UK politics - The Yellowhammer Made The Robin Weep

[ants]

3 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Which is exactly the point. The EU 27 will vote for an extension. They don't get give a hoot about being on Cumming's naughty list or something. So by that logic all of them will be on the bottom of his Christmas list. The Hungarians already asked what possible benefits there'd be that could possibly outweigh the damage their relations with their EU partners (Germany in particular they asked) would suffer.

It's a bit like being Sheldon's enemy list.

This threat of being at the bottom of Johnson's "friend list" is just so utterly ridiculous.

That presupposes that they vote for an extension.  If some don't vote for one, then the naughty & nice list becomes quite relevant (theoretically).  

[Which Tyler]

4 hours ago, ants said:

That presupposes that they vote for an extension.  If some don't vote for one, then the naughty & nice list becomes quite relevant (theoretically).  

It's a valid supposition though.

This time, no-one in the EU seems to ba talking about not granting the extension, all the discussion seems to be around how long.

 

If we get an extension, the vote is, by definition, unanimous. Meaning that there is no naughty Vs nice list.

If we don't get an extension, then there can be a naughty Vs nice list - it just won't mean anything as well benoutsire the EU and unable to affect its internal politics anyway, so the list is irrelevant.

There is no middle option where nations vote against an extension, or abstain, AND we maintain influence within the EU

[mormont]

6 hours ago, ants said:

That presupposes that they vote for an extension.  If some don't vote for one, then the naughty & nice list becomes quite relevant (theoretically).  

Not really, no. 

In that event, the list is still irrelevant, because for all the threats about going to the back of the queue, the response is: what queue? 

Within EU competences, there is no bloody queue. We will not be dealing with individual governments, but with the EU collectively. So that bit is not only an empty threat but nonsensical too. 

Outwith EU competences, what issues are we actually talking about? What are we sending people to the back/front of the queue for? I can't think of anything valuable enough for an EU member to make it worth their while. 

[Which Tyler]

4 hours ago, mormont said:

I can't think of anything valuable enough for an EU member to make it worth their while. 

There isn't. It's tough talk for domestic consumption.

 

Elsewhere, I'm pleased that Leave.eu have taken down their Merkel même - disgraceful, and probably taken down in fear of litigation. Damage done, and the racists whipped into their frenzy - but better than having it left up.

https://mobile.twitter.com/EmmaRome6/status/1181638808179228672

[Gaston de Foix]

4 hours ago, mormont said:

Outwith EU competences, what issues are we actually talking about? What are we sending people to the back/front of the queue for? I can't think of anything valuable enough for an EU member to make it worth their while. 

The answer is security cooperation. It's a disgraceful card to play but it has been floated before as attempted leverage: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/29/brexit-eu-condemns-mays-blackmail-over-security-cooperation

[mormont]

52 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

The answer is security cooperation. It's a disgraceful card to play but it has been floated before as attempted leverage: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/29/brexit-eu-condemns-mays-blackmail-over-security-cooperation

We must assume so, I guess, but even that is a pretty feeble card to play. It's simply not worth pissing off the rest of the EU27 and making your country the architect of a no-deal scenario, particularly for a country like Hungary, which frankly doesn't have a very strong reason to care.

This, I think, is the fundamental assumption and the fundamental problem with this whole approach. Cummings, Johnson and the rest imagine that their erstwhile Eurosceptic allies within the EU share their own fuck-you attitude to the EU, and are therefore happy to act as wreckers if given an incentive. They don't understand that this is just not the case.

[Gaston de Foix]

30 minutes ago, mormont said:

This, I think, is the fundamental assumption and the fundamental problem with this whole approach. Cummings, Johnson and the rest imagine that their erstwhile Eurosceptic allies within the EU share their own fuck-you attitude to the EU, and are therefore happy to act as wreckers if given an incentive. They don't understand that this is just not the case.

