UK Politics Thread VIII—Can't Let EU Go

[Ifreann]

Raab calling for extending Article 50 to be ruled out "to give businesses certainty". How about ruling out no deal to give businesses certainty?

How about ruling out Brexit to give businesses certainty?

[Ostroeuropa]

If labour policy becomes a second referendum I will not be continuing as a party member. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this.

Labour policy is to pursue a second referendum. It has been for a while.

It was to pursue an election so they can negotiate brexit, or a second referendum. The options the conference struck down were no deal brexit, remaining without consulting the public, and a conservative brexit without being put to the public first. Conference was prepared to support a Labour brexit, or a referendum on the conservative proposal.

This is quite literally the centrist position here.

We didn't want to just overrule the referendum and remain.
We didn't want a no deal brexit.
We are prepared to accept a tory brexit if the public accepts it.
We are prepared to negotiate a labour brexit.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Labour policy is to pursue a second referendum. It has been for a while.

It was to pursue an election so they can negotiate brexit, or a second referendum.

Guess I'll stay a member until he calls for one himself.

[Trumptonium1]

In terms of managing expectations, yes.

If we're engaged and are about to get married and everybody expects to be invited to our ceremony ("the deal") but then I decide I only want to see her on Thursdays and tell everyone to forget about it, then it's not really a "deal" is it.

What are you blabbering on about. What does any of that sentence have to do with the fact that 'deal' and 'agreement' are synonyms?

Simple - it is politically convenient for me/us to call it 'no deal' because A) it satisfies people who want 'no deal' in the colloquial terms (WTO basis) and B) it avoids the problems raised by squealers on Remain about armageddon (supplies)

Hence, a managed no deal. You can call it no deal if you want, or a WTO deal if you want to be pedantic.

[Trumptonium1]

If labour policy becomes a second referendum I will not be continuing as a party member. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this.

It is already party policy, it is a matter of whether Corbyn will have to be brought in for discipline by the policy committee for failing to do as instructed by the party conference.

We cannot allow 15% of members to hold the rest to ransom.

The conference gave explicit options to Corbyn and instructed him to stick to them:

Obtain an election and negotiate a deal yourself
Hold a second referendum

It's not so much as "15% of members holding the rest to ransom" as it is 3.07% of Labour 2017 voters holding the rest of Labour to ransom.

We all know that Labour endorsing Remain is the death of Labour whether you want to admit it or not. No amount of optimism will cloud the fact that people in the north and midlands have no interest in what latte liberals think is right for them.

There was an interesting BBC Newsnight report (or maybe This Week? I forgot.) last week where they went around asking 'What is more important to you? The Labour Party or voting for a pro-Brexit Party?' and the overwhelming response was a pro-Brexit party.

Maybe they are fooling you. Maybe they are not brave enough to vote for UKIP, or stomach voting for the Conservatives. Maybe they're not serious about not voting. But we know one thing for sure - publicly, Labour non-white collar voters are vehemently pro-Brexit and any attempt to stray away from that 2016 result will have unknown consequences that were either overblown or will be the death of Labour as we know it. The same way the Liberals died in 1918 by siding with the metropolitan class rather than workers.

One would have to be truly delusional to believe a second referendum is popular with the working class who are socially conservative Labour voters.

[Ostroeuropa]

It is already party policy, it is a matter of whether Corbyn will have to be brought in for discipline by the policy committee for failing to do as instructed by the party conference.

We cannot allow 15% of members to hold the rest to ransom.

The conference gave explicit options to Corbyn and instructed him to stick to them:

Obtain an election and negotiate a deal yourself
Hold a second referendum

It's not so much as "15% of members holding the rest to ransom" as it is 5% of Labour voters holding Labour to ransom.

We all know that Labour endorsing Remain is the death of Labour whether you want to admit it or not. No amount of optimism will cloud the fact that people in the north and midlands have no interest in what latte liberals think is right for them.

