BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

rick_chasey

So folks in the office are pretty sure the EU is gonna bin the backstop, not having antthing else, and Bojo will sent that WA to the commons with a day to go and say "this or no deal, it's on you".

I asked how having no backstop solves the Irish problem and they just went "well if the Irish want people on the border it's their problem" and "Brits don't smuggle" so that was enlightening.

surrey_commuter

Rick Chasey wrote:

So folks in the office are pretty sure the EU is gonna bin the backstop, not having antthing else, and Bojo will sent that WA to the commons with a day to go and say "this or no deal, it's on you".

I asked how having no backstop solves the Irish problem and they just went "well if the Irish want people on the border it's their problem" and "Brits don't smuggle" so that was enlightening.

Ask your colleagues about people who they consider to be Brits but who don't consider themselves to be Brits

TheBigBean

Rick Chasey wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Prorogation does not equal recess.

They are quite different.

You could justify why recess + prorogation is materially different from one long prorogation. As standalone things, they are different as one kills all the bills progressing through parliament, but it is not clear to me that a recess + prorogation is any different to one long prorogation.

MPs have a say over one but not the other for starters.

I said that upthread, but assuming MPs agreed to the recess (noting only 25 voted against the summer one), what's the difference?

Pross

HaydenM wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

HaydenM wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Not sure I follow you there Bally. What are you saying he hasn't done?

They were talking about him proroguing over the deadline to stop any possible intervention, whereas this stops short. IBS made that point in the interview also, the interviewer said that if this has nothing to do with brexit, why is it weeks longer than any other time this has happened? He ignored it and started berating MPs again (which I have a bit of sympathy for)

Not sure they were all being that specific and yes there will be a fortnight of parliament before 31st October. I'm sure that that will make all the difference.

I agree, it's like this so he can pretend it's not because of brexit which it definitely is. Willfully ignorant to think otherwise. Interesting stats of the willfully ignorant below:

A snap YouGov poll conducted on Wednesday found 47% of British adults thought the decision was unacceptable, with 27% saying it was acceptable and 27% unsure.

But it found the suspension was supported by 51% of people who voted Leave, with 52% of Conservative voters also approving of the move.

So, based on proportions, the only people who support it are 51% of those who voted for Brexit i.e. 51% of 52% comes in at the 27% total in support when rounded.

rjsterry

Rick Chasey wrote:

So folks in the office are pretty sure the EU is gonna bin the backstop, not having antthing else, and Bojo will sent that WA to the commons with a day to go and say "this or no deal, it's on you".

I asked how having no backstop solves the Irish problem and they just went "well if the Irish want people on the border it's their problem" and "Brits don't smuggle" so that was enlightening.

I would suggest that folks in your office are at least wrong on the EU dropping the backstop. I'm not even sure Johnson cares about it beyond its use as a motivator for his supporters.

kingstongraham

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Prorogation does not equal recess.

They are quite different.

You could justify why recess + prorogation is materially different from one long prorogation. As standalone things, they are different as one kills all the bills progressing through parliament, but it is not clear to me that a recess + prorogation is any different to one long prorogation.

MPs have a say over one but not the other for starters.

I said that upthread, but assuming MPs agreed to the recess (noting only 25 voted against the summer one), what's the difference?

Tick tock.

Pross

Another point, if the prorogation was for genuine reasons as claimed could they have not requested it before the summer recess? This would then have allowed the government their summer recess to get their ducks in a row and only a short prorogation would then be needed with a decent period of time being available either side of the conference recess. Instead they are using virtually every day allowed to them within the restrictions that were pushed through recently. As others have said, it really is insulting people's intelligence to suggest it is anything other than a way to minimise alternative being agreed but some seem to revel in having their intelligence insulted (see £350 million to the NHS).

surrey_commuter

Does anybody else think that BoJo wants to get stopped so that he can heroically miss his target and then set about doing something sensible?

