Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Westminstenders: Lets get on with...

939 replies

RedToothBrush · 05/05/2019 09:48

Admitting the mandate for leaving has expired.

The newspapers today are full of Talk of both Corbyn and May panicking that Brexit is destroying their parties, so after nearly 3 years of party politics they have decided that actually they can agree on something in the next week or so. Not because it's in the national interest but because they don't fancy mutual self assured destruction.

If they do manage to cobble something together then it with be rushed and shite.

If they don't they will be punished at the Euro elections by a Remain / Leave pincer action.

They can spin it all they like from their local election disaster that it was people wanting to get on with Brexit. It certainly does not change the reality that those people who were most likely to vote are fed up with the pair of them. And that there is a strong indication that the most motivated voters are remain leaning. Perhaps its true that leavers stayed home in protest. If they did, what will they do if the Brexit Party stand candidates at a general election? Maybe they will vote, but you can't argue that they view voting itself as an important act. Spoilt ballots were up, but not that up. If the pair do manage a deal, then we have Brexited which might satisfy some. The trouble is the underlying issues are not to do with the European Union. And even if we leave with a deal that does not resolve our future trading relationship. The poison that is Brexit won't end. And the voters will realise that soon enough. Leaving even with a deal will harm the economy, and that's only going to fuel discontent.

It's therefore hard to see where either party go from here. Not when they are effectively split internally. The poison is here to stay.

Spinning it as 'it shows the public want us to get on with Brexit' isn't going to help their cause with voters who still think leaving is a national disaster. Those voters will still think its a national disaster and will be even more pissed at being ignored and dismissed once again.

Where is the incentive to return to voting Labour or Conservative?

The Euro Elections, if they go ahead, will therefore be about one thing and one thing only: turnout. Even if the Brexit Party do relatively well, it will be about how many turnout in comparison to the locals and in comparison to the last EU elections. Whilst they might not admit the reality of things, ultimately all Labour and Conservatives really care about is securing the vote of people who will vote because voting intention doesn't win them seats if people don't turnout.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
43
dreichuplands · 09/05/2019 15:49

Brexit wasn't delivered on time because MP's didn't want to vote for the Brexit agreement. Not predominantly remainer MP's mostly ones who stated they wanted Brexit.
There was every chance to have Brexit on time but Brexiteers didn't take it.

Peregrina · 09/05/2019 15:54

they are the basis upon which people stood for election. whether they have legal status is neither here nor there

You can't have this both ways, which is what you appear to be trying to do. If manifestos have no legal status, just being a wish list of things they would like to do, then you can't complain when they are not implemented. A reminder once again that neither party won, so both manifestos bite the dust.

DGRossetti · 09/05/2019 15:57

There was every chance to have Brexit on time but Brexiteers didn't take it.

It ? You mean them - as in "more than one".

Every step of the past two years has been taken with a chorus of Brexiteers telling us what they don't want. What they would never agree to. What cannot be considered. Even as they have been in charge (looks at double-D ...). It really is the parental equivalent of asking 9 kids whether we should go out for a party, or stay in, and the moment the 5/4 majority for "going out" is delivered, the 5 start squabbling over pizza, KFC, McDonalds, Nandos, Subway ...

LonelyTiredandLow · 09/05/2019 15:59

re: lack of planning, I do agree that this has been handled poorly. I would add though that none of that is any sort of excuse for not delivering Brexit in due time

Often jump off a ship without checking the waters? Why on earth would we leave the most successful trading bloc in history without a plan? Why take away so many rights and freedoms without any tangible benefit? Mind you, who on earth would vote to do that blind with no plan int he first place... Confused

dreichuplands · 09/05/2019 16:03

You are right DG I do mean them.
There have been multiple opportunities to leave which have all been turned down by Brexiteers.
Not leaving is the responsibility of the Brexiteers, they broke it they bought it.

TatianaLarina · 09/05/2019 16:05

The former prime minister has splashed out on a luxurious addition to his Cornish retreat – what better way to chillax as Brexit unfolds?

Westminstenders: Lets get on with...
LonelyTiredandLow · 09/05/2019 16:08

@Louise I can only assume you will be voting BP in the elections? And GE?