There was an interesting BBC Newsnight report (or maybe This Week? I forgot.) last week where they went around asking 'What is more important to you? The Labour Party or voting for a pro-Brexit Party?' and the overwhelming response was a pro-Brexit party.

Maybe they are fooling you. Maybe they are not brave enough to vote for UKIP, or stomach voting for the Conservatives. Maybe they're not serious about not voting. But we know one thing for sure - publicly, Labour non-white collar voters are vehemently pro-Brexit and any attempt to stray away from that 2016 result will have unknown consequences that were either overblown or will be the death of Labour as we know it. The same way the Liberals died in 1918 by siding with the metropolitan class rather than workers.

A newsnight report is not a sufficient stand in for actual polling on the topic.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... referendum

[Dumb Ideologies]

My fantasy still involves Jezza sweeping to power, forcing through a hard socialist Brexit, and building Jamreusalem in England's green and pleasant land.

[Ostroeuropa]

My fantasy still involves Jezza sweeping to power, forcing through a hard socialist Brexit, and building Jamreusalem in England's green and pleasant land.

This would indeed be the best outcome, short of a sudden shift toward a Euronationalist and Socialist union.

[Trumptonium1]

It's not so much as "15% of members holding the rest to ransom" as it is 5% of Labour voters holding Labour to ransom.

We all know that Labour endorsing Remain is the death of Labour whether you want to admit it or not. No amount of optimism will cloud the fact that people in the north and midlands have no interest in what latte liberals think is right for them.

There was an interesting BBC Newsnight report (or maybe This Week? I forgot.) last week where they went around asking 'What is more important to you? The Labour Party or voting for a pro-Brexit Party?' and the overwhelming response was a pro-Brexit party.

Maybe they are fooling you. Maybe they are not brave enough to vote for UKIP, or stomach voting for the Conservatives. Maybe they're not serious about not voting. But we know one thing for sure - publicly, Labour non-white collar voters are vehemently pro-Brexit and any attempt to stray away from that 2016 result will have unknown consequences that were either overblown or will be the death of Labour as we know it. The same way the Liberals died in 1918 by siding with the metropolitan class rather than workers.

A newsnight report is not a sufficient stand in for actual polling on the topic.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... referendum

Your own source says only 55% of people in Labour support Ref 2.

That sounds about right as to Labour's young/liberal to middle-aged/working class split.

At least the Conservatives have a sense of security because the 'other' faction of the conservatives, pro-business people who are mildly liberal, have nowhere to go because the UK lacks a German-like FDP party, and they most definitely won't go to the Lib Dems. So the Conservatives can give zero shits about their opinion and still get their vote out of necessity/fear of Corbyn. Corbyn has much to lose by pursuing a second referendum, or remain, or EEA, because whether UKIP exists as a serious force or not they are a protest vote which much of non-activist Labour will use.

There's a difference between activists and members, and between members and voters. I am a member, but I am not an activist. I do not canvass, and I find campaigning and hustings cringy. But I still influence local decisions, and I have a theoretical vote. Equally, there's a huge difference between us 100k members and the other 14 million voters who have zero loyalty beyond their personal interests or ideological interests. Your primary mistake here is conflating the three as one.

Labour is currently a party blighted by entryism, with a gigantic gap between the three groups larger than any other party.

[Dumb Ideologies]

My fantasy still involves Jezza sweeping to power, forcing through a hard socialist Brexit, and building Jamreusalem in England's green and pleasant land.

This would indeed be the best outcome, short of a sudden shift toward a Euronationalist and Socialist union.

The centrist soft Brexit stance he's been backed into isn't better than May's deal, but both are better than an unmanaged tax haven ERG Brexit and the country is generally long overdue a decisive break with the Thatcherite paradigm, so it'll still do. At the end of the day some kind of resolution to the intractable division and the rest of the program outweighs Brexit.

A socialist and Euronationalist EU would also be acceptable, but it's similarly a dream. The multiculturalists and free traders stole the project decades ago, and the mainstream parties all support a broad prevailing consensus, hence the decisive turn made by nationalist and post-fascist groups towards secession rather than capture.

