Westminstenders: A False Sense of Security

[RedToothBrush]

The new exit date, unless we agree a deal sooner, is the 31st October.

It seems ages away, but its runs the risk of a false sense of security too.

The first deadline is May 22nd. The Conservative Party would dearly like to avoid European Elections. They are already liable to face wipe out in the early May local elections, as the party was at its peak in 2015 under Cameron when there were last elections.

The EU elections have the added danger of proportional representation meaning UKIP and The Brexit Party could win seats from them. This is despite polling suggesting that Ukip and the Brexit Party are unlikely to reach the high watermark of 2015 and this could lead to fewer UKIP style MEPs this time round.

The liklihood of a deal by 22nd May is low though. Especially given how well Tory - Labour talks are going. The potential for a deal seems remote in the next few weeks.

The next deadline falls on 30th June. If we do have EU elections, the next target for the Tory Party is the end of June to get a deal before the newly elected MEPs can take their seats. However if the goal is unachievable before EU elections, it seems unlikely that agreement will be found in the next 30 days unless there is a major change of heart amongst the hardcore ERG and the DUP. Labour will want to see the Tories humiliated too much.

May who says she will go, will face another wave of pressure to resign during May and June. Messages out of No10, though not May herself, had indicated an exit around 22nd May on the condition a deal was done. Crafty as ever, what May actually said was she would stay on until we reached the second stage of Brexit and had effectively left. This now falls as late as Oct 31st, thus killing plans for a summer Tory leader election.

Once we get past June though, time for a deal, any deal starts to become very limited. Parliament only sits until mid July. Here May hits another problem. The two year parliamentary session ends. There has been talk of it being extended but the DUP have firmly said no to this.

This means when parliament is due to return in September we have an issue. To start a new session May will need a majority to pass a Queens Speech. If the DUP and Hardline ERGers withdraw support in protest at May still being PM what happens? Can May win support from elsewhere. It seems unlikely.

At this point the question of a General Election looms large. And we only have six weeks from then before we exit the EU. If a GE is triggered then, the risk of no deal is extremely high, which might encourage some to support May from across the aisle to prevent parliament from being shut and losing those crucial six weeks.

The danger over the next few weeks, is there is a false sense of there being lots of time left. The reality is our real deadline might be in effect the end of the parliamentary session in mid July. After that all bets are off.

The date of 31st October isn't the one you should keep your eyes on.

Change UK is not projected to gain a single seat? That would be the knell in the remain coffin, wouldn't it? Where ARE the remain voters?

nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/04/mckinsey-in-puerto-rico.html?fbclid=IwAR0pEVyo2BfJ65J9WSlzJ7UyjNifPwfM2qowjB_DejvVq7mGvNbvjZdYhlw

Is this ^^ what post apocalyptic post-Brexit UK will look like?

Bankruptcy, natural disaster, enter the management consultants and the lawyers, while the hedge funds are baying at the doors of Puerto Rico - all the cultures are being paid by its taxpayers.

Among the many mind-blowing figures in the fiscal plan, one stands out: the $1.5 billion earmarked over the next six years for costs related to the restructuring process itself — more than a billion of which will go to lawyers, bankers, and consultants, McKinsey included. (The firm billed the board more than $72 million through January, and its ongoing contracts total about $3.3 million a month.) The projected overall fees are more than five times what Detroit spent on its $20 billion bankruptcy, previously the largest local-government default in U.S. history, and higher even than the bill for Lehman Brothers, the $613 billion corporate liquidation that nearly destroyed the world economy.

All those fees are being footed by the taxpayers of Puerto Rico, which is far poorer than any U.S. state, with a median household income of less than $20,000 a year. Its economy was shrinking even before the island was devastated by Hurricane Maria, among the deadliest storms to ever hit U.S. territory. Everywhere in Puerto Rico, whether talking to community organizers or high-level government officials, I heard the refrain: “They’re treating us like guinea pigs...”

^...Already the island is an object lesson in what happens when the logic of capitalism overtakes the structure of government. It is an article of faith at McKinsey that the same management theory that makes businesses run more profitably can be applied to further the public interest. “It’s not about cutting costs. It’s about how we deliver the service more productively,” Chappuis said, arguing that the focus on the immediate pain of austerity is simplistic. “The notion of value, of expanding the pie, of doing things better and cheaper — everything that moves a modern economy forward — is missing from the debate.”

Of course, that assumes that what advances the modern economy advances the common good — a proposition currently under siege from both the right and the left. “When things are working correctly, it’s a huge problem,” one young former McKinsey consultant said of the firm. Disgusted with the company’s work with federal law enforcement under Trump, he recently quit and penned a scathing anonymous essay in the leftist journal Current Affairs. “McKinsey is capitalism distilled,” he wrote. “Its advocacy of the primacy of the market has made governments more like businesses and businesses more like vampires.”