Honestly, I think they think that the British populace wants to see them doing everything possible, no matter how underhanded or ineffective to deliver Brexit.  Their calculations are focused only on the next election which they consider their salvation,

 Which is why the anti-No-Dealers need to get their act together, boot Johnson & Co out of office once he has applied for an extension, and legislate for a second referendum with Remain or No-Deal.  And then, after the results, we can and should have a general election.  They have all the political power in the HoC, if they are willing to use it. 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

12 hours ago, ants said:

That presupposes that they vote for an extension.  If some don't vote for one, then the naughty & nice list becomes quite relevant (theoretically).  

Nope. It really wouldn't. Like others said, the UK can't offer anything of enough value for one or more member states to break rank and poison their relations with the other EU27 states.

 

8 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

 Which is why the anti-No-Dealers need to get their act together, boot Johnson & Co out of office once he has applied for an extension, and legislate for a second referendum with Remain or No-Deal.  And then, after the results, we can and should have a general election.  They have all the political power in the HoC, if they are willing to use it. 

Yes. However, there's still the small problem of Labour, and the idiotic policy they passed at their last party cnference. Have a GE first, win a majority, then have a referendum, and a special party conference to decide, whether Labour wants to side with Frogface, Johnson and Trump and campaign to leave, or to campaign to remain. Just writing that, makes me want to bang my head against my desk repeatedly, it's just so utterly stupid and pathetic what Labour did there.

But moving on from the moronic Labour Party Policy (or absence of). Suppose you get that referendum off the ground, despite the objections from Labour and the ERG (aka the Tories). What will you do, when the leave side simply refuses to acknowledge the referendum and boycots it.

Remain wins, and the Tories have a GE on campaigning to leave the EU (pledging to ignore the second referendum)? And yes, I can absolutely see them doing that.

[karaddin]

46 minutes ago, mormont said:

This, I think, is the fundamental assumption and the fundamental problem with this whole approach. Cummings, Johnson and the rest imagine that their erstwhile Eurosceptic allies within the EU share their own fuck-you attitude to the EU, and are therefore happy to act as wreckers if given an incentive. They don't understand that this is just not the case.

It's not the only fundamental assumption at play as well, they are somehow still labouring under the impression that the UK is the bigger faction than the EU. If you think with that mindset then of course it's only logical to expect people/countries to try curry favor with the major player recognising the imminent decline of the EU which is left bereft without the UK.

They also still seem to expect all other parties to put the desires and well being of the UK (or lets be real here - Mother England) ahead of their own. Especially the RoI who they seem to think are a vassal state or something.

[Gaston de Foix]

22 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

But moving on from the moronic Labour Party Policy (or absence of). Suppose you get that referendum off the ground, despite the objections from Labour and the ERG (aka the Tories). What will you do, when the leave side simply refuses to acknowledge the referendum and boycots it.

Remain wins, and the Tories have a GE on campaigning to leave the EU (pledging to ignore the second referendum)? And yes, I can absolutely see them doing that.

A good question. 

Two answers to this (1) first there will be at least some Brexiteers who think they will win again, and by an overwhelming margin this time and (2) if they are seeking a mandate for no-deal then this referendum would provide it for them (assuming they won).  But, yes, it's a real risk and one I hadn't considered. 

[Gaston de Foix]

10 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

A good question. 

Two answers to this (1) first there will be at least some Brexiteers who think they will win again, and by an overwhelming margin this time and (2) if they are seeking a mandate for no-deal then this referendum would provide it for them (assuming they won).  But, yes, it's a real risk and one I hadn't considered. 

I guess there is an additional alternative to this threatened boycott: compulsory voting in the referendum (with options to opt out or abstain if you choose). 

[The Anti-Targ]

6 hours ago, karaddin said:

It's not the only fundamental assumption at play as well, they are somehow still labouring under the impression that the UK is the bigger faction than the EU. If you think with that mindset then of course it's only logical to expect people/countries to try curry favor with the major player recognising the imminent decline of the EU which is left bereft without the UK.

They also still seem to expect all other parties to put the desires and well being of the UK (or lets be real here - Mother England) ahead of their own. Especially the RoI who they seem to think are a vassal state or something.