Maybe I can ask you then, if that is the case, what you think Farage and Co will do that is different? How and when will he be trading with EU?

LouiseCollins28 · 09/05/2019 16:15

@Lonely I think that's unlikely from me, though I'm still undecided about how to vote in the European Elections.

Farage may well be (re)elected as an MEP, though FWIW if I had to predict, I think Brexit party will do more poorly than it currently appears it will.

I don't think there is any chance whatever of Nigel Farage being Prime Minister of the UK, or Trade Minister, so any notion of him determining our trading relationship with the EU falls on that point

Violetparis · 09/05/2019 16:19

Louise out of interest why do you think the Brexit Party will not do as well as expected ?

LouiseCollins28 · 09/05/2019 16:26

Because it's new, and new parties tend to ramp up expectations and then fail to meet them.

It's a proportional system so that is to the advantage of smaller parties but I'd be surprised if BP can match the UKIP performance of taking 24/73 seats in 2014.

DGRossetti · 09/05/2019 16:26

Anyone want to read about the American Secretary of State lecturing the UK government on what Mrs Thatcher would have done ?

Fill your boots ...

www.theregister.co.uk/2019/05/09/pompeo_invokes_thatcher_huawei_5g_security/

Margaret Thatcher would not let Huawei build Britain's 5G networks, US foreign secretary Mike Pompeo claimed yesterday as British ministers suggested the rollout may be delayed for security reasons.

Pompeo was visiting Britain to deliver a bollocking over the government's decision to continue allowing Huawei to build the edge, but not the core, equipment for future mobile phone networks.

His remarks invoking the late leader, one of the longest-serving prime ministers of the 20th century, used her political nickname of the Iron Lady.

"Ask yourself this. Would the Iron Lady be silent when China violates the sovereignty of nations through corruption and coercion? Would she have welcomed the Belt and Road initiative without demanding absolute transparency and the highest standards? Would she allow China to control the internet of the future?" Pompeo was reported as saying by political journalists.

Thatcher died in 2013 and never mentioned Huawei in Parliament. Her main concerns with China were the smooth return of Hong Kong to Chinese political control when tea-sucking, opium-dealing Britain's 99-year lease on the colony came to an end in 1997.

"Look, I know it's a sensitive topic," Pompeo continued, "but we have to talk about sensitive things as friends. As a matter of Chinese law, the Chinese government can rightfully demand access to data flowing through Huawei and ZTE systems. Why would anyone grant such power to a regime that has already grossly violated cyberspace?"

(contd)

I guess that's one pence worth ?

LonelyTiredandLow · 09/05/2019 16:53

Hahaha! The American Secretary of State talking about China's corruption and coercion Grin. Oh that really has made me laugh! Grin

DGRossetti · 09/05/2019 16:54

Hahaha! The American Secretary of State talking to the UK as we deserve ... certainly as the US sees us.

1tisILeClerc · 09/05/2019 16:58

So the UK is going to 'suck up' to the Chinese with Hauwei, and the Americans for food (presumably) in a period where America and China are having significant 'tit for tat' trade disagreements (putting it simply) so the UK can play 'piggy in the middle' and fall between both stools (word chosen carefully).
And the UK is going to enforce transparency and 'level playing field' trade and legal accountability for transgressions with the Chinese government,,,, HOW?
Silly me, Gavin was going to send a warship to tell them who is 'boss'.

BigChocFrenzy · 09/05/2019 17:09

Woman Yes, all members of the British armed services are repeatedly instructed in the rules of the Geneva Convention - an international treaty - during basic training,
to cover what they need to know to avoid breaking international law against war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Additionally, before being sent on planned deployment for "peace-keeping" or war, they are given extra training and a card with Rules of Engagement decided by the MoD that are specific to where they are going.
e.g. to use baton rounds to combat riots, how and when to do this
These RoE may only be tougher than the GC, not weaker

However, the basics of international law for troops are pretty obvious:

don't rape or use sexual assault / humiliation to intimidate
don't torture or beat up helpless prisoners
don't murder unarmed civilian demonstrators

and it is these type of serious historical offences for which British soldiers may be investigated and prosecuted, not lesser offences like e.g. theft of civilian property, or damage to it.

