Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[Oscie]

Yeah, they want a custom agreement and not a custom union since Brexit is the fruit of the unwillingness to be in an Union and the willingness to take all decisions unilaterally. And there is already a Custom Union that solves the Irish border issue.

It's identical to the bilge the Tories come out with. The Tories think they can negotiate a deal that retains all the benefits of the customs union without membership and magic away the Irish border issue - and the Labour party think they can negotiate a deal that retains all the benefits of the customs union without membership and magic way the Irish border.

Spending time negotiating to get what we already have to appease supporters of a political party that virtually no longer exists takes some time to get your head around.

It's hilarious the number of posters here who seem to want to pretend there currently exists huge, partisan chasm between the two parties. The solution is obvious - aggressively challenge the Farage-led assertion that the vote was a vote to leave the customs union and single market. Even now I don't think it's too late to make that argument but nobody seems willing to want to. Nobody of note anyway.

 

[JPRouve]

It's identical to the bilge the Tories come out with. The Tories think they can negotiate a deal that retains all the benefits of the customs union without membership and magic away the Irish border issue - and the Labour party think they can negotiate a deal that retains all the benefits of the customs union without membership and magic way the Irish border.

Spending time negotiating to get what we already have to appease supporters of a political party that virtually no longer exists takes some time to get your head around.

It's hilarious the number of posters here who seem to want to pretend there currently exists huge, partisan chasm between the two parties. The solution is obvious - aggressively challenge the Farage-led assertion that the vote was a vote to leave the customs union and single market. Even now I don't think it's too late to make that argument but nobody seems willing to want to. Nobody of note anyway.

I think that I disagree. You are basically admitting that the two main parties are on the same page, logically it should mean that a large part of the population is on the same page too and they are for a hardish Brexit. And it kind of make sense when you believe that Brexit was more philosophical than practical, people like idea of telling the rest of the EU to do one while they ride off into the sunset. The only problem is that people want Brexit without the consequences, which could explain why people are so keen to just dismiss them.

 

[Oscie]

I think that I disagree. You are basically admitting that the two main parties are on the same page, logically it should mean that a large part of the population is on the same page too and they are for a hardish Brexit. And it kind of make sense when you believe that Brexit was more philosophical than practical, people like idea of telling the rest of the EU to do one while they ride off into the sunset. The only problem is that people want Brexit without the consequences, which could explain why people are so keen to just dismiss them.

If the two main parties aren't on the same page then what are the substantive differences.

"We must leave the SM and CU and we are best place to negotiate a deal that'll retain the benefits of each and we will also solve the Irish border issue"

That is the position of both parties, isn't it? I dont think the country is on the same page. Those who are have representation, those who aren't (and there are many of us) have none. That's my frustration.

 

[Pexbo]

It's identical to the bilge the Tories come out with. The Tories think they can negotiate a deal that retains all the benefits of the customs union without membership and magic away the Irish border issue - and the Labour party think they can negotiate a deal that retains all the benefits of the customs union without membership and magic way the Irish border.

Spending time negotiating to get what we already have to appease supporters of a political party that virtually no longer exists takes some time to get your head around.

It's hilarious the number of posters here who seem to want to pretend there currently exists huge, partisan chasm between the two parties. The solution is obvious - aggressively challenge the Farage-led assertion that the vote was a vote to leave the customs union and single market. Even now I don't think it's too late to make that argument but nobody seems willing to want to. Nobody of note anyway.

I think the placement of your comma in McDonnells quote is wrong and has changed the semantics.

I don’t think he’s saying “We will negotiate a customs Union and that will magically provide a solution to the complicated issue of the Irish border”.

He’s saying “Our plan to solve the complicated issue of the Irish border is to negotiate a bespoke customs union built around the complexities of the Irish border”.


That’s absolutely the right thing to do, it’s an option May and Davis had but they fecked it off because it’s impossible to negotiate that and achieve the head up the arse, nose lacerated firmly off the face Brexit they want to achieve.


So on that front McDonnell is absolutely right. The Irish border is as big an issue as any (possibly the biggest) in Brexit negotiations and as such it should be a key factor and one the UK simply has to make concessions over.

 

[JPRouve]

If the two main parties aren't on the same page then what are the substantive differences.