If you see the first response to the Donald Tusk tweet up thread this is exactly the thinking. When the UK leaves with no deal and greatly prospers from it then the whole house of cards will fall and Britain will stand as the true power in all of Europe to which all the small European nations will flock for their salvation.

Seems legit.

7 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Yes. However, there's still the small problem of Labour, and the idiotic policy they passed at their last party cnference. Have a GE first, win a majority, then have a referendum, and a special party conference to decide, whether Labour wants to side with Frogface, Johnson and Trump and campaign to leave, or to campaign to remain. Just writing that, makes me want to bang my head against my desk repeatedly, it's just so utterly stupid and pathetic what Labour did there.

But moving on from the moronic Labour Party Policy (or absence of). Suppose you get that referendum off the ground, despite the objections from Labour and the ERG (aka the Tories). What will you do, when the leave side simply refuses to acknowledge the referendum and boycots it.

Remain wins, and the Tories have a GE on campaigning to leave the EU (pledging to ignore the second referendum)? And yes, I can absolutely see them doing that.

It's only moronic if you are a [Labour] remainer. Corbyn wants to leave and believes the best way to leave is to become the govt, negotiate a Labour deal (whatever that might be) and then hold a referendum in which the Labour deal will be so wonderful it will win the referendum. If there's a referendum before a GE then Labour had no deal to present and either no deal or remain wins, neither outcomes of which is what Corbyn wants.

Corbyn might well be 50/50 on whether he'd rather have remain or no-deal. If he loses the election then there is almost certainly going to be a leave / no-deal majority in the House, he's probably prepared to take that risk (and still achieve Brexit, albeit without him as the hero who delivered, over a pre-GE referendum in which remain wins and then he gets no mandate at all for moving forward with Brexit even if he wins the ensuing GE. Indeed there is another a risk for Labour that if there's a pre-GE referendum and remain wins, then right-leaning voters may well feel safe voting Conservative, because remain has been secured.

I also think the Lib Dems should also feel a bit worried about that risk. Once remain has been secured via referendum the Lib Dem point of difference that has seen them surge in the polls is gone, so their support might evaporate.

 

[ants]

14 hours ago, mormont said:

Not really, no. 

In that event, the list is still irrelevant, because for all the threats about going to the back of the queue, the response is: what queue? 

Within EU competences, there is no bloody queue. We will not be dealing with individual governments, but with the EU collectively. So that bit is not only an empty threat but nonsensical too. 

Outwith EU competences, what issues are we actually talking about? What are we sending people to the back/front of the queue for? I can't think of anything valuable enough for an EU member to make it worth their while. 

I never spoke to whether or not the threat (or list) was in any way effective. I was pointing out that the vote being unanimous is why they made the threat, and wasn’t an argument in itself against the idea. 

If they had an actual stick or carrot the approach could be very effective. They don’t. 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I also think the Lib Dems should also feel a bit worried about that risk. Once remain has been secured via referendum the Lib Dem point of difference that has seen them surge in the polls is gone, so their support might evaporate.

I think for the LibDems stopping Brexit as priority tops electoral prospects in some not so distant future.

And then question remains, how much damage Corbyn ahs done to the Labour remain voting base. If they are sufficiently/permanently alienated enough and the LibDems manage to shore them up, that's a win for them. And I think we might have crossed that point by now. Then we also have the Remain Tories, no idea how soon they feel like moving back into the fold to vote Boris.

[williamjm]

8 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Remain wins, and the Tories have a GE on campaigning to leave the EU (pledging to ignore the second referendum)? And yes, I can absolutely see them doing that. 

I don't think there's ever going to be a solution that could stop a future Parliament choosing to restart the process of leaving the EU. If Remain wins a referendum then Article 50 can be revoked which, if I remember correctly, means that any future Brexit process would have to be restarted from scratch, but that would just be adding a delay rather than permanently preventing Brexit if a Tory majority government wanted to restart it.

[The Anti-Targ]

31 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

I think for the LibDems stopping Brexit as priority tops electoral prospects in some future.