This move just unites and motivates his opponents. Without it they would have kept umming and ahhing rather than reaching for the nuclear option

kingstongraham

Pross wrote:

Another point, if the prorogation was for genuine reasons as claimed could they have not requested it before the summer recess? This would then have allowed the government their summer recess to get their ducks in a row and only a short prorogation would then be needed with a decent period of time being available either side of the conference recess. Instead they are using virtually every day allowed to them within the restrictions that were pushed through recently. As others have said, it really is insulting people's intelligence to suggest it is anything other than a way to minimise alternative being agreed but some seem to revel in having their intelligence insulted (see £350 million to the NHS).

Everyone knows it's bollocks. It's not even insulting anyone's intelligence, because those saying it know that everyone knows it's bollocks.

bompington

Pross wrote:

HaydenM wrote:

A snap YouGov poll conducted on Wednesday found 47% of British adults thought the decision was unacceptable, with 27% saying it was acceptable and 27% unsure.

But it found the suspension was supported by 51% of people who voted Leave, with 52% of Conservative voters also approving of the move.

So, based on proportions, the only people who support it are 51% of those who voted for Brexit i.e. 51% of 52% comes in at the 27% total in support when rounded.

It's all just getting more and more obviously tribal. One of the few true and insightful things Trump has ever said was the thing about how he could get away with murder: once you have the backing of your tribe it doesn't matter what you do.
It's a combination of the satisfaction of getting one over on the other side and the wilful blindness to bias: like they used* to say in NI, "there's bad bastards on both sides. But at least these ones are our bastards"

The poll would probably give exactly the same figures whether Johnson announced he was going to machine gun all Remain-voting MPs or tour the UK wearing a mankini.



*OK, they still do

haydenm

Pross wrote:

HaydenM wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

HaydenM wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Not sure I follow you there Bally. What are you saying he hasn't done?

They were talking about him proroguing over the deadline to stop any possible intervention, whereas this stops short. IBS made that point in the interview also, the interviewer said that if this has nothing to do with brexit, why is it weeks longer than any other time this has happened? He ignored it and started berating MPs again (which I have a bit of sympathy for)

Not sure they were all being that specific and yes there will be a fortnight of parliament before 31st October. I'm sure that that will make all the difference.

I agree, it's like this so he can pretend it's not because of brexit which it definitely is. Willfully ignorant to think otherwise. Interesting stats of the willfully ignorant below:

A snap YouGov poll conducted on Wednesday found 47% of British adults thought the decision was unacceptable, with 27% saying it was acceptable and 27% unsure.

But it found the suspension was supported by 51% of people who voted Leave, with 52% of Conservative voters also approving of the move.

So, based on proportions, the only people who support it are 51% of those who voted for Brexit i.e. 51% of 52% comes in at the 27% total in support when rounded.

It would be interesting to know how what the percentages look like for 'people in favour of what BJ did' after Brexit, when it all works out as he plans. I'm sure a lot of those who currently think the prorogation is unacceptable will overlook it if the outcome is OK. Understandable really

rjsterry

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Does anybody else think that BoJo wants to get stopped so that he can heroically miss his target and then set about doing something sensible?

This move just unites and motivates his opponents. Without it they would have kept umming and ahhing rather than reaching for the nuclear option

Definitely a strong possibility; at least the first bit. The fact that the hardliners don't trust him either is significant.

imposter2.0

Two legal challenges currently being heard - one in Belfast and one in Edinburgh..

rjsterry

Reports from the meetings between David Frost and the EU support the idea that propagation is a tactic to bounce MPs into agreeing whatever deal Johnson can obtain.

mamil314

bompington wrote:

Pross wrote:

HaydenM wrote:

A snap YouGov poll conducted on Wednesday found 47% of British adults thought the decision was unacceptable, with 27% saying it was acceptable and 27% unsure.

But it found the suspension was supported by 51% of people who voted Leave, with 52% of Conservative voters also approving of the move.

So, based on proportions, the only people who support it are 51% of those who voted for Brexit i.e. 51% of 52% comes in at the 27% total in support when rounded.