Mercer resigned the whip because the govt hadn't passed a law to stop historical prosecutions of very serious offences

btw, I doubt if Nazi war criminals or more recently war criminals in Serbia or Africa were ever instructed on thr Geneva Convention, but ignorance of the law is no defence in law - so those found guilty were still convicted.

DGRossetti · 09/05/2019 17:09

So the UK is going to 'suck up' to the Chinese with Hauwei

Well we're hardly going to build our own are we ?

prettybird · 09/05/2019 17:12

DGR will know better than me, but isn't one of the reasons why the US hates Huawei equipment the fact that the NSA doesn't have a "backdoor" in to the equipment? Hmm

So it's not so much about the Chinese spying on us which they may well be doing but the fact that the Americans can't Confused

Welcome to Trumpian double standards Hmm

BigChocFrenzy · 09/05/2019 17:13

The USA may wreck the WTO this year

Trump keeps blocking the reapointment of judges and by the end of 2019 here will be too few judges for the WTO appeals court to sit.

Once this court goes, it will be survival of the strongest:
That's the USA, the EU / EEA, China and probably India.

The UK, having lost most of its trade deals and with its economy crashing, will suffer even more if it chooses to rely on "WTO terms" without the WTO court

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-wto/u-s-blocks-wto-judge-reappointment-as-dispute-settlement-crisis-looms-idUSKCN1LC19O

BigChocFrenzy · 09/05/2019 17:20

An irresponsible PM could hold a referendum on whether people want to live to be 200 - without giving a plan how to achieve this

If voters choose Yes, then it's not betrayal of democracy if the politicians then can't deliver on that choice.

Leave promised different things to different groups and some of these things conflict with each other
They also require the EU to risk its Single Market, on which its prosperity depends and / or to risk the Troubles breaking out in NI

When people vote for something that is undeliverable in anything like the form promised, what should happen next ?

DGRossetti · 09/05/2019 17:36

DGR will know better than me, but isn't one of the reasons why the US hates Huawei equipment the fact that the NSA doesn't have a "backdoor" in to the equipment?

One, possibly ... however I think international espionage is more subtle than that. After all, if we are discussing it, then it's already been flagged and mitigated somewhere.

I'm thinking it's a lot less technical, and a lot more political. Trump needs to fuel the fire that keeps him burning, and Huawei are just a convenient target. If it wasn't them it would be something else.

DGRossetti · 09/05/2019 17:40

An irresponsible PM could hold a referendum on whether people want to live to be 200 - without giving a plan how to achieve this

I try and avoid such examples as it will invariably bring Brexiteers flocking to deliberately misinterpret you as saying Brexit was "impossible". Which wasn't the case at all. Difficult, requiring careful planning and implementation, certainly. But like any surprise party, ultimately entirely achievable.

LouiseCollins28 · 09/05/2019 18:00

Lets for the sake of the argument pretend that I accept the premise that Brexit "is undeliverable in anything like the form promised",
I don't but for the sake of answering your question, I will.

You asked: "what should happen next ?"

We live in a parliamentary democracy, our parliamentarians have a duty to give effect through making laws to the people's will to the fullest extent that they can.

A proposition has been put that is "undeliverable in anything like the form promised" so the choices are, a) either it is delivered in some form, or b) it is not.

If democratic votes cast are to mean anything, the only credible answer must be a) it must be delivered in what form it can be.

BigChocFrenzy · 09/05/2019 18:05

Brexit is impossible in the unicorn form promised

If people would accept the form of Brexit that is doable without wrecking the economy - i.e. SM 3rd EEA pillar -
and that we'd need at least 3 years transition after Brexit to negotiate the treaty terms, then we could have Brexit

Same as if instead of promising 200 years of life,
a referendum proposed improving health & life expectancy of the nation as much as possible AND proposed tax increases to invest massively in the NHS, including prevension of illnesses, also something like Sure Start

BigChocFrenzy · 09/05/2019 18:16

Is there a mandate to deliver Brexit when any form would damage the economy to some extent ?

Leave claimed this was Project Fear, but it is now clearly the reality.

Is a referendum binding when people were falsely led to believe that they can gain something without losing other important things ?