And then question remains, how much damage Corbyn ahs done to the Labour remain voting base. If they are sufficiently/permanently alienated enough and the LibDems manage to shore them up, that's a win for them. And I think we might have crossed that point by now. Then we also have the Remain Tories, no idea how soon they feel like moving back into the fold to vote Boris.

Are you saying the Lib Dems are acting on principle and not just playing the same old political game? You might be right, but I remain skeptical.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

4 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Are you saying the Lib Dems are acting on principle and not just playing the same old political game? You might be right, but I remain skeptical.

With regards to Brexit, yes. I think this is right now the most defining thing about the political identity in British politics (at least outside the Labour party). You either believe in it, or you don't. From there on out, you can go to philosophical questions like, can you vote for Brexiter (Corbyn) as PM, if it means stopping Brexit.

 

[The Anti-Targ]

2 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

With regards to Brexit, yes. I think this is right now the most defining thing about the political identity in British politics (at least outside the Labour party). You either believe in it, or you don't. From there on out, you can go to philosophical questions like, can you vote for Brexiter (Corbyn) as PM, if it means stopping Brexit.

 

At the moment, if one can safely assume that come 19 Oct Boris will sign the letter and the EU will grant the extension, albeit possibly coming back with a longer extension. Electorally speaking this is possibly the best situation for the Lib Dems. Boris is made to look bad, because he failed his die in a ditch promise. The Lib Dems still have their firm remain platform to campaign on and it keeps the left and right remainers scared enough to seriously consider giving Lib Dems their vote.

I think the EU should grant the UK a 99 year extension, basically saying: you can leave any time you like but it will be because of a definitive vote, either in the House or by referendum, and not because you came up against an arbitrary deadline and you weren't organised enough to form a majority view on what you want. The EU is surely sick of being used as a political punching bag, so putting the ball permanently in the UK's court is what the rest of the EU would want. Odd mixed metaphor there, but you get what I mean, I hope. I don't imagine the EU will do that, at most they will propose a 2 year extension, but more likely they'll give you 31 Oct 2020.

[Ser Hedge]

Leo & Bozo meeting today seems to have  ended on a positive note.

Of course that might just be:

"There were also suggestions that both sides were keen to cast the talks in a positive light to avoid being held responsible for their failure."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/10/boris-johnson-and-leo-varadkar-say-they-see-pathway-to-brexit-deal

There's still a week, let's see, even if chances are slim.

[Werthead]

Apparently the date being floated by the EU is the end of June 2020. However, if Boris sends the letter it will be until the end of January and no more, we can be sure of that.

The Varadkar/Boris meeting seems to have settled on basically the very first May outline (with NI in the customs union) as a possible way forwards but I'm not sure if Boris can sell that to the DUP or the ERG. Farage would also called it "Brexit in Name Only."

YouGov have a new poll indicating that in a fresh referendum, Remain would win but, in addition to that, have found that there has been a major shift against Brexit in the last two years, with very few polls putting Leave ahead and only one this year. In the same time period, over 200 polls have put Remain ahead. We can assume that in a Remain vs No Deal scenario, Remain's victory would be inevitable. That's also led to talk of the Remain parties using "super-Saturday" to try to get Ref3 through the Commons. Apparently the LibDems, CUK and SNP have brought on board most, if not all, of the Indy Tories to this point of view, so if Corbyn supported it then the referendum should happen (although we'd need a longer extension, as the referendum would be hard to hold before early April).

That's actually an interesting out for Johnson. He can blusteringly accept the need to carry out the referendum saying he's been forced into it, campaign for Leave and then if he wins, go back to his will of the party spiel etc and use it as a platform for No Deal. If he loses, he perhaps might try to carry on as PM having said, "Fuck it, I tried but you guys changed your minds, fair enough." I suspect that even the Tories might have enough honour to kick him out at that point, though.

Perhaps with an eye to that, Farage and the Brext Party have voted against an EU resolution to prevent further Russian meddling in elections.