It's all just getting more and more obviously tribal. One of the few true and insightful things Trump has ever said was the thing about how he could get away with murder: once you have the backing of your tribe it doesn't matter what you do.
It's a combination of the satisfaction of getting one over on the other side and the wilful blindness to bias: like they used* to say in NI, "there's bad bastards on both sides. But at least these ones are our bastards"

The poll would probably give exactly the same figures whether Johnson announced he was going to machine gun all Remain-voting MPs or tour the UK wearing a mankini.



*OK, they still do

Good post. I wonder if the likes of coopster even recognize themselves in this, or they are too much the types to dance on graves even to their own detriment.

coopster_the_1st

mamil314 wrote:

bompington wrote:

Pross wrote:

HaydenM wrote:

A snap YouGov poll conducted on Wednesday found 47% of British adults thought the decision was unacceptable, with 27% saying it was acceptable and 27% unsure.

But it found the suspension was supported by 51% of people who voted Leave, with 52% of Conservative voters also approving of the move.

So, based on proportions, the only people who support it are 51% of those who voted for Brexit i.e. 51% of 52% comes in at the 27% total in support when rounded.

It's all just getting more and more obviously tribal. One of the few true and insightful things Trump has ever said was the thing about how he could get away with murder: once you have the backing of your tribe it doesn't matter what you do.
It's a combination of the satisfaction of getting one over on the other side and the wilful blindness to bias: like they used* to say in NI, "there's bad bastards on both sides. But at least these ones are our bastards"

The poll would probably give exactly the same figures whether Johnson announced he was going to machine gun all Remain-voting MPs or tour the UK wearing a mankini.



*OK, they still do

Good post. I wonder if the likes of coopster even recognize themselves in this, or they are too much the types to dance on graves even to their own detriment.

Haha, you and others are trying to compare extremism with delivering a democratic vote. You and the others have completely lost persepctive. It's known as Brexit derangement syndrome and you have it!

shirley_basso

Do you not see the hypocrisy in your own post?

briantrumpet

Shirley Basso wrote:

Do you not see the hypocrisy in your own post?

It seems unlikely.

briantrumpet

rjsterry wrote:

Reports from the meetings between David Frost and the EU support the idea that propagation is a tactic to bounce MPs into agreeing whatever deal Johnson can obtain.

Oh god, Boris isn't creating more babies, is he?

imposter2.0

Shirley Basso wrote:

Do you not see the hypocrisy in your own post?

As mentioned - almost certainly not...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E ... ger_effect

Stevo_666

Pross wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

I'm very much enjoying the irony that MP's who have completely ignored the referendum result are now outraged that they are to be ignored

I really don't know what Boris will do if it comes down to it and he might actually have to ram through the chaotic brexit. There's still a chance he'll bottle it, don't you think?

Unlikely. As much as people may disagree with what he is trying to do, he does appear to have the balls to do it.

Whether he will be stopped in time by others is a different question.

Is that a good thing if it results in him losing a vote of no confidence and we end up with a leftie bollox coalition government (or even a Corbyn government)?

As I mentioned, it is a ballsy but high risk tactic. Also RJS mentioned several pages back that it could also be a tactic for force a GE which will be on his 'preferred battleground'.

Stevo_666

@ Pross

Stevo 666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Further evidence that this is a ploy to try to force a VONC and then a GE. From Tom Newton Dunn.

Is Boris’s real aim to invite on a no confidence vote next week and force a general election on his preferred battle ground? Also high risk, as a majority with the Brexit Party still alive is v unsure, and a pact with Farage will mean having to govern with him.

Boris also needs two thirds of MPs to agree to an election under FTPA, can’t just call one himself - and they may not. All depends on whether Corbyn agrees to whip in favour or insist on legislation to block No Deal first.

Some serious disquiet in Govt now about the strategy. One senior minister tells me: “I don’t think No10 really understands that if we don’t have the MPs then we dont have control. I think it is 50/50 what happens next”.

That's a plausible explanation.

Although in any event its pretty risky strategy. Some might say a ballsy move but that will not please some...

haydenm

The talk of last week was that his spending promises were based directly on polling results and he was definitely in election phase, forcing a GE would make sense. The issue for the country* is that Corbyn is so unpalatable to some that they just won't vote for him under any circumstances, including normal Labour supporters. Labour aren't strong enough to have a clear message, the results will be skewed and we will be in the same situation again.

