BREGZIT (GE 2019) - Jezza Streaking Ahead in the Bankrupt the UK Stakes.

1128812891291129312941316

Posts

  • kingstoniankingstonian Posts: 1,744
    If and when Boris gets this deal into Parliament for it to be voted upon, it will be interesting to see how successful Labour are at whipping their MPs to oppose it when roughly 60% of them represent constituencies that voted Leave. That's a tough conundrum, do you do what you personally believe (or what your party tells you to believe), or do you represent how your constituents voted in the referendum? It isn't such a dilemma for the Tories, of course.
  • Stevo_666Stevo_666 Posts: 35,935
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Anyone who asserts the terms of the referendum were clear that the UK would leave the EU, and that this meant leaving the customs union and single market, must accept that Boris's deal doesn't fulfill the terms of the referendum.
    In what way?

    The UK hasn't left the EU
    GB has, but the UK hasn't.
    Go on explain.

    As far as I can see we will leave both the single market and the customs union under the terms of the current deal.

    Short version - being subject to EU regulations, under the jurisdiction of the ECJ, complying with EU customs code and subject to EU vat rules wouldn't be defined as leaving the SM or CU if it were applying to England.

    The institute for gov have good resources on what's in the deal

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org. ... d-protocol
    Insofar as staying in the single market and customs union go, have to disagree.
    - Single market: definitley not as the 4 freedoms will not apply.
    - Customs union: again, no:
    https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-the-new-brexit-deal-explained
    The acid test being (from the link): "It will see the whole of the UK, including Northern Ireland, leave the EU’s customs union, which means Northern Ireland will be included in future British trade deals."

    There is a degree of alignment and cooperation but that in my mind is not the same thing at all.
    Whippet
    Bruiser
    Panzer
    Commuter

    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,604 Lives Here
    TheBigBean wrote:
    TheBigBean wrote:
    Trying to bounce parliament in which you do not command a majority into a decision because it is politically and electorally expedient for your party is not necessarily the way to get an important piece of legislation through quickly....

    Parliament trying to delay things is politically beneficial for BoJo.

    I don’t think this is the case.

    He has hung his hat on 31st October.

    And in many people's eyes he is doing everything he can to achieve that.

    I agree with TBB. He can sell this as doing everything he can to get it done.

    I agree with TBB too.

    The deal insulates him from criticism with regard to the extension and has split the Leavers who could have been stacked against him

    So you think getting the WA passed through parliament before October 31st is *not as politically beneficial* as WA being delayed post 31st October?
  • haydenm wrote:
    He won't have 'failed' if it doesn't happen by then, he will call a GE then blame parliament for trying to stop him. It'll probably serve him well.

    He can’t call a GE
  • Stevo 666 wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Anyone who asserts the terms of the referendum were clear that the UK would leave the EU, and that this meant leaving the customs union and single market, must accept that Boris's deal doesn't fulfill the terms of the referendum.
    In what way?

    The UK hasn't left the EU
    GB has, but the UK hasn't.
    Go on explain.

    As far as I can see we will leave both the single market and the customs union under the terms of the current deal.

    Short version - being subject to EU regulations, under the jurisdiction of the ECJ, complying with EU customs code and subject to EU vat rules wouldn't be defined as leaving the SM or CU if it were applying to

    The institute for gov have good resources on what's in the deal

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org. ... d-protocol
    Insofar as staying in the single market and customs union go, have to disagree.
    - Single market: definitley not as the 4 freedoms will not apply.
    - Customs union: again, no:
    https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-the-new-brexit-deal-explained
    The acid test being (from the link): "It will see the whole of the UK, including Northern Ireland, leave the EU’s customs union, which means Northern Ireland will be included in future British trade deals."

    There is a degree of alignment and cooperation but that in my mind is not the same thing at all.

    Could get DUP onside by GB leaving in same manner as NI
  • tailwindhometailwindhome Posts: 13,659
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    in my mind is not the same thing at all.


    ok
    "ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED? IS THIS NOT WHY YOU ARE HERE?"
  • kingstongrahamkingstongraham Posts: 7,220
    TheBigBean wrote:
    TheBigBean wrote:
    Trying to bounce parliament in which you do not command a majority into a decision because it is politically and electorally expedient for your party is not necessarily the way to get an important piece of legislation through quickly....

    Parliament trying to delay things is politically beneficial for BoJo.

    I don’t think this is the case.

    He has hung his hat on 31st October.

    And in many people's eyes he is doing everything he can to achieve that.

    I agree with TBB. He can sell this as doing everything he can to get it done.

    I agree with TBB too.

    The deal insulates him from criticism with regard to the extension and has split the Leavers who could have been stacked against him

    So you think getting the WA passed through parliament before October 31st is *not as politically beneficial* as WA being delayed post 31st October?

