Westminstenders: Run Forrest Run

[RedToothBrush]

Need i say more?

Naturally in Britain now, positivity, I.e. agreement with everything senior figures say, is more important than common sense so old we have children’s’ rhymes about it.
“The butcher, the baker, the candle-stick maker, Turn them out knaves all three!”

Our best hope now is all these rumours about senior Tories angry with continual u-turns. Although of course a load were expelled for not being “positive” just last year. How long can this go on? I’m missing Sajid Javid.

All 5 contributors absolutely plainly totally Anti-Brexit

This is a very interesting take, because it encapsulates the right wing attitude to Brexit all along: that any discussion of real-world consequences is "anti Brexit".

The idea that sovereignty is so important that it's somehow biased and unpatriotic to make factual arguments about consequences is going to blow up very messily in their faces when Sturgeon finally gets her second referendum. Tim Shipman in the Times seems to think that Gove understands this ... IMO if we do get a deal then this will be why.

Louise, is it possible they have each done their analysis and each concluded independently that a) a no deal Brexit is highly likely and b) a no deal Brexit will not be beneficial for the UK?

Should the BBC have a flat-earther and a N anti-evolutionary on every science / environment / nature programme "for balance"?

You may not agree with the speakers, you may be disappointed they don't reflect your own "positivity" about Brexit, but that in itself doesn't make them wrong.

Louise
All 5 contributors absolutely plainly totally Anti-Brexit, check the writings or public statements of any of them.
No.
5 people who have actually looked at the issues and read the legislation and briefing papers and reached an evidenced conclusion.

Which 5 people would you have liked to hear from - who actually have the facts at their fingertips?

Just picked up this article
Austerity cuts to local authorities and fire services and HMRC and the HSE are directly to blame
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/30/revealed-shocking-lack-of-regulation-at-leicester-garment-factories

All 5 contributors absolutely plainly totally Anti-Brexit, check the writings or public statements of any of them.

I wonder if the same complaint could be made of a TED talk about solar flares ...

All 5 contributors, absolutely plainly anti flat-earth ....

"Louise, is it possible they have each done their analysis and each concluded independently that a) a no deal Brexit is highly likely and b) a no deal Brexit will not be beneficial for the UK?"

Various posters have asked similar questions in response to my "All 5 contributors absolutely plainly totally Anti-Brexit" comment, but this one was the best I thought. So hopefully in answering it I can answer the others as well.

Yes, both those things are entirely possible. I think of the 5, Peet put the possibility of "No Deal" highest at 50/50. Whether that counts as highly likely is a matter of judgement. I agree totally that just because I don't like what they say, it doesn't make them wrong.

These are at least understood to be well informed people, chances are then, that they are much more likely to be right than any random commenter on the internet (such as myself)

I might argue that since their minds were already made up, perhaps they consult mostly sources that confirm their existing thinking? I don't do that, I consume vast amounts of content from people who don't think like I do, including from some very excellent posters on MN and much less from those who share my own opinions. That most certainly doesn't make me an expert, but it does mean I've exposed myself to viewpoints more varied than 'EU Good: UK Bad'.

What irks me is that this is believed to represent "balance". Really, among 5 contributors there wasn't a space for even1/5 who favours Leaving the EU?

That the earth is spherical is a verifiable scientific fact. What the outcome of a negotiation is plainly not a fact. The consequences of a decision are not a fact either.

What irks me is that this is believed to represent "balance". Really, among 5 contributors there wasn't a space for even1/5 who favours Leaving the EU?

How do you think some people felt seeing Farage weekly on Question Time (for example) ?

Also, we don't need to hear from people who favour leaving the EU anymore. They really are yesterdays people. We've left. We need to hear from people who think they can make the UK better after Brexit. Which is a different subset of people. And mathematically, there's no reason why it can't be a null set.

Really, among 5 contributors there wasn't a space for even1/5 who favours Leaving the EU?
Who would you suggest?
Which experts who understand the issues and the legislation would, in your opinion, have put the "Brexit is a good idea because" arguments best ?

It's telling that Brexiteers feel they still have to campaign for Brexit, rather than enact it.

DGR you put that well. It might be a null set, statistically I'd say it was unlikely, but you could be right. Your point about "yesterday's people" was in some sense a good one.

Farage appeared loads on QT, that's true. He and other pro-Leave voices were almost always in a minority on QT panels, that's also true. In a country where 52% voted to Leave that shouldn't be so.