*I say for the country rather than just opposition to Bojo because there's too much grey area in what is mandated for in the Brexit debate, if we had had a referendum with defined outcomes this mess wouldn't have happened.

rjsterry

briantrumpet wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Reports from the meetings between David Frost and the EU support the idea that propagation is a tactic to bounce MPs into agreeing whatever deal Johnson can obtain.

Oh god, Boris isn't creating more babies, is he?

Probably.
Autocorrect strokes again.

briantrumpet

rjsterry wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Reports from the meetings between David Frost and the EU support the idea that propagation is a tactic to bounce MPs into agreeing whatever deal Johnson can obtain.

Oh god, Boris isn't creating more babies, is he?

Probably.
Autocorrect strokes again.

It's weird, every time I type "Boris", my autocorrect tries to change it to "lying, power-crazed b@stard".

rjsterry

Interesting update.

Guardian Politicslive wrote:

The defence secretary, Ben Wallace, has been caught on mic admitting the uncertainty of what happens next in the Brexit process and conceding the weakness of the government grip on power.

Speaking to his French counterpart at a defence summit in Helsinki, Wallace could be heard explaining the decision to prorogue parliament.

He said: “Parliament has been very good at saying what it doesn’t want. It has been awful at saying what it wants. That’s the reality. So eventually any leader has to, you know, try.”

Shrugging and laughing he added: “I don’t know what the outcome will be, you know politics.”

He added this about the government’s weakness:

“Our system is a winner-takes-all system. If you win a parliamentary majority you control everything, you control the timetable. There’s no written separation. So it’s, you pretty much are in command of the whole thing. And we’ve suddenly found ourselves with no majority and a coalition and that’s not easy for our system.

TheBigBean

Ruth Davidson wrote:

We had three golden opportunities to support a deal. The people right now who are saying they would do anything to avoid no deal had a goal gaping in front of them three times and they hit the ball over the bar. For all the elaborate plans of bringing down governments and installing Ken Clarke and Harriet Harman on job shares as prime minister, the simplest way to avoid no deal is to vote for a deal.

To colleagues who want to avoid no deal: vote for a deal. You’ve had three opportunities, you blew every one of them don’t blow a fourth. I know the prime minister is seeking to get a deal. I’ve had long conversations with him on this point. And I believe him when he says that he’s seeking to get a deal. And please ... make it clear now that if a deal comes back to the House of Commons, you will vote for it and let the EU hear you say that you will vote for it so that they understand that there is a reason for them to reopen negotiations.

coopster_the_1st

TheBigBean wrote:

Ruth Davidson wrote:

We had three golden opportunities to support a deal. The people right now who are saying they would do anything to avoid no deal had a goal gaping in front of them three times and they hit the ball over the bar. For all the elaborate plans of bringing down governments and installing Ken Clarke and Harriet Harman on job shares as prime minister, the simplest way to avoid no deal is to vote for a deal.

To colleagues who want to avoid no deal: vote for a deal. You’ve had three opportunities, you blew every one of them don’t blow a fourth. I know the prime minister is seeking to get a deal. I’ve had long conversations with him on this point. And I believe him when he says that he’s seeking to get a deal. And please ... make it clear now that if a deal comes back to the House of Commons, you will vote for it and let the EU hear you say that you will vote for it so that they understand that there is a reason for them to reopen negotiations.

Despite her Brexit views she was a good politician and definitely looked like a future party leader and PM. Maybe she still can be in the long term.

However I respect her even more for stepping back from that to put her familty and friends first, and being honest about that.

We all know how tiring a whinging and negative woman can be and she is having to deal with the chief whinger in leader of the SNP and it is easy to see why she would put her son first.

haydenm

^ Agreed, I thought she spoke well and made some convincing arguments whether I agreed with her or not. Must be a pretty hard thing to do to step back

kingstongraham

If we leave, what's the best option for those of us who would want to go back in as soon as possible? No deal or the May deal?