"We must leave the SM and CU and we are best place to negotiate a deal that'll retain the benefits of each and we will also solve the Irish border issue"

That is the position of both parties, isn't it? I dont think the country is on the same page. Those who are have representation, those who aren't (and there are many of us) have none. That's my frustration.

I haven't been clear, my disagreement is with your conclusion that Brexit should be aggressively challenged. And the reason for my disagreement is that you admitted yourself that both parties are for Brexit, both parties together represents a big majority. Basically your take seem to put more weight on the minority that is against Brexit over the majority that is for it or doesn't care about it which makes little sense.

In the end @Stanley Road is right, people voted for Cameron knowing that a referendum would happen, then they didn't defend their pro EU position, then they didn't ask for clarification on what Brexit actually meant and its extent. From the beginning the idea has been to tell the undemocratic EU to do one, and you can see that by looking at the Tory and the Labour. The only problem here is that while people have been mainly behind the idea of Brexit some have a hard time accepting its consequences, which lead us to an other issue raised by posters like Devilish, people want Brexit but they want to cherry pick, the mentions of EFTA are an example of that because it doesn't fit with Brexit.

In all this there is zero consideration for the other side of the equations, the EU and Ireland have been an afterthought and that's the mistake made by a large part of the electorate and the main parties.

 

[Sweet Square]

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ire...dermined-britain-for-over-100-years-1.3486305

 

[Adisa]

Is it true Labour peers have been told to abstain from a motion that would require continued EEA membership?

 

[Ubik]

Is it true Labour peers have been told to abstain from a motion that would require continued EEA membership?

Appears so - https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/05/labour-peers-accuse-corbyn-brexit-cowardice

If it passes the Lords it'll require a vote in the Commons, which would be awkward for them, particularly if there were enough putative Tory rebels to pass it with their support.

 

[Adisa]

Appears so - https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/05/labour-peers-accuse-corbyn-brexit-cowardice

If it passes the Lords it'll require a vote in the Commons, which would be awkward for them, particularly if there were enough putative Tory rebels to pass it with their support.

Spineless.

 

[Jippy]

Jesus, Westminster is a total mess. Depressing as we blunder into economic suicide...

 

[Drainy]

I don't buy the whole 'political suicide' thing. I can get how, with the majority of their voters supporting Brexit/hard Brexit, it's politically very difficult for May to support anything else. I don't understand the logic that says that the leader of the party whose members support soft Brexit/ no Brexit has to support hard Brexit or else risk political disaster. Arguments that suggest as much seem to act as a smoke screen for a leader who wanted Brexit to begin with and is now trying to find ways of making excuses for his complete lack of opposition to it despite leading a party whose MPs/members/voters/natural political sympathisers being against it.

The voters who are pro-brexit are maniacally for that position. We're seeing lifelong Labour voters voting torie for it, more will go over if Labour tried to overturn the referendum.

Throw in the fact that a leave voter gunned down an MP in the streets over it and I can see why there is such political cowardice over it.

 

[jackofalltrades]

A vital question is whether the Tories can deliver what they think is best for the country and, more importantly, hold on to power.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

There are very few politicians in either the Tory or Labour parties who are acting in the interest of the country.

Most important for them is their careers, their party and power.

I never cease to be astounded at the gullibility of the electorate.

 

[Sweet Square]

Reason why the Labour left is so anti EU.


Jeremy Corbyn-led government prompts tough EU line on Brexit
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fear-of-corbyn-prompts-tough-eu-line-on-brexit-lrcmwgvlx

 

[Kentonio]

I haven't been clear, my disagreement is with your conclusion that Brexit should be aggressively challenged. And the reason for my disagreement is that you admitted yourself that both parties are for Brexit, both parties together represents a big majority. Basically your take seem to put more weight on the minority that is against Brexit over the majority that is for it or doesn't care about it which makes little sense.

Half the country is remain and that includes 70% of Labour voters. Labour not representing them is despicable and a clear sign that Corbyn is representing his own desires not the desires of the majority of his party on Brexit. It’s cost him my vote in the next election.

 

[Adisa]

Cabinet in open warfare. I've never seen anything like it since I moved to this country.
Ministers publicly calling PM's position names.