Is Puerto Rico the opening act for Brexit UK?

1tisILeClerc Wed 17-Apr-19 08:13:31
lonelyplanetmum
To me Brexit will mean a lowering of the UK's position, so rather than being a 5th or 6th position it will drop into maybe 20th position.
This is still not bad IF the massive inequality can be tackled, so that schools, NHS and housing are really addressed and UK society could be more fair if not quite as prosperous overall.
Unfortunately the political will to do that is lacking so what could become a fairer 'happier' UK could well descend rapidly.
You can work with a model where the 'rich' live in gated communities to keep the poor out and prevent crime, or you can have a society where everyone has at least decent 'basics' of housing, food and health which will reduce the risk of crime and avoid the tensions of 'ghettos'.

I don't think tackling massive inequality is top of any list of any of the vultures who stand to make a nice pile of money 'restructuring' the UK after Brexit.

Change UK is not projected to gain a single seat? That would be the knell in the remain coffin, wouldn't it? Where ARE the remain voters?

Have they come out as Remain? I thought they just wanted a PV (I maybe wrong on this)

They are entirely comprised of Remain MPs.

I think the fact you need to ask answers my question. No clear message.

@mathanxiety

Puerto Rico maybe... but my fear all along has been for it to turn into Chile under Pinochet.

I know it's quite paranoid of me but I worry about the normalisation of authoritarian rhetoric.

Has the Brexit party managed to get enough candidates to stand for the EU elections ?

I think the authoritarian ship has sailed.

www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-04-10/brexit-britain-is-tired-of-weak-leaders
I don't agree with Bershidsky's assertion that a preference for referendums is a sign that British people are wary of authoritarianism.

I think it is a sign of fascination with the idea of the mob, and a sign of deep disaffection and impatience. It is something only people who live in echo chambers think is realistic. They cannot fathom the idea that there are millions who might disagree with them. They want to cut through all the rules that slow things down, all the patient debate, the committees, the amendments, the processes of Parliament. They want fast results that are their preferred outcome.

Direct democracy always has a trace of the mob and the pitchfork behind it. There is always an assumption that the opposition are 'others', not mainstream, not 'us'. The word treason has already been used in British political discourse.

This is the reality of a preference for authoritarian rule too - there is always the assumption that the other side will get the thin end of the wedge, that the majority will be ok, that the authoritarian leader will be someone the majority will agree with.

Change UK have got to start working with the Greens and Lib Dems. I know they are trying to establish their own identity, but splitting the vote will give credence to the Brexit party.

I went to go and find a clip of 'would you like me to be the cat?' ( George Galloway)

Icantreach I'd forgotten that tv high point. I know we like cats on this thread but that's really one step too far!

I found the LibDems had an extract posted at the time. A bit of a low tactic but Its here:

George~Galloway~cat~boosts~LibDems

Such matters are very influential with voters - like Cameron's pig story. What we need now is NF in similar activities. Anyone have anything similar on him? Ex Mrs F maybe?!

There is also a still photo of Galloway from the Telegraph

Galloway~loses~respect

I think the trouble with ChangeUK and working with others is that at present they are still too new. As I might have said, the LibDems locally have worked with the Greens in the Local Council elections - but both are established parties with active local branches and have been in discussions about things for a number of months.

It's not that easy, you don't just stick both logos on the ballot paper, you have to sort out details of e.g. election expenses which can prove tricky with the parties organising themselves differently e.g. the Greens are organised by LA District and the LibDems by constituency, which don't overlap. I am not saying that it's not doable; it is but it needs commitment and time.

Direct democracy always has a trace of the mob and the pitchfork behind it.

Direct democracy ignores representation of the minority however for me true democracy (true representation of the PEOPLE in its entirety) is about how the minority is also represented. That's why binary questions are such a bad choice; they can only result in the tyranny of the majority.

I too am confused about the messages coming from the Remain parties. Do they want to revoke, another referendum, remain and reform ??? What would be on the ballot if there was another referendum ? Would they risk no deal being on there ? The lack of clarity frustrates me.

The LibDems ideally would like revoke, but I think, realise that it's not politically possible at the moment. However, a "People's Vote" which confirmed that the public's attitudes had changed might help them get the revoke they desire.

Talking of pitchforks...poor Meghan, i'd not be her for all the tea in China. I know lots of these trolls are abroad, but I'd not feel safe.

