UK Politics: A Partly Political Broadcast

[Sophelia]

12 hours ago, mormont said:

A horrifying and sad story:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-50150070

39 people.

This has been getting to me all day, really unbearable to think about. 

[The Anti-Targ]

Macron should piss off. It's not up to the French President to set the UK's deadline for leaving the EU. The UK Parliament has said that at a minimum it needs until 1 January(?) to sort their shit out. It is outrageous for anyone to attempt to shorten that time-frame or to deny it. The only legit response from anywhere in the EU is either to accept that time-frame or suggest a longer time-frame just to make sure there won't be a need to ask to extend yet again.

IMO extension requests from the UK should be a rubber stamping exercise on the EU's side unless the EU wants to suggest more time.

[Which Tyler]

3 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Macron should piss off. It's not up to the French President to set the UK's deadline for leaving the EU. The UK Parliament has said that at a minimum it needs until 1 January(?) to sort their shit out. It is outrageous for anyone to attempt to shorten that time-frame or to deny it. The only legit response from anywhere in the EU is either to accept that time-frame or suggest a longer time-frame just to make sure there won't be a need to ask to extend yet again.

IMO extension requests from the UK should be a rubber stamping exercise on the EU's side unless the EU wants to suggest more time.

Macron's comments are for his domestic audience, and partly as a pantomime villain to show that the EU isnt just perfectly happy, he's not actually an idiot, and won't actually veto any extension.

[The Anti-Targ]

1 hour ago, Which Tyler said:

Macron's comments are for his domestic audience, and partly as a pantomime villain to show that the EU isnt just perfectly happy, he's not actually an idiot, and won't actually veto any extension.

I know, it's just there's enough pantomime shit and false bravado coming from the UK herself, empty rhetoric coming from other quarters isn't helpful.

Not actually an idiot, but being idiotic, for the sake of the idiot factions of various countries.

[Ser Hedge]

6 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

The UK Parliament has said that at a minimum it needs until 1 January(?) to sort their shit out.

Agree with you about Macron for the most part. The only thing is that UK govt and Parliament have demonstrated time and again over the last 3 years is that we just cannot sort our faeces out no matter how much time is given. True, leaving the EU (or not) and the actual process of withdrawal is the most complex piece of legislation that they had to examine in one go ever, but from an external perspective (that part of the French audience Macron is catering to) a lot of this should have been done already. May's approach to jam her bill through just before the original deadline (even if they if was still considerably more time than what Boris and Dom planned to this time around) after little debate over the preceding 2 and half years obviously played a big role.

I agree with you that in the end we might get the extension until 31. Jan we requested, but somehow with a longer extension it feels like we will be back at this point again at that time, with Parliament amending the bill repeatedly and Boris not willing to accept the amendments, or the EU not willing to re-open the agreement like last time.

[Which Tyler]

We've talked before about Pasty Cockwomble's fear of scrutiny and accountability (though I can't be bothered to go and find the posts); here's just the latest example:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50160505

Quote

Boris Johnson has pulled out of a scheduled appearance before a panel of senior MPs, saying he has to "focus on delivering Brexit".

The prime minister had been due to be grilled by the Commons liaison committee - made up of the chairs of select committees - on Thursday.

He has asked committee chair Sarah Wollaston for a date "five or six months" from him becoming PM.

Dr Wollaston accused the PM of "refusing to face detailed scrutiny".

The former Conservative - now Lib Dem - MP said it was the third time the prime minister had cancelled.

Article Continues...

 

[Which Tyler]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50174402

Boris Johnson has said he will give MPs more time to debate Brexit deal, but only if they agree to a 12 December general election.

"If they (MPs) genuinely want more time to study this excellent deal, they can have it - but they have to agree to a general election on 12 December,"

So he wants a GE before the students get home to vote, and hopes that it's before the weather is severe enough to reduce the old-folk vote.
Parliament is only allowed to do its job IF they agree to his will.
Even that much is still begrudged, and is obviously with the hope that he can immediately subvert the will of this parliament by having a majority and the ability to undo anything this parliament decides before any new deadline.
It looks like he'll be trying the FTPA again - which would be allowed, as his first attempt was before prorogation - he's obviously still scared that if he tries the "simple bill" method, it gets ammended against his will, and passed against his will.
For someone who campaigned so hard on "parliamentary soveriegnty" he really, REALLY doesn't like it when parliament exerts its sovereignty.

ETA: On which - if we get another day when the backbenches control the order paper, could somone else propose a "simple bill" for a new GE, already ammended as the opposition parties would want?