    I think it's debatable whether he would get more benefit from pushing Brexit through and then getting the election as a hero figure "don't let them undo our good work", or being forced by perfidious parliament to delay until after an election "I need your support to get this done against those remoaner elites".

    You're probably right, but it doesn't matter - the personal political benefit comes from portraying parliament as blocking/delaying, whatever the immediate outcome. There is not going to be any attempt to appeal to anyone who currently disagrees with him.
    and then the next thing you know
  • longshotlongshot Posts: 301
    TheBigBean wrote:
    TheBigBean wrote:
    Trying to bounce parliament in which you do not command a majority into a decision because it is politically and electorally expedient for your party is not necessarily the way to get an important piece of legislation through quickly....

    Parliament trying to delay things is politically beneficial for BoJo.

    I don’t think this is the case.

    He has hung his hat on 31st October.

    And in many people's eyes he is doing everything he can to achieve that.

    I agree with TBB. He can sell this as doing everything he can to get it done.

    I agree with TBB too.

    The deal insulates him from criticism with regard to the extension and has split the Leavers who could have been stacked against him

    So you think getting the WA passed through parliament before October 31st is *not as politically beneficial* as WA being delayed post 31st October?

    I think it's debatable whether he would get more benefit from pushing Brexit through and then getting the election as a hero figure "don't let them undo our good work", or being forced by perfidious parliament to delay until after an election "I need your support to get this done against those remoaner elites".

    You're probably right, but it doesn't matter - the personal political benefit comes from portraying parliament as blocking/delaying, whatever the immediate outcome. There is not going to be any attempt to appeal to anyone who currently disagrees with him.

    It worked fairly well for Trump. Don't try to win over the dissenters by softening the message, instead harden it and hit them over the head with it enough times and you'll solidify your own base.
    You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.
  • haydenmhaydenm Posts: 2,689
    haydenm wrote:
    He won't have 'failed' if it doesn't happen by then, he will call a GE then blame parliament for trying to stop him. It'll probably serve him well.

    He can’t call a GE

    Good point, but I'm sure there is a way
  • tailwindhometailwindhome Posts: 13,659
    Stewart Wood
    @StewartWood

    · 2h
    The #Brexit Minister Stephen Barclay just confirmed to me in his @LordsEUCom evidence that, under the Govt's proposals, Northern Irish businesses sending goods to Great Britain will have to complete export declaration forms.
    "ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED? IS THIS NOT WHY YOU ARE HERE?"
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,604 Lives Here

    You're probably right, but it doesn't matter.

    Ha. What?!
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,604 Lives Here
    Some analysis on the impact of something similar to the proposed WA on services: https://twitter.com/samuelmarclowe/stat ... 23456?s=21
  • kingstongrahamkingstongraham Posts: 7,220

    You're probably right, but it doesn't matter.

    Ha. What?!
    You're probably right, but it doesn't matter - the personal political benefit comes from portraying parliament as blocking/delaying, whatever the immediate outcome.

    I think there's not a significant difference to him either way whether he "gets it done" by the 31st or not.
    and then the next thing you know
  • tailwindhometailwindhome Posts: 13,659
    Ken Clarke: "Can the govt stop giving this sacred quality to the date of Oct 31st? The date was not selected by the British public or the British govt. It was a compromise selected in the EU between President Macron and the rest."
    "ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED? IS THIS NOT WHY YOU ARE HERE?"
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,604 Lives Here

    You're probably right, but it doesn't matter.

    Ha. What?!
    You're probably right, but it doesn't matter - the personal political benefit comes from portraying parliament as blocking/delaying, whatever the immediate outcome.

    I think there's not a significant difference to him either way whether he "gets it done" by the 31st or not.

    Cba to find it but polling suggests a marked drop off in BoJo support (from a month ago) for GE after 31st October.
  • kingstongrahamkingstongraham Posts: 7,220

    You're probably right, but it doesn't matter.

    Ha. What?!
    You're probably right, but it doesn't matter - the personal political benefit comes from portraying parliament as blocking/delaying, whatever the immediate outcome.

    I think there's not a significant difference to him either way whether he "gets it done" by the 31st or not.

    Cba to find it but polling suggests a marked drop off in BoJo support (from a month ago) for GE after 31st October.

    Fair enough. ComRes from 7th September has the Tories dropping 3% with all of that going to the Brexit party. Obviously 6 weeks is a long time ago.

    The other point is that he knows he isn't in control of when we leave.
    and then the next thing you know
  • kingstongrahamkingstongraham Posts: 7,220
    I hope you are right.
    and then the next thing you know
  • tailwindhometailwindhome Posts: 13,659
    Sam Coates Sky
    @SamCoatesSky
    ·
    6s
    Why is the government not publishing an economic analysis of Boris Johnson's revised brexit deal.

