Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[Paul the Wolf]

If May and Corbyn join forces, then arm in arm lead us out of the EU to a soft Brexit, it would probably break both parties in half. And for that reason, well, I just dont see it happening.

Neither want a soft brexit so no.

 

[horsechoker]

I find it disgusting that people are responding in this way before they've even heard or seen what the deal might be.

How has cooperation developed such a negative connotation?

Pessimism is at a high because this process has dragged on and nothing so far has produced a majority agreement.

 

[Kentonio]

Trouble is, there's no consensus over what constitutes a "good" choice, as the indicative votes have made clear, so that argument doesnt really follow. Whatever solution is offered, a majority of MPs disagree with it, so the deadlock continues.

The argument does kind of work. The problem with people calling for compromise is that the compromise options are basically lets drive off a smaller cliff while hitting a smaller wall. The issue here is that a large number of MPs are still trying to claim that the car can fly and that the wall is made of marshmellows. Until that crap stops, it's hard to see anything other than a tragic conclusion.

 

[EwanI Ted]

There's a clear direction from the commons that certain options are preferable to Mays deal so you're wrong. A majority isn't needed to put the option on the table.

The CU and/or single market would have passed with government votes.

May has taken no deal off the table she says, that should be demonstration enough that no deal occurring is 90% on May.

Yes, and May's deal would have passed with Labour votes, we don't need to keep going in circles. The point is that both parties are in the same position, either of them could agree with a plan the other side supports and we'd have a deal tomorrow. But neither side do and we move towards no deal by default.

If you accept that Labour are right not to support a deal they don't agree with, then you have to accept the same for the Tories. If you think the Tories should compromise, you should say the same of Labour. Or, as I do, you can take the view that only voting for things you agree with and rarely compromising with the other side are flaws baked in to our political system, and that's the reason we're inching toward defaulting to no deal.

 

[Wibble]

Exactly my point, both sides are doing the same thing.

But only one of them.is the party who started this whole mess and then continued to make a disaster of it for the past 3 years.

Labor are hopeless but they didn't start this or design the debacle it has become.

 

[Wibble]

Yes, and May's deal would have passed with Labour votes, we don't need to keep going in circles. The point is that both parties are in the same position, either of them could agree with a plan the other side supports and we'd have a deal tomorrow. But neither side do and we move towards no deal by default.

If you accept that Labour are right not to support a deal they don't agree with, then you have to accept the same for the Tories. If you think the Tories should compromise, you should say the same of Labour. Or, as I do, you can take the view that only voting for things you agree with and rarely compromising with the other side are flaws baked in to our political system, and that's the reason we're inching toward defaulting to no deal.

It's the Tories own fecking deal.

 

[Wibble]

Trouble is, there's no consensus over what constitutes a "good" choice

Which is what May should have done before triggering A50. At the very least she could have not wasted all but a few days of the last 3 years failing to build a consensus across parties.

Corbyn is proving that he isn't a visionary or charismatic leader but the blame lies fairly and squarely with the Tories.

 

[sun_tzu]

Yeah they can't be that stupid right? Right?!

one would hope not... but who knows
Gut feel is that in the national interest people should work together...
practicalities are (in both parties) that working with the "enemy" is not acceptable and as somebody else mentioned on here... both could implode

 

[Smores]

Yes, and May's deal would have passed with Labour votes, we don't need to keep going in circles. The point is that both parties are in the same position, either of them could agree with a plan the other side supports and we'd have a deal tomorrow. But neither side do and we move towards no deal by default.

If you accept that Labour are right not to support a deal they don't agree with, then you have to accept the same for the Tories. If you think the Tories should compromise, you should say the same of Labour. Or, as I do, you can take the view that only voting for things you agree with and rarely compromising with the other side are flaws baked in to our political system, and that's the reason we're inching toward defaulting to no deal.

I understand where you're coming from but I'd call out there's a distinction between party and government and whilst this government and most governments blur the lines it should be distinct.