It doesn't need a "Brexit is a good idea because", It needs, "here are the opportunities"....

so in addition to Aaronovich as host (who I can't stand but I'd accept though I'd prefer a host who's Brexit position was not a matter of record or who public confirmed they didn't vote) we could have...

One from 2 of Menon or Thimont Jack (can't see the need for both, I know Menon's work better so I'll go for him
Adler as Europe editor who whatever her obvious biases ought nonetheless to be informed.

Then you need 2 other voices for balance, exactly who they are I would struggle to say, as I mentioned I read far more that argues against my own biases than agrees with it.

Stephen Booth from Open Europe/Policy Exchange might be someone to look to from a pro-Leave pov. For the last seat someone who works as a trade negotiator for the US Government; or get someone in who runs a business who's looking forward to trading with nations outside the EU without tariffs.

What the outcome of a negotiation is plainly not a fact. The consequences of a decision are not a fact either.

They soon will be though. What will you complain about then? People going on the telly to talk about real-life lorry queues, because talking about actually queueing lorries is unpatriotic?

runs a business who's looking forward to trading with nations outside the EU without tariffs.

What?

No tariffs requires a deal. Otherwise you have to trade on WTO terms, which is very much NOT "no tariffs".

Please don't tell me that with a month to go, someone who claims to care about Brexit still doesn't understand simple, basic facts.

You might do a lot of reading, but do you do any understanding?

here are the opportunities

Maybe it's time to resurrect the Brexitannian Newspeak Dictionary

Then you need 2 other voices for balance
No, you do not.
You need people who know their stuff.

If 99% of those who have read up on an issue think one way (eg Climate Change)
then 99 out of 100 speakers on the topic should be from that view
NOT equal numbers of speakers from both sides

The fact that around 95% of experts on Brexit say it will be bad
just shows that 52% of those who voted 1529 days ago
did not understand the issues

I didn't propose equal numbers of speakers from both sides Listening my proposed panel had 3 to 2 in the favour of those against Leaving. So that's 60% saying it will be bad still.

It's bloody obvious why there were no pro brexit expert peeps on the panel. There aren't any.

This is not about Leaving v Remaining. This is about whether we leave with a deal or not. There is, and has always been, a broad consensus against no deal.

@Pepperwort

This is not about Leaving v Remaining. This is about whether we leave with a deal or not. There is, and has always been, a broad consensus against no deal.

We have left. There's no argument to be made for it anymore.

Part of the problem now - and it's very much Louises problem, is that instead of getting on with it, Leavers seem determined to rerun all the arguments in favour of Leave. Which I can't help but feel is a sign of a guilty conscience.

The reason I say it's Louises problem, is I think it explains the reasons for the "unbalanced" panel.

It was a joke at the time, but it seems to be rapidly becoming the new paradigm:

You won. Get over it.

The Remain vs Leave debate ended in June 2016. (Leave won, in case anyone needs reminding.)
The debate now is about what kind of deal we leave with. I recall hearing phrases sch as "easiest deal in history", "they need us more than we need them" and "oven ready", but some people seem surprised how hard the EU are fighting to get the best deal for its members.

Brexit has happened.
Now it has to be made to work.

Which means those who proposed it are going to have to
either

• grind the whole country further into the ground

or

• compromise a LOT

Well if you don't like the panel put forward Louise you have to suggest some Brexiters who can put the case.

Peter North was a Brexiter and published a lot of research but I get the impression that even he has given up now.

I get really really fed up with those of us who were Remainers being asked to provide solutions. You won, you provide the answers, and not pie in the sky wishful thinking. We have had more than 4 years now - which trade deals with the US are ready to be signed off? I think the answer is none, but am happy to be corrected.

I think we made one with the Faroes, or somewhere like that - with the best will in the world, there is a limit to how many Faroese jumpers we need.

I agree it's no longer an argument about Remain or Leave. Johnson won his mandate on 'Getting Brexit Done' and we would have a deal and it was going to be a great deal as far as I recall. Enough people thought right that's good and he got his majority. Now he is hinting that there won't be a deal, never mind an 'Oven ready' one. Well more fool Tory voters for believing a man who is a known liar.

I think Louise is symptomatic of a lot of Leavers who are starting to wonder where the unicorns are. Obviously they can't blame themselves, so it has to be somebody - anybody - else.

To be fair to that poster, at least they are still engaging at a time when most people who voted Leave have disappeared from view.

Thanks but no, I'm not casting blame, I'm not feeling guilty and I'm not expecting any unicorns to appear.