybrid d'Hondt system) was designed to ensure that the SNP never got control assumed that no one party would ever have a majority and that as a result there would be coalitions.

The various committees which provide the necessary oversight and examination of proposed legislation were designed to reflect the make-up of the Parliament. Not a problem when no one party has a majority - but when the unthinkable happened and the SNP won an overall majority, it meant that they were in the majority on the committees overseeing their own legislation

Even now, they are so close to an overall majority, that the committees are still heavily weighted in their favour.

I'd argue that when Scotland does become independent, it needs to look again at the structure and consider a 2nd chamber - whether it is peopled by election, the great and the good or by a form of jury service , I don't know.

Bit late I know but the 'scoop' about UK MEPs in next sessions. They will be the ones making the teas and coffees while wearing a muzzle.

Regarding the postscript about the possibility of M.E.P.s from the U.K. being in the next session.

I don't want to put a dampener on any slight slivers of optimism but it was dated Friday 13 th of April, and two months is a long time in politics.

Re membership of political parties, a friend has just posted this:

interesting, the House of Commons library reports that membership of political parties has been growing over the last four years. After this week's events it seems this list will need to be updated and reordered

The Labour Party has around 552,000 members, as of January 2018

The Conservative Party has 124,000 members as of March 2018

The Scottish National Party has around 118,200 members, as of April 2018

The Liberal Democrat Party has around 100,500 members, as of April 2018

The Green Party (England and Wales) has 41,073 members, as of April 2018

UKIP has around 21,200 members, as of April 2018

Plaid Cymru has around 8,000 members, as of April 2018

Scottish Green Party around 9000 members

Separately, I see that Nicola has announced that there have been over 7,500 new SNP members in 48 hours!

That would take the SNP membership to over 125,000 - more than the Conservative Party! Maybe that's why the Conservatives are trying to claim 1,000 new members