Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Spockydog

UK Politics: What Goes DUP Must Come Down

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

No doubt May could have done more to get other parties on board and the way she has approached getting people to vote for her deal has been confrontational and unhelpful.

But yes, her deal is still relatively soft. The backstop is worse than remaining if we get trapped in it. The future relationship hasn’t been ironed out yet but even that seems to be pretty soft in many regards,  and even seems to hint at customs unions.

This is of course why Brexiteers don’t like her deal. I’ve yet to really understand Labours problem with it other than it simply not being their deal or that it’s not Remain. 

If she went back on her red lines, for instance keeping freedom of movement then she would really struggle to claim she has delivered Brexit in any real terms.

Edited by Heartofice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Nothing Has Changed said:

This is just fluff though, you can't tell me what this compromise would look like. 

I did that bit months ago (well, kinda, I suggested what compromise would likely have had majority support 2 years ago, though it's far more about how the compromise is reached than the details of the eventual compromise). The posts you've been quoting haven't been attempting to tell you what compromise I'd like (or, for that matter, why you think I would like such a compromise, or why it's my job to come up with one).

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

But yes, her deal is still relatively soft. The backstop is worse than remaining if we get trapped in it. The future relationship hasn’t been ironed out yet but even that seems to be pretty soft in many regards,  and even seems to hint at customs unions.

 

For a certain variation of the word "soft" I suppose.

A hard brexiteer would call May's "soft", anyone else would call it "hard". It's certainly harder than a Norway option, or a Canadian option, or a Swiss option, and slightly harder than a Japanese or Turkish option.

Edited by Which Tyler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Which Tyler said:

For a certain variation of the word "soft" I suppose.

A hard brexiteer would call May's "soft", anyone else would call it "hard". It's certainly harder than a Norway option, or a Canadian option, or a Swiss option, and slightly harder than a Japanese or Turkish option.

How is it harder than Canada Turkey or Japan?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/01/customs-union-brexit-conundrum-no-deal-eu-peter-mandelson

Slimy as Mandelson is, and as much as he is pushing for a second ref, I think this is quite a decent summary of the situation. There does seem to be a lot of noise in the press about Customs unions right now, I'm seriously hoping that isn't the direction we are going as its worse than almost all the other scenarios. 

Share this post


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

No doubt May could have done more to get other parties on board and the way she has approached getting people to vote for her deal has been confrontational and unhelpful.

 

Did she actually do anything to try to get other parties aside from the DUP on board?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

How is it harder than Canada Turkey or Japan?

Sorry - me cocking up there; about the same as Canada/Turkey; and TBH, [email protected] not sure how close the EU/Japan relationship will be, I haven't really looked into it, and shouldn't have brought it up - my bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think anyone talking about May seeking and finding consensus are delusional. What evidence is there that Corbyn would have done anything to help her position? He has deliberately avoided taking any position. 

And every other party with enough votes to make a difference is Remain. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/01/customs-union-brexit-conundrum-no-deal-eu-peter-mandelson

Slimy as Mandelson is, and as much as he is pushing for a second ref, I think this is quite a decent summary of the situation. There does seem to be a lot of noise in the press about Customs unions right now, I'm seriously hoping that isn't the direction we are going as its worse than almost all the other scenarios. 

What is the difference between staying and leaving with a costums union? 

Who can be happy with that? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, divica said:

What is the difference between staying and leaving with a costums union? 

Who can be happy with that? 

Nobody should be happy with it. Turkey damn well isn't happy with the Customs union they have, nor should they be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on the old petition thing, but this is a good example of just how divided the country is on.. well a lot of topics. The petition got a lot of signatures, but when they mostly seem to be coming from the cosmopolitain centres of the UK it does just seem to confirm the growing divide. It really is a country of Somewheres and Anywheres..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Back on the old petition thing, but this is a good example of just how divided the country is on.. well a lot of topics. The petition got a lot of signatures, but when they mostly seem to be coming from the cosmopolitain centres of the UK it does just seem to confirm the growing divide. It really is a country of Somewheres and Anywheres..

I think Lisa Nandy is a thoughtful politician and one of the better, more reasonable voices in the Labour Party who has made a good fist of balancing the new direction of the party with practical politics. Her stance on Brexit, where she has attempted to really get into the reasons why Remain lost, has also been laudable.

However, as noted in the responses her conclusion is both simplistic and flawed. It was EU money that was supporting projects and infrastructure in many of these rural regions, not just in the North but also in the west country, Wales and Cornwall. Since Brexit these projects have been cancelled, leaving a lot of communities without their new swimming pools, new bridges and other amenities the EU was providing for. Astonishingly, the blame for this has been deflected onto the EU instead of the Brexit process itself (as we're leaving, so we're clearly not entitled to any of that money, just as you wouldn't pay a salary for the next year to the employee who has just quit), just as the blame for many of the economic woes of the country since the financial crisis were deflected onto immigrants rather than the Conservatives' imbecilic economic policies.

Brexit will make life for these communities considerably worse, because the reasons for those communities going downhill has been the natural and global switch from rural to urban power, worsened by several bursts of Conservative economic policy (not that New Labour did much to help either). The EU has had absolutely and utterly nothing to do with it.

Share this post


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

What is the difference between staying and leaving with a costums union? 

Who can be happy with that? 

A lot, actually. A customs union basically means no tariffs on goods between the EU and the UK. It doesn't mean regulatory alignment, or free movement of services or people.