[Ifreann]

My fantasy still involves Jezza sweeping to power, forcing through a hard socialist Brexit, and building Jamreusalem in England's green and pleasant land.

I shall not cease from toasting bread,
Nor let my butter knife sleep in my hand

[Bears Armed]

About 52% to 48% according to recent polls are for unification. That’s going to go through the roof when a hard border because of a no deal Brexit takes place.

Bexit has no need to involve a "hard border" there, despite the scaremongering from various [non-NS] sources; Existing systems & technology that are already used to process the UK's trade with non-EU nations (and also some trade between other EU members & outsiders, IIRC) without a 'harder' border than already exists is perfectly capable of handling UK/EU trade (including UK/RoI trade) post-Brexit as well.

[Ostroeuropa]

A newsnight report is not a sufficient stand in for actual polling on the topic.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... referendum

Your own source says only 55% of people in Labour support Ref 2.

That sounds about right as to Labour's young/liberal to middle-aged/working class split.

At least the Conservatives have a sense of security because the 'other' faction of the conservatives, pro-business people who are mildly liberal, have nowhere to go because the UK lacks a German-like FDP party, and they most definitely won't go to the Lib Dems. So the Conservatives can give zero shits about their opinion and still get their vote out of necessity/fear of Corbyn. Corbyn has much to lose by pursuing a second referendum, or remain, or EEA, because whether UKIP exists as a serious force or not they are a protest vote which much of non-activist Labour will use.

There's a difference between activists and members, and between members and voters. I am a member, but I am not an activist. I do not canvass, and I find campaigning and hustings cringy. But I still influence local decisions, and I have a theoretical vote. Equally, there's a huge difference between us 100k members and the other 14 million voters who have zero loyalty beyond their personal interests or ideological interests. Your primary mistake here is conflating the three as one.

Labour is currently a party blighted by entryism, with a gigantic gap between the three groups larger than any other party.

It's not something they're prepared to jump ship over. The poll notes a net gain of 1.5 million votes.

[Trumptonium1]

Raab calling for extending Article 50 to be ruled out "to give businesses certainty". How about ruling out no deal to give businesses certainty?

How about ruling out Brexit to give businesses certainty?

Uh there's nothing uncertain about no deal...

We already know WTO rules, they've been the same since 1992. We already know EU's tariffs, they're published and updated every October.

[Trumptonium1]

Your own source says only 55% of people in Labour support Ref 2.

That sounds about right as to Labour's young/liberal to middle-aged/working class split.

At least the Conservatives have a sense of security because the 'other' faction of the conservatives, pro-business people who are mildly liberal, have nowhere to go because the UK lacks a German-like FDP party, and they most definitely won't go to the Lib Dems. So the Conservatives can give zero shits about their opinion and still get their vote out of necessity/fear of Corbyn. Corbyn has much to lose by pursuing a second referendum, or remain, or EEA, because whether UKIP exists as a serious force or not they are a protest vote which much of non-activist Labour will use.

There's a difference between activists and members, and between members and voters. I am a member, but I am not an activist. I do not canvass, and I find campaigning and hustings cringy. But I still influence local decisions, and I have a theoretical vote. Equally, there's a huge difference between us 100k members and the other 14 million voters who have zero loyalty beyond their personal interests or ideological interests. Your primary mistake here is conflating the three as one.

Labour is currently a party blighted by entryism, with a gigantic gap between the three groups larger than any other party.

It's not something they're prepared to jump ship over. The poll notes a net gain of 1.5 million votes.

Try it if you feel you have nothing to lose

But I would be heavily disappointed if the Tories don't start helping UKIP up north, I must say. But no balls.

[Ifreann]

How about ruling out Brexit to give businesses certainty?

Uh there's nothing uncertain about no deal...

We already know WTO rules, they've been the same since 1992. We already know EU's tariffs, they're published and updated every October.

There's nothing uncertain about staying in the EU.

