Jump to content
A Horse Named Stranger

UK politics: The tale of an old (Ber)crow who flew down from the cuckoo's nest...

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Maltaran said:

I suspect Boris doesn't want it until after we've actually Brexited, so he can blame all the problems on other people.

He's be just as happy if Brexit was revoked.  He'd then seek office on the basis of betrayal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, Ian Dunt's take on May's invitation to not talk, and Corbyn's refusal to attend.

In between having a go at both Corbyn and May as in

Quote

They are the most inadequate, self-interested, unimaginative, unprincipled, irresponsible party leaders in living history. There is no thesaurus in the world which could contain all the descriptions of their failures. In a moment which requires towering political figures, we're lumped with them: a prime minister with the intellectual status of a pebble and an opposition leader with the cerebral qualities of crumbled paper.

There's also some information hidden there.

Quote

Even if May said she ruled out no-deal, it would be a meaningless promise. No-deal happens automatically on March 29th as a result of the Article 50 notification. It is the default outcome. To stop it, we need a parliamentary majority for something. That could be a motion demanding the government petition for an extension to Article 50. Or it could be legislation to hold a People's Vote, with an attached extension. Or perhaps a new mandate for talks on customs union and single market membership, again with an attached extension provision.

Even if we were simply to revoke Article 50, we would still need a parliamentary majority. The European Court of Justice ruling allowing the UK to unilaterally cancel Brexit stated that it had to do that in accordance with its constitutional arrangements. And the Gina Miller case, back in the halcyon days of 2017, showed that governments cannot use the royal prerogative to overrule a decision which has been taken by parliament. In this case, parliament voted to trigger Article 50. So either by a motion or a piece of legislation - there is a lively legal debate on exactly which - there needs to be a majority even to cancel Article 50.

Popcorn anyone, or rather a Scotch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Erik of Hazelfield said:

I don't think I saw this posted:

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2019/01/15/gaming-a-three-way-people-s-vote

It's a piece on how the ballot design and chosen system would affect a second People's Vote. Very interesting. It's really not obvious how to do this in the most fair and legitimate way.

With AV there’s also the possibility of tactical voting: if it looked like it was a close call between Remain and May’s Deal, the best thing to do if you wanted Remain would be to vote that 1st, but not vote May’s Deal 2nd (even if it was your second most desired outcome), to try and starve it of ‘second round’ votes.

But either way, no way is half the population going to accept a rigged re-run, where Leave votes are divided up to make way for a Remain win. It has to be two tiers: Leave or Remain, if Leave then x, y, or z. But that’s not without problems either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2019 at 8:22 PM, Chaircat Meow said:

Also, Corbyn agrees with sitting down with terrorists, like the IRA and Hamas, with no preconditions. But when it comes to the democratically elected PM of the UK he sets impossible preconditions. 

The PM of the UK is being kept in power through a dubious deal with a grubby party that used to effectively be a terrorist organisation (although I forget, it's fine to sit down with terrorists when it's the Tories doing it), so the "democratically-elected PM of the UK" bit is highly questionable. She's Prime Minister through a quirk of our system, the same way Trump is President of the US only through a quirk of theirs. Neither are democratically-elected through an expression of the overall majority will of the people.

 

Quote

 

Yea, I know Verhofstadt started squealing about it but it is not his decision. And he brought it up because it started to become a live prospect. 

 

The main reason for it being a non-starter is actually to do with us: our repayment agreement with the EU is currently based on us not fielding any MEPs for this election and them taking part in EU Parliament business afterwards. If we are to stay for another year or whatever, we would need MEPs to deal with business impacting on the UK in that time. The longer the extension, the longer that Britain is a member of the EU and ergo the larger the settlement bill.

Quote

 

I imagine Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn both want it.

 

They do, but not under these current circumstances. If Brexit goes badly wrong, they don't want the blame. Their strategic stance is for May to carry it through, it be a disaster and for them to pick it up again afterwards and be seen as heroes for saving the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gillian Anderson to play that cunt Thatcher in The Crown. That's going to make me conflicted. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/19/2019 at 9:54 PM, DaveSumm said:

With AV there’s also the possibility of tactical voting: if it looked like it was a close call between Remain and May’s Deal, the best thing to do if you wanted Remain would be to vote that 1st, but not vote May’s Deal 2nd (even if it was your second most desired outcome), to try and starve it of ‘second round’ votes.

