This is still going to be a mess even with cross party talks
SNP - are not going to accept anything but remain
The Greens - want a citizens assembly
The Lib - want No deal off the table and a second referendom
ERG - want hard brexit
Labour - want no deal off the table first before even talking
Half the tories want a deal just not Theresa’s
Theresa wants her deal
We will extend A50 and in a years time we will still be at this point
The problem with agreeing to take no deal off the table is that it knackers out negotiating position with the EU - If they think we want a deal and will not / can not walk away, they will not budge or find a way to tuck us up further.
If I were them, if the UK legislate for avoid a no deal, I would withdraw the current deal completely saying that the UK have turned it down and here is the new deal. In this one I wouldn’t give any of the concessions that was in the first deal, because they will think that in the absence of a satisfactory deal and no deal being ruled out, the only option is to remain.
Now May cannot take no deal off the table because she will split her party and Corbyn knows that, and is therefore IMO playing politics trying to force a general election
Unsurprisingly I have a few issues with that article as it makes its own assumptions and in some cases offers the same ‘arrogance’ Of thought that it looks to accuse remainders of.
-
It’s easy to accuse those looking for a second vote of undermining the decocratic process, but that only holds true if a second ref vote gave a leave option… it would NOT hold true if there was a FIRST vote on how we should leave… because I don not believe that a majority would want a no deal hard Brexit and all the uncertainty that brings… I believe most Brexiters also understand a need for a measured withdrawal that minimises the impact on the UK and its people…
-
He makes a second arrogant assumption by suggesting that when remainders indicate a lack of transparency and information, it’s somehow suggesting only the ‘elite’ remainders are informed etc… that is bollocks. The information available to both sides and from both sides was often false and misleading… I am sure many from both sides were able to navigate through it, just as many from both sides may have been convinced by falsehoods… the question remains valid that can democracy be grisly served under such conditions?
Given the level of uncertainty and that the the referendum was non binding, how can it be democratic to NOT allow further public opinion in How we should leave?
I am sure some will find a definition to suggest it would be and again accuse that this POV undermines democracy… but there also comes a time for common sense. In this case that means recognising the significance of the decision and acknowledging that we should not leave until we DO have agreement on a measured exit which safeguards the democratic principles, yet ensures we minimise risks and impact… that has nothing to do with being undemocrratic and all to do with ensuring our future is not fucked by our own arrogance
170 business leaders have come out today in favour of a people’s vote. They don’t give a monkeys what the people think, they are only pushing for it because they think that it gives them the best chance of remaining.
It the polling was overwhelming in favour of leave, you would not hear one squeak about “let the people decide”.
If we have another referendum, then so be it but remain should not be on the ballot paper - the MPs need to fuck off and get a deal that a majority can stomach and then present that to the people - this deal or no deal.
and then make sure that legislation exists that means the govt can just implement the result without MPs trying to frustrate the decision because they didnt like it
I would argue that taking no deal off the table does NOT knacker our negotiating position… IF we consider the benefits that will come from a collaborative negotiation (win win) as opposed to a positional one (combative and one party always left defeated) - the latter is in no ones interest
We deny democracy at our peril, we’ll also have a genuine racist right wing party in reaction to it and there’ll be in Westminster with quite a few seats, they’ll be able to block and veto things and make the lives of millions worse.
Thats not snowflake predictions, that is a fact.
Good write up of where we are and the problems that ain’t going away. But that makes Corbyn’s position the correct one i think. No one’s going to budge, so a general election will make both the main parties state their position and some can look at it as a second referendum.
It won’t happen of course, but would appear to be the best chance of healing some of the divisions this whole mess has caused.
In the last General Election last year the Labour manifesto was to respect the outcome of the referendum, as was the Tories, so in effect people like Soubry campaigned on false pretenses.
Why would a GE change anything unless Labour volte face and campaign to remain
A GE would allow each party to state what direction they plan to take us in(nightmare for the tories admittedly) and would get rid of the troublesome people’s vote.
It’s far from perfect, but might stop some of the divisions in society, that are getting worse the longer this mess continues.
It’s all a bit groundhog day presently and i’m really bored of it.
