Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[ClaretAndJew]

I'm smashed off Czech ale

[martin_p]

Looks like the pro (Brexit Party and UkIP) and anti (Liberal, Change UK, SNP, Greens and Plaid) Brexit parties are broadly neck and neck in the polling.

[aggi]

Lib Dems seem to be doing plenty of door knocking from what I gather. I think they're taking advantage of the fact that they're already a sizeable, established party and know how it all works.

[Elizabeth]

Pointless comment Martin, with a little m.
You are looking at it completely in the wrong way, do you have any idea how the seats will be distributed in the EU election?

[nil_desperandum]

Pointless comment Martin, with a little m.
You are looking at it completely in the wrong way, do you have any idea how the seats will be distributed in the EU election?

He probably has as much idea as you do to be fair.
It's really difficult make predictions because of the way the PR system works, and small changes in percentages can make a big difference, but as things stands the official prediction for the North West, (presumably the area in which you will be voting), is as follows:
The Brexit Party would get 32% of the votes, would be guaranteed at least 2 seats, (and would almost certainly get 3),
Labour 22% would also be guaranteed 2 seats, (but with an outside chance of 3)
And Lib Dem 17% would be guaranteed at least 1 seat.
So that's 6 of the 8 seats accounted for. Most likely the conservatives and Greens on 9% each would each get one MEP.
But as I said, it doesn't take huge swings from one side to another in the final couple of days for things to change.
e..g. if Lib Dem support continues to grow then they might pick up a 2nd seat, but it's hard to say at whose expense.
However, it is possible to predict that if Brexit Party poll at 32% or above then they will get 3 of the 8 seats.
http://www.democraticaudit.com/2019/05/ ... f-england/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(This is a very interesting site, and for those who have time to explore it, it gives a detailed breakdown of how current polling would translate into seats in each of the regions.)

[aggi]

May's proposal to get the Withdrawal Bill through:

So our New Brexit Deal makes a ten-point offer to everyone in Parliament who wants to deliver the result of the referendum.

One - the government will seek to conclude alternative arrangements to replace the backstop by December 2020, so that it never needs to be used.

Two - a commitment that, should the backstop come into force, the government will ensure that Great Britain will stay aligned with Northern Ireland.

Three - the negotiating objectives and final treaties for our future relationship with the EU will have to be approved by MPs.

Four - a new workers’ rights bill that guarantees workers’ rights will be no less favourable than in the EU.

Five - there will be no change in the level of environmental protection when we leave the EU.

Six - the UK will seek as close to frictionless trade in goods with the EU as possible while outside the single market and ending free movement.

Seven - we will keep up to date with EU rules for goods and agri-food products that are relevant to checks at border protecting the thousands of jobs that depend on just-in-time supply chains.

Eight - the government will bring forward a customs compromise for MPs to decide on to break the deadlock.

Nine - there will be a vote for MPs on whether the deal should be subject to a referendum.

And ten – there will be a legal duty to secure changes to the political declaration to reflect this new deal.

All of these commitments will be guaranteed in law – so they will endure at least for this parliament.

There isn't a huge amount in there is my feeling, a lot of it is pretty wooly.

The customs union compromise is only until the next election so could be a short-lived thing.

I suspect she's gambling on another referendum being voted down but, even if that isn't the case, there isn't really a clear indicator as to what the flip side of not voting for May's deal would be. Would it be no deal, remain or, more likely, more talks.

[kentonclaret]

The notion that Britain will be free to go ahead and sign trade deals around the world unhindered post Brexit is simply an illusion. The choice of Huawei to provide a 5G network and the choice of China as a bigger trading partner in the future is a good example. Donald Trump and the US are already threatening sanctions against countries choosing Huawei as a network provider and the escalating trade war between the USA and China does not bode well for Britain doing increased business without jeopardising relationships across the pond. Britain outside of the EU will be in an even weaker position to stand alone against US sanctions.

[Foulthrow]

May's proposal to get the Withdrawal Bill through:

So our New Brexit Deal makes a ten-point offer to everyone in Parliament who wants to deliver the result of the referendum.

One - the government will seek to conclude alternative arrangements to replace the backstop by December 2020, so that it never needs to be used.

Two - a commitment that, should the backstop come into force, the government will ensure that Great Britain will stay aligned with Northern Ireland.

Three - the negotiating objectives and final treaties for our future relationship with the EU will have to be approved by MPs.

Four - a new workers’ rights bill that guarantees workers’ rights will be no less favourable than in the EU.

Five - there will be no change in the level of environmental protection when we leave the EU.

Six - the UK will seek as close to frictionless trade in goods with the EU as possible while outside the single market and ending free movement.

Seven - we will keep up to date with EU rules for goods and agri-food products that are relevant to checks at border protecting the thousands of jobs that depend on just-in-time supply chains.

Eight - the government will bring forward a customs compromise for MPs to decide on to break the deadlock.

Nine - there will be a vote for MPs on whether the deal should be subject to a referendum.

And ten – there will be a legal duty to secure changes to the political declaration to reflect this new deal.

All of these commitments will be guaranteed in law – so they will endure at least for this parliament.

There isn't a huge amount in there is my feeling, a lot of it is pretty wooly.

The customs union compromise is only until the next election so could be a short-lived thing.

I suspect she's gambling on another referendum being voted down but, even if that isn't the case, there isn't really a clear indicator as to what the flip side of not voting for May's deal would be. Would it be no deal, remain or, more likely, more talks.

What’s the difference between those ten things and staying in the EU?

Also, what’s the other alternative should there be a referendum on the withdrawal agreement, in favour of the agreement or what???

[Lancasterclaret]

General consensus appears to be its another massive fudge with enough wiggle room to be meaningless to all sides.