[Chaircat Meow]

Instant hot take from me - Boris has not played this well. He had the momentum: he may not have got the WAB through on the third reading but he would have come very close. Now he's taking the government on strike and pulling the WAB? Hasn't he just given the Remainers the initiative back and didn't he need to get his deal through quickly before people learn what is in it and the mood turns sour? Mmh, I'll probably be proven horribly wrong but this looks like a blunder to me.

[Chaircat Meow]

Budget, which was set for 6 November also pulled along with the WAB.

[Chaircat Meow]

And can't all those Labour Leave MPs (and maybe one or two Indie Tories) now say to their constituents 'well, we wanted to vote on the Brexit bill but Boris decided to play silly buggers.'

[A Horse Named Stranger]

12 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Instant hot take from me - Boris has not played this well. He had the momentum: he may not have got the WAB through on the third reading but he would have come very close. Now he's taking the government on strike and pulling the WAB? Hasn't he just given the Remainers the initiative back and didn't he need to get his deal through quickly before people learn what is in it and the mood turns sour? Mmh, I'll probably be proven horribly wrong but this looks like a blunder to me.

Not necessarily. I think the point is to avoid detailed public scrutiny of his deal. The longer the reading dragged out, the more scrutiny his deal would get, the less he could sell it as Great/wonderful/terrific/fantastic/whatever. MPs could hit him on the details and implications of his deal. That's the last thing he wants/needs. That's at least my reading of the situation.

So the ball is in the oppositions' court. It's not like they will do much with it. Or at least I don't see them doing much with it. What are they gonna do, form a caretaker goverment? That would mean eitehr Corbyn stepping aside, or the other parties accepting Corbyn. Like I said, if there's a chapple in Westminster, Johnson should visit it everyday, light a candle and pray for Corbyn's physical well-being. As Corbyn is effectively the stumbling block for most actions the opposition could take. What else is there? Vote for another referendum? They've failed to do so before, and Corbyn/Labour policy is GE over Referendum, because. That leaves voting for a GE. Which is what Johnson wants to do, and for which Labour is totally ill-suited at the moment. Did I mention that Johnson should thank whatever deity he might pray to for Corbyn?

15 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

And can't all those Labour Leave MPs (and maybe one or two Indie Tories) now say to their constituents 'well, we wanted to vote on the Brexit bill but Boris decided to play silly buggers.'

Too complex messaging. Johnson will jsut repeat they didn't vote for my deal, but they wanted to play games (what sane people would call scrutiny, but words have lost meaning anyway).

[Chaircat Meow]

1 minute ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Not necessarily. I think the point is to avoid detailed public scrutiny of his deal. The longer the reading dragged out, the more scrutiny his deal would get, the less he could sell it as Great/wonderful/terrific/fantastic/whatever. MPs could hit him on the details and implications of his deal. That's the last thing he wants/needs. That's at least my reading of the situation.

So the ball is in the oppositions' court. It's not like they will do much with it. Or at least I don't see them doing much with it. What are they gonna do, form a caretaker goverment? That would mean eitehr Corbyn stepping aside, or the other parties accepting Corbyn. Like I said, if there's a chapple in Westminster, Johnson should visit it everyday, light a candle and pray for Corbyn's physical well-being. As Corbyn is effectively the stumbling block for most actions the opposition could take. What else is there? Vote for another referendum? They've failed to do so before, and Corbyn/Labour policy is GE over Referendum, because. That leaves voting for a GE. Which is what Johnson wants to do, and for which Labour is totally ill-suited at the moment. Did I mention that Johnson should thank whatever deity he might pray to for Corbyn?

Too complex messaging. Johnson will jsut repeat they didn't vote for my deal, but they wanted to play games (what sane people would call scrutiny, but words have lost meaning anyway).

You are preaching to the choir wrt Corbyn - an effective LOTO could have turned the tables on the Brexiteers by now.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Yeah, but like I said, passing the initiative to the opposition would be a huge blunder if they could do something (or rather anything) with it.

So you tell me what they could possibly do, other than giving him his GE?

[Chaircat Meow]

3 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Yeah, but like I said, passing the initiative to the opposition would be a huge blunder if they could do something (or rather anything) with it.

So you tell me what they could possibly do, other than giving him his GE?

Longer this goes unresolved the more time Corbyn has to step down. This is the only Remain masterstroke I can think of. As long as Long-Bailey does not take over. 