If you're saying that Labour would be as to blame as the ERG for no deal due no to not voting for the WA (ignoring some aspects) i agree. However that's only because the government are 100% to blame.

 

[Mockney]

Trouble is, there's no consensus over what constitutes a "good" choice, as the indicative votes have made clear, so that argument doesnt really follow. Whatever solution is offered, a majority of MPs disagree with it, so the deadlock continues.

A majority of Tory MPs disagree with it. 90% of Labour MPs have voted for one compromise option or another, with only 9.6% abstaining from the whip. If it wasn’t for all the Tories, who got us into this mess, the DOP who they bribed to help them, the TING party, who threw their toys out of the pram about an ideologue Labour and then promptly refused to vote for anything but a second Ref (which they don’t even want anymore now they think they can straight revoke) then a soft Brexit would’ve passed....

 

[EwanI Ted]

But only one of them.is the party who started this whole mess and then continued to make a disaster of it for the past 3 years.

Labor are hopeless but they didn't start this or design the debacle it has become.

Indeed, and I'm not referring to the history of how we ended up here.

It's the Tories own fecking deal.

Not sure I follow the point you're making. Could you clarify?

 

[Wibble]

Indeed, and I'm not referring to the history of how we ended up here.



Not sure I follow the point you're making. Could you clarify?

The choices are all design by or as a result of the Tories. To blame labor for the resulting clusterfeck isn't fair even if a more charismatic leader might have been able to capture the imagination of the nation.

You can blame Labor and Cornyn for being a bit shit but Brexit isn't their clusterfeck. Their mission statement isn't to roll over and agree just because the Tories have made a complete and utter arse of everything.

 

[Adisa]

So the greatest threat to the country in seventy years should be decided within a party? The Tories are an extreme right wing mob. Just look at their reaction to the PM talking to the elder of the opposition.

 

[Buster15]

Except using your football supporter analogy, it's like United fans actively seeking relegation in an attempt to stop Liverpool winning the league. Even though Liverpool aren't going to win the league anyway and United going down would have no bearing either way.

Even better analogy.
The current situation is just self inflicted suicide.

 

[EwanI Ted]

The choices are all design by or as a result of the Tories. To blame labor for the resulting clusterfeck isn't fair even if a more charismatic leader might have been able to capture the imagination of the nation.

You can blame Labor and Cornyn for being a bit shit but Brexit isn't their clusterfeck. Their mission statement isn't to roll over and agree just because the Tories have made a complete and utter arse of everything.

Don't really disagree with any of that, my post wasn't talking about that either. I'm just talking about the existing parliamentary deadlock, irrespective of how we got here. You pointed out that the Tories didnt vote for the options Labour backed & how that was pushing us to no deal, but its also true that Labour didnt vote for an option the Tories backed.

Bear in mind that its not in our hands to give ourselves endless extensions to A50. If we eventually fall out of the EU without a deal because Parliament couldnt find agreement about any route forward & ran out of time, then Parliament as a whole is to blame, or at least that's my opinion.

 

[Wibble]

Don't really disagree with any of that, my post wasn't talking about that either. I'm just talking about the existing parliamentary deadlock, irrespective of how we got here. You pointed out that the Tories didnt vote for the options Labour backed & how that was pushing us to no deal, but its also true that Labour didnt vote for an option the Tories backed.

Bear in mind that its not in our hands to give ourselves endless extensions to A50. If we eventually fall out of the EU without a deal because Parliament couldnt find agreement about any route forward & ran out of time, then Parliament as a whole is to blame, or at least that's my opinion.

It is the government's responsibility to sort the mess out that they created. Not the opposition's.

And the Tories are voting against all possible soft Brexit options. Labor are backing many of them.

 

[Smores]

So the greatest threat to the country in seventy years should be decided within a party? The Tories are an extreme right wing mob. Just look at their reaction to the PM talking to the elder of the opposition.