 

[Rajma]

Cabinet in open warfare. I've never seen anything like it since I moved to this country.
Ministers publicly calling PM's position names.

I don't get why doesn't she just resign and gives those clowns the rope to hang themselves. Does she enjoy being at the heart of abuse from all sides with no long-term political prospectus personally?

 

[Paul the Wolf]

What is even more ridiculous is that the cabinet are basically fighting over two positions, both of which have been rejected by the EU.

There is and always has been only one solution, the custom's union.

 

[Adisa]

What is even more ridiculous is that the cabinet are basically fighting over two positions, both of which have been rejected by the EU.

There is and always has been only one solution, the custom's union.

Furthermore, parliament has the authority on any final decision.
The whole thing is a farce.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Furthermore, parliament has the authority on any final decision.
The whole thing is a farce.

Yes, but really there is only one decision, either let project fear become project reality or stay in the custom's union.

Problem is that time is fast running out and the decision may be made for them by the EU, because one thing is a certainty, the EU are going to be prepared for either outcome.

 

[Oscie]

83 Labour peers and 17 Tories defy their party whip to vote for EEA amendment


Some 83 Labour peers - 44% of the total - defied the whip and voted for the Alli amendment.

There were also 17 Tory rebels.

 

[Ubik]

83 Labour peers and 17 Tories defy their party whip to vote for EEA amendment


Some 83 Labour peers - 44% of the total - defied the whip and voted for the Alli amendment.

There were also 17 Tory rebels.

Excellent. Will have to wait and see how many Tory rebels will be willing to go along with it in the Commons.

 

[Adisa]

83 Labour peers and 17 Tories defy their party whip to vote for EEA amendment


Some 83 Labour peers - 44% of the total - defied the whip and voted for the Alli amendment.

There were also 17 Tory rebels.

Good on them.

 

[Oscie]

The government looks to be weeks/months away from agreeing a position to negotiate from, leaving them scant time for the actual negotiations. It's a testimony to either how little they're paying attention or how little they care that they actually opposed an amendment that would give them more wriggle room when the inevitable actually happens.

Increasingly convinced the Brexit strategy is 'Let's see how long we're allowed to get away with this'. What I don't understand is: what's their end game? If they even have an end game, they seem to be surviving hand to mouth at the moment. Don't think anyone's thought about 10 months time.

 

[Oscie]

As for the govt using the Parliament Act to force their agenda through..

 

[711]

What is even more ridiculous is that the cabinet are basically fighting over two positions, both of which have been rejected by the EU.

There is and always has been only one solution, the custom's union.

I agree with your first sentence. It's quite staggering how the British have totally failed to listen to anyone in the EU since day one. I can only assume that as so many of our politicians, both Labour and Conservative, have taken up positions contrary to what they actually believe in, that they think Europeans don't mean what they say either.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

I agree with your first sentence. It's quite staggering how the British have totally failed to listen to anyone in the EU since day one. I can only assume that as so many of our politicians, both Labour and Conservative, have taken up positions contrary to what they actually believe in, that they think Europeans don't mean what they say either.

It's almost as if they hope the whole thing will just go away.
The EU are not kidding about, they mean what they say and the British government have to wake up quickly.

Both the Tories and Labour have put themselves in an impossible position and none of them can see a way out other than making the logical decision but they are too scared to do so.

 

[711]

The odds must be shortening on May being overthrown, coming the old 'back me or sack me', or Tory rebels doing a deal with Labour on no confidence.

I've never known a position of such utter chaos that it's impossible to even begin to predict where we will be politically in twelve months time.

 

[devilish]

I don't get why doesn't she just resign and gives those clowns the rope to hang themselves. Does she enjoy being at the heart of abuse from all sides with no long-term political prospectus personally?

if that happens then rest assured they will call for an early general election which they will lose. Then they will have the opportunity to pin the blame on may, cameron and labour for not delivering the brexit they wanted

 

[JPRouve]

83 Labour peers and 17 Tories defy their party whip to vote for EEA amendment


Some 83 Labour peers - 44% of the total - defied the whip and voted for the Alli amendment.

There were also 17 Tory rebels.

I am missing something here. If EEA membership is an objective than Brexit is a monumental waste of time and money. None of the Brexit arguments are applicable.