But either way, no way is half the population going to accept a rigged re-run, where Leave votes are divided up to make way for a Remain win. It has to be two tiers: Leave or Remain, if Leave then x, y, or z. But that’s not without problems either.

A second round preference is only relevant if your preferred choice isn't one of the top two.  In your example, someone can vote Remain (1), May's deal (2), and the second preference for May's deal is only relevant if Remain isn't in the last two leading options.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this nonsense this morning attempting to change the Backstop or an attempt to create a bilateral treaty with Ireland just serves to demonstrate how necessary the Backstop is as the UK is behaving as an untrustworthy negotiator 

I hate that we have gotten no further on the Backstop since last December, the UK is being utterly DUP-ped and it's so frustrating to watch. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really.. NOT hilarious story coming out that Cameron assumed the original referendum would never happen because the Lib Dems would just block it. Cameron looks worse and worse the more you hear.

Apparently a lot more of this kinda thing in a new BBC show called ' Inside Europe: 10 years of turmoil' looking forward to it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎1‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 11:20 AM, Werthead said:

The PM of the UK is being kept in power through a dubious deal with a grubby party that used to effectively be a terrorist organisation (although I forget, it's fine to sit down with terrorists when it's the Tories doing it), so the "democratically-elected PM of the UK" bit is highly questionable. She's Prime Minister through a quirk of our system, the same way Trump is President of the US only through a quirk of theirs. Neither are democratically-elected through an expression of the overall majority will of the people.

 

 

It's overstating the case to say that the DUP used to be a terrorist organisation.  In general, the UDA and UVF used to be very scathing about the way that DUP politicians liked to shoot their mouths off, while refusing to get their hands dirty.  They are however, thoroughly corrupt.

May is PM, because no alternative PM can win a vote of confidence in the Commons.  That's a feature of the system, not a bug.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Really.. NOT hilarious story coming out that Cameron assumed the original referendum would never happen because the Lib Dems would just block it. Cameron looks worse and worse the more you hear.

Apparently a lot more of this kinda thing in a new BBC show called ' Inside Europe: 10 years of turmoil' looking forward to it. 

I thought it was already well known that he'd put it in the manifesto assuming that it would be another coalition and he could blame the Lib Dems for havig to drop it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In unsurprising news. The EU has ruled out reopening the WA, and have reacted somewhat disgruntled at May saying her plan b is, talkig again about the backstop.

As @mormont pointed out, there's very little within the power of the PM, and even less stopping her entertaining people with the idea that's not the case.

And Labour MPs have decided to take matters into their own hand with the second referendum. So, another day in Westminster, I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in the meantime, this has been wrought by this absolute cluster F*ck:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jan/22/people-dont-want-this-derry-rejects-violence-old-fears-return

Quote

 

.... The language, like the attack, seemed anachronistic. But dissident republicans think Brexit has gifted them their best opportunity since the 1916 Easter Rising, said Marisa McGlinchey, the author of a forthcoming book, Unfinished Business: The Politics of ‘Dissident’ Irish Republicanism.

If so Tuesday’s headlines provided more succour: the European commission said a no-deal exit would result in a hard border. And the business group CBI warned no deal could leave Northern Ireland’s economy almost £5bn less productive by 2034.

Future historians may mull the irony of English nationalism stoking radical Irish nationalism, but people in Derry on Tuesday were busier worrying about the next security alert.

 

The only things going on crazier than all this is what's going on in the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2019 at 5:56 PM, Maltaran said:

I thought it was already well known that he'd put it in the manifesto assuming that it would be another coalition and he could blame the Lib Dems for havig to drop it.

One of those cunning plans that blows up in your face.

The Conservatives did far too good a job wiping out the Lib Dems in the 2015 election for Cameron's own good.

Edited by SeanF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that the lovely Mr Rees Mogg has said that if MPs keep on disagreeing with him, then May should simply close parliament.

 

So THAT'S what "taking back control" means!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, SeanF said:

One of those cunning plans that blows up in your face.

The Conservatives did far too good a job wiping out the Lib Dems in the 2015 election for Cameron's own good.

The irony is if he'd accepted the Lib Dem's request for preferential voting without going to a referendum (or supported it in the referendum), then he wouldn't have had to worry about UKIP splitting the conservative vote, and wouldn't have needed the promise on a referendum on leaving the EU. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×