Poor Megan.
Shock horror, attractive young woman is pregnant. I am happy for her and wish her well.
Now I have got over this and can think of more important things in my life.
Saying that, all the trash talk in 'MN Trending' is so depressing, I want Brexit to be decided so I can actually get on with things.

Had a quick scan of that Meghan article. They refer to the usual suspects really: the chans & gab.
Pfft, same old losers spreading toxic sludge. Women haters, Trump fanatics (they call him God Emperor FFS). Little fascists who fantasize about a world in which their truly irrelevant existence could find sone meaning.
I know one of them. I loathe the guy.

It may be Milne more than Corbyn, who keeps removing the PV vote from Labour policy statements

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/17/why-labours-leader-has-to-perform-a-brexit-balancing-act

An early draft included a reference to a public vote, but this was removed in an editing process involving Milne.
Starmer signed off the changes on the understanding that, in publicising the letter, the leader’s office would make reference to a referendum – but that didn’t happen.

“It’s obvious that Seumas is the one that unpicks it every time,” said one shadow minister.
.....
one shadow cabinet member put it:
“We still think there’s a bit of road left.
The Tories could break before we do.”

< 🙄 That's the strategy - hope the Tory party splits before Labour ?! >

Excellent ARTE documenary "Brexit: The Clock is Ticking" which followed Barnier during negotiations

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DT1FSmISCGw

“It’s obvious that Seumas is the one that unpicks it every time,” said one shadow minister.

Milne is an ideologue. By refusing to support a PV he is effectively supporting the Brexit party; just not saying it out loud.

Milne is a disaster socialist.

No surprises there.

Thank you @BigChocFrenzy

I am meeting an SNP MP today with one of my colleagues as part of my work. So as not to be outing, I won't say which MP it is. Obviously our discussion will focus on work-related issues, but I can probably squeeze in one Brexit question. Keeping in mind they are SNP and almost always vote along party lines, any suggestions?

So I've been looking at the polling for the EU elections for the London Constituency. Its going to be INCREDIBLY close.

YouGov splits its polling into regions but you can only really look at London and Scotland as their regions are London, North, Wales/Midlands, Rest of the South, Scotland so the others can't be split easily.

Based on You Gov and turnout in 2014 this is what would happen.

Seat 1
CON - 374,080
LAB - 550,118
LD - 286,061
GREEN - 352,076
UKIP - 176,038
BREXIT - 330,071
CHANGE - 110,023
LABOUR WIN SEAT

SEAT 2
CON - 374,080
LAB - 275,059
LD - 286,061
GREEN - 352,076
UKIP - 176,038
BREXIT - 330,071
CHANGE - 110,023
CON WIN SEAT

SEAT 3
CON - 187,040
LAB - 275,059
LD - 286,061
GREEN - 352,076
UKIP - 176,038
BREXIT - 330,071
CHANGE - 110,023
GREEN WIN SEAT

SEAT 4
CON - 187,040
LAB - 275,059
LD - 286,061
GREEN - 176,038
UKIP - 176,038
BREXIT - 330,071
CHANGE - 110,023
BREXIT WIN SEAT

SEAT 5
CON - 187,040
LAB - 275,059
LD - 286,061
GREEN - 176,038
UKIP - 176,038
BREXIT - 165,035
CHANGE - 110,023
LD WIN SEAT

SEAT 6
CON - 187,040
LAB - 275,059
LD - 143,030
GREEN - 176,038
UKIP - 176,038
BREXIT - 165,035
CHANGE - 110,023
LABOUR WIN SEAT

SEAT 7
CON - 187,040
LAB - 183,372
LD - 143,030
GREEN - 176,038
UKIP - 176,038
BREXIT - 165,035
CHANGE - 110,023
CON WIN SEAT

SEAT 8
CON - 124,693
LAB - 183,372
LD - 143,030
GREEN - 176,038
UKIP - 176,038
BREXIT - 165,035
CHANGE - 110,023
LABOUR WIN SEAT

So effectively Labour lose one seat to the LDs and UKIP lose their seat to UKIP.

The two seats which are interesting are seats 7 and 8. One for Labour and one for the Cons. Its so close that its possible that Labour could in fact lose two seats rather than just one, and the Conservatives run the risk of losing a seat too.

The problem is you effectively have 143,030 Green votes plus 110,023 Change votes which look like they will be 'wasted' versus 165,035 UKIP votes which look like they will be 'wasted' in a tight race between the Cons, Labour, LD and Brexit for those last two seats. If each people intending to vote Green, Change or UKIP change their mind between now and the election those seats could be different. There are about 11,000 votes in it for those last two seats. 2.2 million people voted in the last election - thats less than 0.5% of those who are voting.

Its tight. Very tight.