Anyway though, I do agree that as a 2nd ref looks very unlikely now (as a I pointed out earlier in this thread, getting a deal shot that fox if it was ever alive) there will have to be an election to resolve this. The opposition parties can't hide from it forever. However, I think shelving the WAB was a mistake if you want 'to get Brexit done.' It takes the pressure off. Now Boris likely prizes a majority and a guaranteed five years as pm more than getting Brexit done so this doesn't necessarily not make sense for him and he seems to have calculated a pre-Brexit election is better than a post one. Still I don't think throwing down tools and not doing anything is sensible for a government to do, my gut feel is that will play badly. People like competence/decision/action - sulking is bad.

[Ser Hedge]

Not necessarily a fan of this mag, but if you want to get into the mind of the Tory faithful .... this article appears to be outside paywall

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/new-deal-new-tactics/

 

But the Brexit deal now allows the Tories a two-pronged strategy: they can go on the offensive in Labour Leave seats but still defend their existing constituencies against the Liberal Democrats. They can credibly promise a smooth and orderly exit which paves the way for amicable relations with the European Union. Tory MPs who were pretty much resigned to losing their seats to the Liberal Democrats are far more chipper about their chances now.

The Tories offer a negotiated Brexit deal, freshly baked in Brussels. Labour promises more negotiations and a second referendum, with all the rancour that would bring. Jo Swinson, Lib Dem leader, seeks to revoke Brexit entirely, without a referendum. Nigel Farage’s Brexit party is hellbent on no-deal, saying the Boris plan is not Brexit at all — something even Arron Banks, his former political partner, cannot bring himself to say. In contrast to these positions, the Tory one looks rather reasonable.

 

 

[The Anti-Targ]

Isn't it funny? Boris is in the strongest position he's ever been in since becoming PM because he took out Northern Ireland in a manner that would have caused an absolute riot across almost all parties if May had tried to do it and he dragged social and environmental protections out of the legally binding framework and thus managed to come up with a deal that is different enough from May's to convince people to look at it with fresh eyes. And it's all because Labour Leave MPs will vote for it because they are feeling the heat from their left-leave voters.

Did the EU throw the remain cause under the bus by agreeing to the changes other than the NI change? And they did it because they didn't want to feel the heat from Brexiteers by being accused of not showing good faith? Or did the EU think the changes were not enough to swing votes in favour and that they took May's proclamation to at no PM would ever countenance a border in the Irish sea to heart and believed no parliament would even consider giving substantial votes to a border in the Irish sea?

[Which Tyler]

If he could get a GE under the FTPA; he can then dissolve parliament whenever he wants, regardless of the election date - meaning that there's no-one at home to receive or debate any extension offer from the EU - and we crash out without a deal. I THINK that he simply has to accept a 31/01/20 extension date without debate (Benn Act), but anything else has to be discussed in parliament - so drop out)

 

9 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Isn't it funny? Boris is in the strongest position he's ever been in since becoming PM because he took out Northern Ireland in a manner that would have caused an absolute riot across almost all parties if May had tried to do it and he dragged social and environmental protections out of the legally binding framework and thus managed to come up with a deal that is different enough from May's to convince people to look at it with fresh eyes. And it's all because Labour Leave MPs will vote for it because they are feeling the heat from their left-leave voters.

Did the EU throw the remain cause under the bus by agreeing to the changes other than the NI change? And they did it because they didn't want to feel the heat from Brexiteers by being accused of not showing good faith? Or did the EU think the changes were not enough to swing votes in favour and that they took May's proclamation to at no PM would ever countenance a border in the Irish sea to heart and believed no parliament would even consider giving substantial votes to a border in the Irish sea?

But remember - dissolution of the union is a price tory leavers are HAPPY to pay in order to get Brexit. It's a win/win for them (despite the name of their party). They get Brexit, they get rid of those pesky non-tory voters in NI and Scotland, lurching the UK further to the right, and they get to blame someone else for it. The EU's job isn't to care overly much about what happens to the UK after it leaves the EU - including whether or not the UK continues to exist as a single entity.

 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-boris-johnson-house-of-commons-dominic-cummings-a9167056.html

Quote

For seventeen spectacular minutes, the House of Commons actually had an opinion on Brexit

If you’re confused by all this, then take comfort from the fact you’re meant to be. None of this is meant to make any sense. That’s the whole plan.

If you’re confused as to why the House of Commons said yes to Brexit then said no to it 17 minutes later; if you’re confused at whether there’s going to be a Brexit extension when Boris Johnson both asked for one and then didn’t ask for one in the form of two letters in one envelope; indeed if you’re confused about why the country voted to leave the European Union when it is self-evidently not in its interest to do so – then it all starts to make a bit more sense once you’ve worked out that you being confused is the whole idea.

Normality is fighting for its life with a Brexit project that has always been fully sociopathic. You’re meant to be hopelessly lost. That is the Cummings game plan. It’s going quite pyrotechnically badly but that is nevertheless the game plan. And despite the kind of setbacks that, were it an aeroplane, the passengers would now be seeing fish swimming past the windows, they are sticking to it.

