[Politics] Brexit

[attila]

By far the best article I have read about the whole sorry episode.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...brexit-britain-state-politics-fit-for-purpose

 

[Triggaaar]

It's often said that Britain is split down the middle on Brexit. It isn't. The extremes have split from the centre, after decades of push-pull in a FPTP electoral system which sends political thought on both sides further towards the edge and eviscerates the centre in the process. When the pendulum swings, as it always does in the end, it swings a little further back the other way. It's pretty much inevitable when you allow a party with as little as 37pc of the vote to form a *majority* government.

I don't think we've been seeing this pendulum swing in our governments. After years of Tory rule, when Labour eventually got in it was with a right biased Labour government, and the Tory governments we've had since then have not exactly been to the right of the Tories.

 

[A1X]

[TWEET]1086182811760054274[/TWEET]
[TWEET]1086182966710231040[/TWEET]
[TWEET]1086183098461638657[/TWEET]
[TWEET]1086183302468374528[/TWEET]
[TWEET]1086183724524490755[/TWEET]
[TWEET]1086183909002493952[/TWEET]

 

[ManOfSussex]

Did anyone else see Newsnight last night? Nick Watt interviewing some northern woman who'd been at a 'Leave Means Leave' rally in London, who said it's all 'b******s', a conspiracy by remainers, David Davis should be PM and finished off by saying does he remember Oliver Cromwell and Enoch Powell.......................

What has happened to this country.

 

[cunning fergus]

Can we agree that agriculture needs to be maintained, here and in the rest of Europe? To lose it would make us fully dependent on imports and therefore vulnerable, to natural disaster and war in other parts of the world, or even trade disputes. The EU has tried different ways in which to ensure farmers can make a living, and protect the countryside at the same time, and every way has brought criticism and problems in some way. It would be fantastic to remove all subsidy, and one day we will get there, but opening the UK up to all imports without tariff as has been suggested by Mogg would kill UK farmers, removing subsidy with tariffs and other barriers might work, but only if farms become more intensive, and this is bad for the environment. The EU has problems, the CAP is one of them, but leaving it just changes one problem for a bigger one.
The EU and it's member states should work to find a better policy, we can look at any socialist regime in the world and find a problem policy.

I have no problem with supporting Agriculture and farmers generally however the CAP is a historic acronism which provides millions to rich landowners. As we know these landowners are very well connected if not part of the current political structure (Hesaltine, Duke of Wellington etc) therefore meaningful reform is unlikely.

Notwithstanding Mogg, i think Brexit would mean UK farmers would continue to be subsidised, and that would be appropriate for a period of time. We can look at the lessons of NZ to removing farming subsidies.

The key here is the UK will no longer be paying to protect farmers in 27 other countries, meaning a lot of produce should be cheaper. This would benefit UK consumers and therefore the poor. Further, it would also benefit farmers in developing countries who do not export to the EU due to EU tariffs.

The consequences of CAP on poor counties is another aspect of CAP that is unjustifiable. Basically the EU dumps surplus produce into Africa at prices local farmers cannot compete with, this means their markets are continually depresed.

Dont get me wrong my primary concern is UK consumers, the consequences for Africa is secondary, however it proves that CAP is loaded against the poor in the UK, EU and elsewhere to the benefit of rich landowners. Of all of the aspects of the EU I despise, CAP is up there, it is 40% of the EU budget, and it’s indefensible in its effect on the poor. I’m saddened when even the fair minded can’t see that.

 

[Baldseagull]

Yes, I find it puzzling that so many are still saying it would be difficult / would split the vote / etc.

You have a referendum that has two questions:
1 - do you want to leave / stay?
2 - if the outcome of the referendum on Q1 is to leave, then which option would you prefer: Mays deal / no deal / whatever else is on offer at that point?

This way, whichever way you vote, you can then have a say on what sort of leave deal you want if the vote is to leave.

In your method, to get the version of leave you want you have to risk having the type of leave that you think could be worse than remaining, and what you would probably end up with in a leave result, is many remainers voting for a norway type deal as their leave option, whereas far fewer of the people that actually want to leave think that is the way to go, and would rather remain than have that type of Leave. The result would be that a large majority would agree that remaining was preferable to this type of leave, but we do it anyway.

 

[The Clamp]

If Leavers had any sense (they don't) they'd be begging for a second referendum. It's the only chance they have for getting anywhere remotely near what they thought they were voting for. The only other options are no deal (simply should not happen) or a complete abandonment of Brexit. I'm for abandoning the whole thing. I think the public are too stupid to get it right on a second referendum.

But Leavers famously act in their own worst interests.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

[tweet]1086206240231997440[/tweet]

 

[Deleted member 2719]

Jacob Rees-Mogg and Nigel Farage advised we should have another referendum.

Okay, if the main men are up for it.

I know the leavers will be, didn't May say it would take another year to call a referendum?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Boris Johnson speech coming up.

I’m sure it’s full of plausible answers and solutions and not more unicorns.

He knows his dreams of being PM are all but dead.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Okay, if the main men are up for it.

I know the leavers will be, didn't May say it would take another year to call a referendum?

Yes, she did, but that's untrue. It could be organised within three months.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Boris Johnson speech coming up.

I’m sure it’s full of plausible answers and solutions and not more unicorns.

He knows his dreams of being PM are all but dead.

A lot of hot air, maybe suggest a 'managed no deal' and propose sending the Royal Marines to Calcutta to do it all over again.