The EU, for one, won't be too happy about having a customs union with a country that doesn't align with EU regulations (in fact you can pretty much forget about it in areas that are heavily regulated, like food or medication). This is why, if a trade deal involving a customs union is negotiated with the EU, the EU is likely to insist the UK aligns its regulations with theirs on products of certain types produced in the UK or imported into the UK from a third country. People who want the UK to freely negotiate trade deals with third countries, or to be free from EU regulations altogether, might not be happy about this (these people might want to be careful what they wish for, though, as certain third countries would like nothing better than to flood the UK with cheap and under-regulated products which could threaten both UK agriculture and industry as well as the quality of products available to UK consumers).

Of course, if you don't have a customs union you will necessarily have to have customs checks. This pretty much means you'll be kicking NI to the curb and throwing the Good Friday agreement out of the window. Some people in Ireland probably won't be happy with that either.

All in all, whoever is in charge is likely going to end up with a fair number of unhappy people as a direct result of their decisions. They might have to consider which of all the options available to them is the lesser evil, rather than which option will have them hailed in history books as the second Churchill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, Jacob Rees-Mogg is now retweeting AfD bullshit from racist cretins, so I think we can forget about the whole "Grand Wizards" thing being some kind of "mistake" now. The hard Brexiteers are flirting with actual far-right parties to try to gain support for their position, possibly thinking they won't be tainted by the association. They are in serious error about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Oh, Jacob Rees-Mogg is now retweeting AfD bullshit from racist cretins, so I think we can forget about the whole "Grand Wizards" thing being some kind of "mistake" now. The hard Brexiteers are flirting with actual far-right parties to try to gain support for their position, possibly thinking they won't be tainted by the association. They are in serious error about that.

Bloody hell.

So much for giving people the benefit of the doubt!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Oh, Jacob Rees-Mogg is now retweeting AfD bullshit from racist cretins, so I think we can forget about the whole "Grand Wizards" thing being some kind of "mistake" now. The hard Brexiteers are flirting with actual far-right parties to try to gain support for their position, possibly thinking they won't be tainted by the association. They are in serious error about that.

Without feeling like I'm walking around defending JRM the whole time, he has come out and explicitly said he doesn't support the AFD in any way, and that he posted that video because it demonstrated that the German position on Brexit isn't so clear cut. 

Of course certain types of people will jump on things like this as a way of confirming their own preconceptions. But this is really a piece of non news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Without feeling like I'm walking around defending JRM the whole time, he has come out and explicitly said he doesn't support the AFD in any way, and that he posted that video because it demonstrated that the German position on Brexit isn't so clear cut. 

It really doesn't look great.

There must be some other way he can demonstrate that other than posting stuff from an extreme right wing group. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mosi Mynn said:

It really doesn't look great.

There must be some other way he can demonstrate that other than posting stuff from an extreme right wing group. 

Oh I agree it doesn't look great and doesn't make him look good at all. 

But he did defend it, which was strangely not shown in that article linked:
 

Quote

 

“No, no, I’m not supporting the AfD,” he said. “But this is a speech made in the Bundestag of real importance because it shows a German view of Brexitand it’s saying to the Germans: ‘Look, you’re paying for this, you’re going to pay more for this’, and Angela Merkel has tied herself up in knots with the French to the disadvantage of the Germans.

“And I think it’s important people know this is a strand of German political thinking. I don’t think retweeting is an endorsement of things that other people stand for. It’s just pointing out that there’s something interesting that is worth watching.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

So indicative votes on C, D, E and G

The following is the BBC'S brief summary of each:


Motion C: Customs union

Proposer: Ken Clarke, Conservative

This option commits the government to negotiating "a permanent and comprehensive UK-wide customs union with the EU" as part of any Brexit deal.

This arrangement would give the UK a closer trading relationship with the EU and reduce the need for some (but not all) checks at the Irish border.

Media captionConfused by Brexit jargon? Reality Check unpacks the basics.

But it would prevent the UK striking independent trade deals with other countries, and has previously been ruled out by Mrs May.

A version of this proposal received the most support in the first round, falling just six votes short of a majority.

 

Motion D: 'Common Market 2.0'

Proposer: Nick Boles, Conservative

This proposal would mean joining the European Free Trade Association and European Economic Area, with countries such as Norway.

It means the UK would remain part of the EU single market and would retain freedom of movement, so British citizens would keep the right to live and work in the EU and vice-versa.

In the last round, 188 MPs voted for this plan and 283 voted against.

 

Motion E: Confirmatory public vote

Proposers: Peter Kyle and Phil Wilson, Labour

This gives the public a vote to approve any Brexit deal passed by Parliament, before it can be implemented.

Tabled last time by Labour former minister Dame Margaret Beckett, this option won the highest number of votes, with 268 MPs for and 295 against.


 

Motion G: Parliamentary supremacy

Proposer: Joanna Cherry, Scottish National Party

This option offers a series of steps to prevent the UK leaving the EU without a deal. First, it requires the government to seek an extension if a deal has not been agreed two days before the deadline for leaving.

If the EU does not agree to an extension, on the day before the UK was due to leave, MPs would be asked to choose between a no-deal Brexit or revoking Article 50 to stop Brexit altogether.

In the event of revoking Article 50, an inquiry would be held to find out what type of future relationship with the EU could command majority support in the UK and be acceptable to Brussels.

MPs previously voted against a proposal to cancel Brexit by Joanna Cherry, but have not considered this plan before.

Edited by Which Tyler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Which Tyler said:

So indicative votes on C, D, E and G

 

Does this mean A, and B  are not going to be voted on today?

Share this post


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

×