All the talk of honouring the referendum result, respecting democracy is nonsense, it’s just not possible. Honouring that result means delivering on the promises made by the Leave campaign at the time. You know, 350 million a week to the NHS, the easiest trade deal in history with the EU, countries from around the world queueing up to trade with the UK, a reduction in net migration, etc etc. It’s not happening is it. That’s not democracy, it’s the very opposite of democracy. So the people need to be asked again, this time without the lies and fantastical bullshit promises. As for May’s offer to Corbyn for talks, yesterday Leadsome was openly stating that Corbyn would be shunned at these talks, overtures being made to senior Labour MPs like Cooper, Starmer, even organizers of the coups against Corbyn’s leadership like John Mann, (who voted against his party and for May’s deal), to go over Corbyns head and bypass him. When they refused May then came up with her offer to Corbyn for talks. This is just a trap by May, “invite” other parties, change nothing herself, then when it all goes wrong blame all the others. It’s already started, look at the headlines this morning in the Mail, Express, the Murdoch rags doing her bidding. “Wrecker Corbyn” and other such nonsense.
The Tories called the referendum, the Tories have been doing the negotiating for the past two and a half years, the Tories have arrived this country at the chaos we are now seeing. No-one else. They have to own it. But May, being the absolute unscrupulous rat she is desperately thrashing around trying to pass the buck, and will try and blame everybody else.
2 Likes
Pretty sure it would be difficult for Labour as well
Corbyn is and has always been a Euro sceptic - he wants out
The majority of Labour MPs want to remain
The Labour members broadly fall into the remain camp
and then a good chunk of the labour voters want out
on top of that, Corbyn has his six rules of a perfect deal, which was created to ensure that Labour could vote down any deal the Tories presented, knowing full well that the EU would never allow a deal that met them. Any deal he proposes has to stand up to those rules otherwise he is going to get pelters.
Good luck squaring that circle.
Remain was just as complicit in spewing bullshit during that campaign
I am still waiting for the emergency budget, the housing collapse, raging inflation etc etc etc.
Any referendum will just be full of the same guff - on both sides. Anyone who wants a second referendum is just using it as a means of trying to get a result they wanted in the first place.
I also suspect a lot of those shouting for a second referendum were critical of Sturgeon when she started chirping about a second independence referendum
That’s what each party would have to lay out before an election. Everyone including the EU would then know the position this nation held.
Corbyn doesn’t have six rules, the party do, so again, the position is clear(if they won) and that’s a far more coherent proposition than the twat that turned up to meetings without so much as a pen, let alone any ideas.
So labour’s position is known and something people either choose to get behind or not. What’s the tory position?
1 Like
But remain didn’t win did they. The leave campaign’s lies were obviously more believable, in part because they were lies that people wanted to believe. One thing’s for sure, if there was another referendum the 350 mill a week lies, the easiest trade deal in history lies, countries queueing up to trade with the UK lies and all the rest of the lies can’t be told again. The bolt is shot. Regarding your other point, emergency budget, housing collapse, inflation etc etc, we haven’t left yet have we. The jury must still be out on that. A no deal Brexit may well cause some or all these things to come to pass, but we won’t know until it happens.
The point is, for such a game changing decision for this country to be made, based on lies and mis information, no matter which side of the argument are telling them, is not democracy. It is just plain wrong. For what it’s worth i think SOS’s compromise is sensible and pragmatic. Which, of course, is why it probably won’t happen.It would seem the political classes in this country don’t do common sense and pragmatism any more.
Good shout. The Government have had enough time to instigate Leave’s promises and they’ve failed. Either they let someone else do it, which won’t happen anytime soon after last nights vote, or they drop it for now, extend A50 indefinitely and try again later when they’ve had time to stop playing silly buggers. This could carry on ad infinitum, or at least as long as it takes Shane to score another goal.
This lays into both leaders, although the main point is about getting candidates into place for a possible election.
Those things haven’t happened. But that’s not to say there aren’t indicators they could happen. Housing market is slowing down. People don’t know what is going to happen so are more cautious when buying and selling (it’s not a bad thing that it’s slowing down because it frankly ridiculously expensive now). I’ve hear via a friend that her husband’s large car manufacturing company are laying off people because of the uncertainty. We see more shops going into administration. These aren’t good signs.
Maybe these would have happened anyway but with all the uncertainty about what’s going to happen/not happen it’s possibly magnifying it.
I dip into his thread no and again and only in the room when this topic is on TV but I am so done with it all.
If I didn’t come up with a plan at work within a decent timescale I’d very much be in trouble. How May still clings on is a wonder.
1 Like
If there is no general election (and possibly regardless) I reckon article 50 will be rescinded.
It would seem, in the short term, the most sensible option is to extend it. It would be interesting to see if it is rescinded though. Would take some big balls to do that.
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1085929417216528384
This whole, ‘lets have a discussion and compromise’ bullshit isn’t going to wash. May is using this time to try and sell her position, not to alter it in the slightest.