 

[MoskvaRed]

I am missing something here. If EEA membership is an objective than Brexit is a monumental waste of time and money. None of the Brexit arguments are applicable.

You’re not missing anything, no, only that the cherry picked, have cake and eat it deal delivered on a gold platter by a unicorn failed to materialise. So, assuming it is not politically viable to call off the whole farce, the Lords have realised that the alternative of EEA membership would limit the damage and at least avoid the economic disaster of crashing out with no deal.

 

[Sweet Square]

God I'm so glad no one watches PMQs.

 

[Xeno]

EEA means rejoining the EU in 10 years rather than the 20 a full brexit would take.

Inevitable.

 

[JPRouve]

You’re not missing anything, no, only that the cherry picked, have cake and eat it deal delivered on a gold platter by a unicorn failed to materialise. So, assuming it is not politically viable to call off the whole farce, the Lords have realised that the alternative of EEA membership would limit the damage and at least avoid the economic disaster of crashing out with no deal.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting your point but the EEA membership doesn't limit damage that's literally cancelling Brexit. Brexit means leaving the EEA, that's where I have been the most confused, people seem to not understand which institutions they are talking about. When brexit is about making your own economic rules or the four freedoms, you are targeting the EEA.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Maybe I'm misinterpreting your point but the EEA membership doesn't limit damage that's literally cancelling Brexit. Brexit means leaving the EEA, that's where I have been the most confused people seem to not understand which institutions they are talking about. When brexit is about making your own economical rules or the four freedoms, you are targeting the EEA.

The point is that when people voted for Brexit, they did not have a clue what it meant - two years later they still haven't a clue. When people tried to explain, they wouldn't listen. Brexit is an enormous waste of time and money. You could ask a hundred Brexiters what Brexit means and you'd get a hundred different answers.

 

[JPRouve]

The point is that when people voted for Brexit, they did not have a clue what it meant - two years later they still haven't a clue. When people tried to explain, they wouldn't listen. Brexit is an enormous waste of time and money. You could ask a hundred Brexiters what Brexit means and you'd get a hundred different answers.

But these answers should all include the EEA. It's the most fundamental aspect, it doesn't matter if you are pro brexit for economic or immigration reasons, the EEA is the area of the four freedoms and it's where the EU and EFTA rules are strictly applied. The EEA encompass all the brexit arguments, it's the one thing you can't stay in if you are negotiating for Brexit.

 

[Ubik]

Maybe I'm misinterpreting your point but the EEA membership doesn't limit damage that's literally cancelling Brexit. Brexit means leaving the EEA, that's where I have been the most confused, people seem to not understand which institutions they are talking about. When brexit is about making your own economic rules or the four freedoms, you are targeting the EEA.

Doesn't include fisheries and isn't subject to the ECJ either, right?

 

[MoskvaRed]

Maybe I'm misinterpreting your point but the EEA membership doesn't limit damage that's literally cancelling Brexit. Brexit means leaving the EEA, that's where I have been the most confused, people seem to not understand which institutions they are talking about. When brexit is about making your own economic rules or the four freedoms, you are targeting the EEA.

It respects the referendum result in that the UK would not remain a member of the European Union. Since there are 101 different interpretations on what the “no” reponse to the referendum question actually meant, then choosing the most formalistic, least harmful interpretation seems to be the more pragmatic approach. A lot of people won’t like it but, in a country split down the middle, there is no magic solution that will reconcile the two camps.

 

[JPRouve]

Doesn't include fisheries and isn't subject to the ECJ either, right?

Not exactly. The EEA is divided between EFTA and EU members, EFTA members aren't subjected to agricultural and fishery laws but they also don't have a direct access to the single market, customs are needed to protect both sides. EFTA members are also subjected to the EFTA court which means that the same philosophical problem exists.

 

[JPRouve]

It respects the referendum result in that the UK would not remain a member of the European Union. Since there are 101 different interpretations on what the “no” reponse to the referendum question actually meant, then choosing the most formalistic, least harmful interpretation seems to be the more pragmatic approach. A lot of people won’t like it but, in a country split down the middle, there is no magic solution that will reconcile the two camps.

That's where I'm confused, why would you leave the EU. What was the reasoning behind it?