    Because, the Chancellor says, it is "self-evidently in our
    economic interest"
    "ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED? IS THIS NOT WHY YOU ARE HERE?"
  • kingstongrahamkingstongraham Posts: 7,220
    Sam Coates Sky
    @SamCoatesSky
    ·
    6s
    Why is the government not publishing an economic analysis of Boris Johnson's revised brexit deal.

    Because, the Chancellor says, it is "self-evidently in our
    economic interest"

    Well I'm convinced.
    and then the next thing you know
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 9,719
    Define who and what in “our economic interests”.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • verylonglegsverylonglegs Posts: 3,399
    A mental slip up on his part, he was talking about the Conservative cabinet not the UK.
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,604 Lives Here
    How long before Parliament makes him publish it?
  • tailwindhometailwindhome Posts: 13,659
    If you're wondering why some people in NI think it may not be the most stable of plans have the NIA vote on the NI Backstop arrangement every four years.

    https://twitter.com/DarranMarshall/stat ... 5451312129
    "ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED? IS THIS NOT WHY YOU ARE HERE?"
  • haydenm wrote:
    haydenm wrote:
    He won't have 'failed' if it doesn't happen by then, he will call a GE then blame parliament for trying to stop him. It'll probably serve him well.

    He can’t call a GE

    Good point, but I'm sure there is a way

    Not without Corbyn helping
  • ballysmateballysmate Posts: 13,026
    haydenm wrote:
    haydenm wrote:
    He won't have 'failed' if it doesn't happen by then, he will call a GE then blame parliament for trying to stop him. It'll probably serve him well.

    He can’t call a GE

    Good point, but I'm sure there is a way

    Not without Corbyn helping

    And Corbyn is so far behind he needs snookers.
  • TheBlueBeanTheBlueBean Posts: 8,261
    haydenm wrote:
    haydenm wrote:
    He won't have 'failed' if it doesn't happen by then, he will call a GE then blame parliament for trying to stop him. It'll probably serve him well.

    He can’t call a GE

    Good point, but I'm sure there is a way

    Not without Corbyn helping

    They only need a simple majority for an election if they amend the FTPA, but it needs to go through the Lords then, so will take longer.
  • TheBlueBeanTheBlueBean Posts: 8,261
    The bill has been published. At 100+ pages, MPs are going to be grumpy.
  • TheBigBean wrote:
    haydenm wrote:
    haydenm wrote:
    He won't have 'failed' if it doesn't happen by then, he will call a GE then blame parliament for trying to stop him. It'll probably serve him well.

    He can’t call a GE

    Good point, but I'm sure there is a way

    Not without Corbyn helping

    They only need a simple majority for an election if they amend the FTPA, but it needs to go through the Lords then, so will take longer.

    Isn’t he 30 odd votes shy of winning a vote to amend the FTPA?
  • Stevo 666 wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Anyone who asserts the terms of the referendum were clear that the UK would leave the EU, and that this meant leaving the customs union and single market, must accept that Boris's deal doesn't fulfill the terms of the referendum.
    In what way?

    The UK hasn't left the EU
    GB has, but the UK hasn't.
    Go on explain.

    As far as I can see we will leave both the single market and the customs union under the terms of the current deal.

    Short version - being subject to EU regulations, under the jurisdiction of the ECJ, complying with EU customs code and subject to EU vat rules wouldn't be defined as leaving the SM or CU if it were applying to England.

    The institute for gov have good resources on what's in the deal

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org. ... d-protocol
    Insofar as staying in the single market and customs union go, have to disagree.
    - Single market: definitley not as the 4 freedoms will not apply.
    - Customs union: again, no:
    https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-the-new-brexit-deal-explained
    The acid test being (from the link): "It will see the whole of the UK, including Northern Ireland, leave the EU’s customs union, which means Northern Ireland will be included in future British trade deals."

    There is a degree of alignment and cooperation but that in my mind is not the same thing at all.

    Then why not include all of the UK on the same terms and pass the bill?
  • TheBlueBeanTheBlueBean Posts: 8,261
    TheBigBean wrote:
    haydenm wrote:
    haydenm wrote:
    He won't have 'failed' if it doesn't happen by then, he will call a GE then blame parliament for trying to stop him. It'll probably serve him well.

    He can’t call a GE

    Good point, but I'm sure there is a way

    Not without Corbyn helping

    They only need a simple majority for an election if they amend the FTPA, but it needs to go through the Lords then, so will take longer.

    Isn’t he 30 odd votes shy of winning a vote to amend the FTPA?

    Depends who votes for it. Tories + ex-Tories with whip restored + Lib Dems would be close.
Sign In or Register to comment.