None of the following is likely to make any sense but we must go through the motions anyway.

Article Continues...

We're supposed to be confused.

We're supposed to be fed up.

We're supposed to be annoyed and making bad decisions.

Doing something because you've been goaded into it has never been the right decision to make.

Please, don't set your country on a path to 50 years of chaos because you're bored of 1 year of chaos (and don't kid yourselves either, it only became publicly chaotic when May brought back her deal in December).

 

That's the plan.

That's what the Pasty Cockwomble and the Cum***** want you to feel.

 

[mormont]

12 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Not necessarily. I think the point is to avoid detailed public scrutiny of his deal. The longer the reading dragged out, the more scrutiny his deal would get, the less he could sell it as Great/wonderful/terrific/fantastic/whatever. M

'Excellent' appears to be the word that was settled on. It's this excellent deal now, whenever he refers to it. 

9 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Isn't it funny? Boris is in the strongest position he's ever been in since becoming PM because he took out Northern Ireland in a manner that would have caused an absolute riot across almost all parties if May had tried to do it and he dragged social and environmental protections out of the legally binding framework and thus managed to come up with a deal that is different enough from May's to convince people to look at it with fresh eyes. And it's all because Labour Leave MPs will vote for it because they are feeling the heat from their left-leave voters.

Mostly, Johnson is in a strong position for two reasons:

1. He is not Theresa May. Being not Theresa May, he can sell the 'get Brexit done' line in a way she could never have done. Johnson can credibly appear as the 'new broom', appealing to everyone to bring an end to delay: May, having been in charge of that delay, never could have done that.

So long as this remains the case, Johnson's calculation has been that people will accept things they would not have accepted a year ago, in the interests of being seen to bring things to a conclusion, and won't look too closely at details. But this advantage is temporary and relies on him appearing dynamic and creating a sense of forward momentum, which he's clearly been trying to do. This delay is therefore very dangerous for him. 

2. He correctly calculated that the EU would re-open the deal if push came to shove because they don't want to block Brexit. They would very much like to see Brexit cancelled, don't get me wrong: but they don't want to stop it from outside. Which answers your second question. That's why the EU agreed to those changes. 

[Which Tyler]

7 minutes ago, mormont said:

2. He correctly calculated that the EU would re-open the deal if push came to shove because they don't want to block Brexit. They would very much like to see Brexit cancelled, don't get me wrong: but they don't want to stop it from outside. Which answers your second question. That's why the EU agreed to those changes. 

Which was always likely to be the case IMO - I was just hoping / expecting it to be in favour of a softer Brexit ("If we remove this red line, can we have closer alignment") as May's deal was right at the hard end of any possible negotiated Brext - Cockwomble's is NDINO (as we apparently have to acronym these things now)

[A Horse Named Stranger]

7 hours ago, mormont said:

'Excellent' appears to be the word that was settled on. It's this excellent deal now, whenever he refers to it. 

Thank you, I knew British and American Newspeak would deviate a bit. I should have used a thesaurus.

7 hours ago, mormont said:

1. He is not Theresa May. Being not Theresa May, he can sell the 'get Brexit done' line in a way she could never have done. Johnson can credibly appear as the 'new broom', appealing to everyone to bring an end to delay: May, having been in charge of that delay, never could have done that. 

So long as this remains the case, Johnson's calculation has been that people will accept things they would not have accepted a year ago, in the interests of being seen to bring things to a conclusion, and won't look too closely at details. But this advantage is temporary and relies on him appearing dynamic and creating a sense of forward momentum, which he's clearly been trying to do. This delay is therefore very dangerous for him. 

That's part of the answer. However, I think equally important is that this apparent dynamic (no matter how fake) prevents to some degree a closer examination. It's a bit dificult to do a post mortem, while the body is still twitching if you will.

Part of May's problem was that she had a shred more integrity than Johnson (it's a low bar) and let her deal be examined. As untransparent as her administration was during the negotiation process, she had at least put her child on public display once the negotiation phase was done. Johnson brought his deal home, wrapped it in clothes, so you could not see its ugly face and wanted to MPs to just vote for it as the most beautiful baby out there. The dynamic like everything about Boris is of course just fake. He can push the pram as hard as he wants, as he is still pushing it on a tread mill and not really moving things forward. It's time other groups (opposition MPs and journalists) stop chasing him on that treadmill and start to talk about the contents of the deal more. The legislation is out there now. Just because Johnson pulled the legislation, doesn't mean the content is gone.