[Trumptonium1]

Uh there's nothing uncertain about no deal...

We already know WTO rules, they've been the same since 1992. We already know EU's tariffs, they're published and updated every October.

There's nothing uncertain about staying in the EU.

Both statements are true, yes.

Although one might want to analyse what are the political risks and hence induced business and political uncertainty from deciding to stay in the EU, because the debate on Brexit most certainly wouldn't end on that decision day. Not sure businesses would want to be in a country where Article 50 is triggered every 2-3 years.

[Vassenor]

There's nothing uncertain about staying in the EU.

Both statements are true, yes.

Although one might want to analyse what are the political risks and hence induced business and political uncertainty from deciding to stay in the EU, because the debate on Brexit most certainly wouldn't end on that decision day. Not sure businesses would want to be in a country where Article 50 is triggered every 2-3 years.

Which is why it being triggered even once has them bailing out.

[Bears Armed]

There's nothing uncertain about staying in the EU.

You/we can forecast every future EU decision, and how it would affect the UK as a member (whether in economic matters, through the greater emphasis on mutual defence for which some continental politicians are calling, through mandatory quotas for accepting refugees, or in other ways), and whether every Eurozone economy will do well enough for the euro to survive?!?
Seriously?

[The Blaatschapen]

There's nothing uncertain about staying in the EU.

You/we can forecast every future EU decision, and how it would affect the UK as a member (whether in economic matters, through the greater emphasis on mutual defence for which some continental politicians are calling, through mandatory quotas for accepting refugees, or in other ways), and whether every Eurozone economy will do well enough for the euro to survive?!?
Seriously?

Just as much as we can forecast every future British decision after they've taken back control. And whether the states within the UK (Scotland, etc.) will do well enough for the pound to survive?!?

Seriously?

The argument goes both ways

[Juristonia]

About 52% to 48% according to recent polls are for unification. That’s going to go through the roof when a hard border because of a no deal Brexit takes place.

Bexit has no need to involve a "hard border" there, despite the scaremongering from various [non-NS] sources; Existing systems & technology that are already used to process the UK's trade with non-EU nations (and also some trade between other EU members & outsiders, IIRC) without a 'harder' border than already exists is perfectly capable of handling UK/EU trade (including UK/RoI trade) post-Brexit as well.

Except, you know, yes, they do.
Because laws.

[Neu Leonstein]

Bexit has no need to involve a "hard border" there, despite the scaremongering from various [non-NS] sources; Existing systems & technology that are already used to process the UK's trade with non-EU nations (and also some trade between other EU members & outsiders, IIRC) without a 'harder' border than already exists is perfectly capable of handling UK/EU trade (including UK/RoI trade) post-Brexit as well.

The reason you don't notice the hard border between the EU and the rest of the world is that the UK doesn't have a land border with the rest of the world right now. It's got nothing to do with systems and technology. Parliament has been through this in extensive investigations and hearings. They got officials from Switzerland and Norway in to talk about what can be done, and those are some of the softest borders of the world. They didn't get the answer they were looking for.

That's why they're upset with the backstop in the first place. If they thought that a solution existed that preserved the status quo in Ireland and allowed for the UK to leave the Customs Union to pursue independent trade policy, then the backstop would be trivial. It only stays in effect until that solution is found. It's in the name. But the fact of the matter is that even the ERG types don't think the 'technological' solution is anything other than a pipe dream, which means the backstop would end up being a permanent arrangement.

I know British media has done a terrible job. Their constant insistence to give airtime to people who literally sit there lying about technical matters because they don't fit into a political narrative is both the reason for the referendum turning out the way it did and for the mess that followed. But that's still no excuse not to at least use the resources available elsewhere.

[Fartsniffage]

A return to the good old days?

[Vassenor]

Jeremy Corbyn Calls For MPs To Get The Right To Trigger Second Brexit Referendum

[Trumptonium1]

Jeremy Corbyn Calls For Parliament To Get Rights They Already Have In Desperate Attempt To Stay Relevant