Never known usually loyal ministers so angry. Here is a non Brexiteer: “We say parliament made us do this, not Corbyn. They’re idiots. We kept her there and now she stabs us in the back and fecks off. Thanks a lot. All that crap about serving the party. Bollocks.”

I think that shows where the focus has been in the discussions. Blame and party preservation.

I'm still not convinced the meeting and reaction isn't all an orchestrated ploy to prepare for a GE.

 

[Buster15]

I find it disgusting that people are responding in this way before they've even heard or seen what the deal might be.

How has cooperation developed such a negative connotation?

That is completely understandable. As a modern civilised country of course it should be perfectly possible for both the main parties to cooperate.
However, the recent events are bound to colour people's perceptions of our elected politicians.
They have all behaved in a totally unacceptable manner.
Now is definitely the time to stop and show proper leadership. God knows we need it.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

So it has just descended into an argument about who is to blame the most.

No solutions, no agreements, no compromise. Pathetic.

 

[Infra-red]

So it has just descended into an argument about who is to blame the most.

No solutions, no agreements, no compromise. Pathetic.

I suppose that was inevitable after the indicative votes failed.

The next weeks/months will be about apportioning blame for the no deal chaos. Everyone now has one eye on a GE.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

I suppose that was inevitable after the indicative votes failed.

The next weeks/months will be about apportioning blame for the no deal chaos. Everyone now has one eye on a GE.

Agreed. Imagine wanting to be in charge of the country in such a crisis, not this one, the much worse one to come. I'd say any new government would last one year at the most.

 

[Dave89]

It is the government's responsibility to sort the mess out that they created. Not the opposition's.

And the Tories are voting against all possible soft Brexit options. Labor are backing many of them.

Normally you'd be right. But it's Corbyn here, he's to blame for everything ever.

 

[Jacko21]

I suppose that was inevitable after the indicative votes failed.

The next weeks/months will be about apportioning blame for the no deal chaos. Everyone has one eye on a GE.

It was evident even in January.

As soon as No Deal or No Brexit came into view, it became about self-preservation.

Both parties know that they can't be the one left holding the bomb when it goes off.

 

[Buster15]

It is the government's responsibility to sort the mess out that they created. Not the opposition's.

And the Tories are voting against all possible soft Brexit options. Labor are backing many of them.

Some people have continually moaned about Labour sitting on the fence.
But within their posturing they have maintained their requirement for a Customs Union with the EU and closer economic cooperation, something that is now gaining favour. A so called soft Brexit.

Whether that resolves the Irish border issue is another matter.
Compare that with the Conservatives totally muddled divisions and indecision.

It is perfectly obvious that blame rests with both sides but it is wholly incorrect to apportion the majority of the blame on the opposition party. It is very much a failure of the government and their leader for the situation this country is in.
Why. Because they called the referendum and ran a shambolic campaign.
They completely failed to plan for what leaving the EU meant.
They who have been abject at negotiating with the EU.
They who have the widest divisions.
And they for failing to communicate effectively with the country on what to expect during the A50 period.
It is all about cause and effect.

Unfortunately Jeremy Corbyn is an ideal stooge on who to shift the blame and that is the Tories tactic.

 

[Buster15]

It is the government's responsibility to sort the mess out that they created. Not the opposition's.

And the Tories are voting against all possible soft Brexit options. Labor are backing many of them.

Some people have continually moaned about Labour sitting on the fence.
But within their posturing they have maintained their requirement for a Customs Union with the EU and closer economic cooperation, something that is now gaining favour. A so called soft Brexit.

Whether that resolves the Irish border issue is another matter.
Compare that with the Conservatives totally muddled divisions and indecision.

It is perfectly obvious that blame rests with both sides but it is wholly incorrect to apportion the majority of the blame on the opposition party. It is very much a failure of the government and their leader for the situation this country is in.
Why. Because they called the referendum and ran a shambolic campaign.
They completely failed to plan for what leaving the EU meant.
They who have been abject at negotiating with the EU.
They who have the widest divisions.
And they for failing to communicate effectively with the country on what to expect during the A50 period.
It is all about cause and effect.