 

[melias shoes]

That's the antithesis of democracy and displays a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of Government. Most left this sort of attitude behind them in the school playground.

So should nit picking one line from my post. Funny because I was expecting that from you.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

Yes, she did, but that's untrue. It could be organised within three months.

But we don't have 3 months and then when leave win again it will have just been a waste of money.

So what are Mogg and Farage suggesting being on the ballot paper

 

[Triggaaar]

Actually not at all, I've posted this morning an article by Nick Cohen that goes a little further than just criticism.

Then I can't see why you mind me calling him childish for refusing to go to the table to help find a way forward. You came back with what May's done wrong, but I'm not defending May, the government have failed to come up with a deal. May has acted as though she has a large majority and the backing of her party, yet she knows she hasn't. Maybe she's playing the game at a higher level than I can comprehend, because on the face of it it looks like she's ballsed it up.

I'm subtracting the personality from the position, hence I referred to the 'leader of the opposition'. I think many people are annoyed because they simply don't like the man, but that is irrelevant really.

There are some real slimy scumbags in politics, so by comparison Corbyn comes across as a decent man. It's his policies and admiration of leaders like Hugo Chavez that scare the shit out me. And regardless, I don't feel the need to like our PM, I just want them to run the country properly.

If May has gone this far, ignored the wishes of the opposite benches for this long, she has to offer an olive branch of some description, otherwise it is just a stunt, "look at me, I'm consulting".

With her red lines it looks like the latter at the moment, but at least the other leaders have the chance to point out that the red lines (on all sides) currently mean we won't get a consensus, but when her next deal fails, new lines will need to be drawn. These meetings should allow the leaders to talk without the slating that has to go with public displays.

As leader of the government she is right to have drawn lines, but there comes a point where she needs to accept that the house won't ratify them, and she needs to reevaluate.

As Simon Jenkins said in another piece I posted (I see you found it), she could set up a 1 issue coalition, possibly betray much of her own party, but it would be for the good of a Brexit to benefit the country.

Yes, although I'm not sure how she'd go about doing it and finding the common ground.

At present we have an invite to talk with another vote in 2 weeks, without any concessions being offered. That is no way to start a negotiation, mediation, or discussion. You have to offer something.

You don't have to offer concessions before the talk, you just start talking. Like mediation in any legal case, you don't need to concede anything before the meeting, you just meet and start talking. May doesn't owe Corbyn anything, he lost the election. If he wants to talk, he's been invited.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

A lot of hot air, maybe suggest a 'managed no deal' and propose sending the Royal Marines to Calcutta to do it all over again.

I’m sure it’s just a coincidence is a couple of days after Goves impressive speech.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

But we don't have 3 months and then when leave win again it will have just been a waste of money.

So what are Mogg and Farage suggesting being on the ballot paper

Ask for an extension to Article 50.

Nothing as they haven't got a clue, except how to stir it.

 

[A1X]

So should nit picking one line from my post. Funny because I was expecting that from you.

TBH the rest of the post was largely paranoid drivel so not really worth engaging with. Or it ignored the core tenement of our constitution that one Parliament does not bind it's successor, so it is perfectly entitled to review and change any decision it made.

 

[Baldseagull]

I have no problem with supporting Agriculture and farmers generally however the CAP is a historic acronism which provides millions to rich landowners. As we know these landowners are very well connected if not part of the current political structure (Hesaltine, Duke of Wellington etc) therefore meaningful reform is unlikely.

Notwithstanding Mogg, i think Brexit would mean UK farmers would continue to be subsidised, and that would be appropriate for a period of time. We can look at the lessons of NZ to removing farming subsidies.

The key here is the UK will no longer be paying to protect farmers in 27 other countries, meaning a lot of produce should be cheaper. This would benefit UK consumers and therefore the poor. Further, it would also benefit farmers in developing countries who do not export to the EU due to EU tariffs.

The consequences of CAP on poor counties is another aspect of CAP that is unjustifiable. Basically the EU dumps surplus produce into Africa at prices local farmers cannot compete with, this means their markets are continually depresed.

Dont get me wrong my primary concern is UK consumers, the consequences for Africa is secondary, however it proves that CAP is loaded against the poor in the UK, EU and elsewhere to the benefit of rich landowners. Of all of the aspects of the EU I despise, CAP is up there, it is 40% of the EU budget, and it’s indefensible in its effect on the poor. I’m saddened when even the fair minded can’t see that.

I don't see it as black and white as you do. I also don't think scrapping CAP will do much for redistribution of wealth. Clearly, payments for doing nothing with the land, creates some problems, but so did guaranteed prices for production, creating wine lakes and butter mountains etc. If you open up the market to competition from places where animal welfare or environmental practices are lower, you damage the chances of standards here from being maintained and do nothing to encourage better practices elsewhere.
The EU recognises the issues CAP creates in developing countries, and is trying to find ways to improve this in balance with other objectives. You won't want to read this, but it may alter your views a bit if you find the time to. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/603862/EXPO_STU(2018)603862_EN.pdf

 

[Deleted member 2719]

Ask for an extension to Article 50.

Nothing as they haven't got a clue, except how to stir it.

Or maybe they have just had enough of remainer May faffing about.

They are bringing it to a head and get the right deal to get out of the EU and so they should IMO.

There are no better common sense MPs than Mogg and Farage imo and remainers should be worried if it goes to another referendum.