Unfortunately Jeremy Corbyn is an ideal stooge on who to shift the blame and that is the Tories tactic.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Some people have continually moaned about Labour sitting on the fence.
But within their posturing they have maintained their requirement for a Customs Union with the EU and closer economic cooperation, something that is now gaining favour. A so called soft Brexit.

Whether that resolves the Irish border issue is another matter.
Compare that with the Conservatives totally muddled divisions and indecision.

It is perfectly obvious that blame rests with both sides but it is wholly incorrect to apportion the majority of the blame on the opposition party. It is very much a failure of the government and their leader for the situation this country is in.
Why. Because they called the referendum and ran a shambolic campaign.
They completely failed to plan for what leaving the EU meant.
They who have been abject at negotiating with the EU.
They who have the widest divisions.
And they for failing to communicate effectively with the country on what to expect during the A50 period.
It is all about cause and effect.

Unfortunately Jeremy Corbyn is an ideal stooge on who to shift the blame and that is the Tories tactic.

That's not a soft brexit, it's a slightly less hard one and doesn't solve the Irish border.

 

[redshaw]

I don't think it's me that's stuck in the seventies.

You said the EU had changed - you mentioned foM and an EU Army. The idea from the beginning was to encompass more and more countries in Europe. We're all still separate nations.
If anyone's stuck in the seventies to think it would stay just as nine countries is a little bit naïve. I hope more countries become part. You couldn't be more wrong.

No, you don't seem to acknowledge what these leave voters are unhappy with. Little clue is probably the amount of countries involved now, the EU has changed. I said you're stuck in the 70s because of your previous one note replies. I have no care or ever eluded to your feelings on the amount of countries and I myself never expressed any thought that I'd expect the EU to remain a handful of countries. You've really got the wrong idea here.

Regarding the talks of the EU army. All I said there was renewed talks. Your reply was there is no EU army. A pointless reply.

You may not be aware how other European politicians and citizens feel about the UK, that we hold it back.

 

[Smores]

I'm a little confused why the Tories who were angry at Corbyn for not meeting May are now angry at May for meeting Corbyn.

Confusing bunch

 

[paulscholes18]

Neither want a soft brexit so no.

Corbyn wants the softest of soft brexit’s

 

[Infra-red]

Corbyn wants the softest of soft brexit’s

I don't think he's in favour of single market membership (because he doesn't want freedom of movement).

 

[Paul the Wolf]

No, you don't seem to acknowledge what these leave voters are unhappy with. Little clue is probably the amount of countries involved now, the EU has changed. I said you're stuck in the 70s because of your previous one note replies. I have no care or ever eluded to your feelings on the amount of countries and I myself never expressed any thought that I'd expect the EU to remain and handful of countries. You've really got the wrong idea here.

Regarding the talks of the EU army. All I said there was renewed talks. Your reply was there is no EU army. A pointless reply.

This makes no sense whatsoever.

You said the EU has changed and then mentioned FoM. FoM was there in 1973. So that hasn't changed. Who's talking about an EU army? Closer collaboration yes.

So leave voters are now worried about FoM which has always been there and an army which is not on the horizon, I suppose like the Turks who are going to invade britain or what other nonsense can be invented.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Corbyn wants the softest of soft brexit’s

A soft Brexit is Single Market with the 4 freedoms and Customs Union with no get out clauses. I don't remember anything like that.

 

[horsechoker]

What's the shortest extension the EU can give which makes it worthwhile for the UK to compete in European elections. 9 months? or more?

 

[Buster15]

That's not a soft brexit, it's a slightly less hard one and doesn't solve the Irish border.

Understand that. I was trying to point out that they had a more consistent policy than some people say.
If they are going to make a success of the latest position they are going to have to accept the WA and move forward on identifying their requirements for the FA.
Let's see how things pan out.

 

[Buster15]

I'm a little confused why the Tories who were angry at Corbyn for not meeting May are now angry at May for meeting Corbyn.

Confusing bunch

I was going to say that it is almost comical but it is actually beyond comical.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Understand that. I was trying to point out that they had a more consistent policy than some people say.
If they are going to make a success of the latest position they are going to have to accept the WA and move forward on identifying their requirements for the FA.
Let's see how things pan out.

I have a consistent policy that I want to win the lottery, the fact that I can't because I don't play is neither here nor there.
Having a consistent policy for nonsense is not an answer.

Yes they have to accept the WA, the problem is this political declaration which is only a guide really. A new trade agreement will take 4 or 5 years minimum, probably have three governments in that time with different politicians wanting different things.

The problem is that parliament seem to expect to have a final agreement in place when the UK leaves and can't get to grips with the WA is just about leaving with an idea of what might happen in the future.

 

[redshaw]

This makes no sense whatsoever.

You said the EU has changed and then mentioned FoM. FoM was there in 1973. So that hasn't changed. Who's talking about an EU army? Closer collaboration yes.

So leave voters are now worried about FoM which has always been there and an army which is not on the horizon, I suppose like the Turks who are going to invade britain or what other nonsense can be invented.

Never said leave voters are worried about an EU army. You seem to be trying to react to this the whole time like some ardent EU supporter attacking some brexiteer and it's clouding your judgment, perhaps you do this a lot elsewhere. Just for the record I vote remain and we should revoke A50 and merely posed a speculative question UK/EU in 10 years time.

The EU army I pointed out was in relation to the UK leaving. There has been upbeat talks of an EU army in mainland Europe once the UK was thought to be leaving. You may not be aware but within Europe, some of its citizens and politicians feel the UK holds the EU back which is what I was speculating about.

 

[paulscholes18]

I don't think he's in favour of single market membership (because he doesn't want freedom of movement).

Didn’t realise that.
I read the other day that he wanted Labour MP’s to vote for the Common market 2.0 plan which would mean staying in the single market and customs union therefore allowing freedom of movement.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Never said leave voters are worried about an EU army. You seem to be trying to react to this the whole time like some ardent EU supporter attacking some brexiteer and it's clouding your judgment, perhaps you do this a lot elsewhere. Just for the record I vote remain and we should revoke A50 and merely posed a speculative question UK/EU in 10 years time.

The EU army I pointed out was in relation to the UK leaving. There has been upbeat talks of an EU army in mainland Europe once the UK was thought to be leaving. You may not be aware but within Europe, some of its citizens and politicians feel the UK holds the EU back which is what I what speculating about.

I never thought for one moment that you didn't vote for remain.
Some may be talking about it. Some people talk of lots of things . We have all different kinds of nonsense from Mélenchon & Le Pen here in France.

 

[Buster15]

I have a consistent policy that I want to win the lottery, the fact that I can't because I don't play is neither here nor there.
Having a consistent policy for nonsense is not an answer.

Yes they have to accept the WA, the problem is this political declaration which is only a guide really. A new trade agreement will take 4 or 5 years minimum, probably have three governments in that time with different politicians wanting different things.

The problem is that parliament seem to expect to have a final agreement in place when the UK leaves and can't get to grips with the WA is just about leaving with an idea of what might happen in the future.

Certainly.
We desperately need true leadership don't we. True leadership is about having the vision to look beyond the obvious to the possible.

It is then about putting in place the mechanism to get to that position and managing the transition.

Unfortunately we are being lead by people without that vision. Instead by people who cannot even see the obvious. Small minded amateurish people who completely fail to grasp the current problems and instead of resolving those problems, they are creating more by their stupid muddled thinking.

Believe me. I have worked with both types.
There were loads who could give you a thousand reasons why we couldn't do something. I had no respect for them; only for the positive thinkers who did not listen to that rubbish.
There are very few true leaders and maybe none amongst the 650 MPS and that is a real problem.