Sigh, looked quite promising for a bit there as well.

[South West Claret.]

General consensus appears to be its another massive fudge with enough wiggle room to be meaningless to all sides.

Sigh, looked quite promising for a bit there as well.

Spot on and this nonsense has been going on for nearly 3 years, in our time and as well! as the relatively high salary there's all the expenses that they can fiddle.... amazing some people still voted for these absolute expensive time wasters in the local elections

Just go's to prove that some people just love to be abused, the more they are abused the more those people vote for them.

[summitclaret]

So it's an even more watered down brino or remain. As a brexiteer I'd rather remain for now and have a proper go with a leader who is not in name only.

Imagine having a referendum with leave a bit v remain. It would see off the tories for a decade at least.

[Lancasterclaret]

So it's an even more watered down brino or remain. As a brexiteer I'd rather remain for now and have a proper go with a leader who is not in name only.

Imagine having a referendum with leave a bit v remain. It would see off the tories for a decade at least.

Thing is, reality will still be there, whoever is in charge.

Course, its been ignored in 2016, in 2017, in 2018, so why should 2019 be any different?

[summitclaret]

Thing is, reality will still be there, whoever is in charge.

Course, its been ignored in 2016, in 2017, in 2018, so why should 2019 be any different?

You might be right but leave voters deserve a proper go at leaving and someone to be firmer with EU in trying to get a free trade agreement. If someone like Raab trys and fails then I might be prepared to accept that for the time being we are trapped in an unhappy marraige.

[ecc]

"MPs will get a vote on whether to hold another referendum if they back the EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill, she said."

Does that make sense?

[Lancasterclaret]

You might be right but leave voters deserve a proper go at leaving and someone to be firmer with EU in trying to get a free trade agreement. If someone like Raab trys and fails then I might be prepared to accept that for the time being we are trapped in an unhappy marraige.

Fair enough that you think it will make a difference, but the evidence is not there.

[aggi]

"MPs will get a vote on whether to hold another referendum if they back the EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill, she said."

Does that make sense?

I think the referendum is on the deal subsequent to the withdrawal.

A lot of people have lost sight that the withdrawal agreement is just the first step in the process. It starts the process of leaving but is just a temporary measure until an actual deal is sorted out for how things will work long-term.

[ecc]

Hi aggi,

Thank you (I'm being sincere). That would make sense although it seems like a bit of a U-Turn to me. The whole thing is a total nightmare whatever one's opinion.

[nil_desperandum]

Hi aggi,

Thank you (I'm being sincere). That would make sense although it seems like a bit of a U-Turn to me. The whole thing is a total nightmare whatever one's opinion.

Just to be clear, (although you may already be): It's not back the deal and then have a confirmatory vote, it's back the deal and I'll give you a chance to vote on whether you want some form of People's Vote. That's far too vague and at present lacks any detail as to what might be on the ballot paper, and whether (e.g.) it would be a free vote.

[dsr]

May's proposal to get the Withdrawal Bill through:

So our New Brexit Deal makes a ten-point offer to everyone in Parliament who wants to deliver the result of the referendum.

One - the government will seek to conclude alternative arrangements to replace the backstop by December 2020, so that it never needs to be used.

Two - a commitment that, should the backstop come into force, the government will ensure that Great Britain will stay aligned with Northern Ireland.

She's talking bilge right from the start. Point 1 - she will use the next 19 months to try and achieve what she couldn't do in the previous 27. Without giving any clue as to how she will succeed.

Point 2 - assuming that she doesn't succeed, she will find another way to do what the EU wants. Not specified how, but clearly implying that if we can't keep the UK aligned the way we want to, we will keep the UK aligned the way the EU wants us to.

[If it be your will]

.

[Pstotto]

Hammond is right to say that the Leave voters feel betrayed by a Hard Brexit. That's because they want a Knard Brexit.

[HieronymousBoschHobs]

Ah, right! Bang on! We're getting somewhere, now.

I have a good and very learned lefty friend that agrees entirely that the EU is rotten, unreformable, neoliberal, undemocratic and unaccountable, corrupt and makes Corbyn's plans impossible. But refuses point blank to talk up the brexit cause for no other reason than it's dangerous. The door will be left wide open to a fascist dictatorship, he reckons.

That, I agree, is a small but horrifying possibility. It is a very good argument to remain - probably the best there is, in fact. A remain campaign based on those grounds would be at least be logical, but it wouldn't win. Which is why they went for the lies of 'remain and reform instead, which is, in fact complete b*******. As is the "You can get around EU law" and "The EU wouldn't prevent the implementation of Corbyn's manifesto".

I'm just addicted to seeing and saying the truth, though. So it doesn't work for me.

At the end of the day, this is why I can't get on board with the Lexiteers: I don't see how leaving the EU will result in anything but a right-ward shift in UK politics.

As for your comments about EU law hamstringing Corbyn, I'm not so sure: Poland and Hungary (far less powerful members than ourselves) seem to be getting away with murder at the moment.

[Lancasterclaret]

Peter Foster of the Telegraph summing this continuing issue up really, really, really well

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/11 ... 5652577280" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[martin_p]

The reaction, especially from her own party, to the 'bold new deal' really does spell the end for May. I reckon the Tories will let the disaster of the Euro elections play out then make a move to get rid at weekend or early next week. I don't think she's one for resigning so the 1922 committee will have to 'usurp democracy' and change their rules to allow another confidence vote. Then it's curtains for May.

[tiger76]

This says it all for me https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48351281 UK citizens are being denied a basic right to participate in the democratic process.

[aggi]

Just watched this interview with David Davies (not Davis), a Brexit supporting MP, being interrupted by a not so rational Brexit voter. You can see him thinking why the **** am I doing this as it goes on https://twitter.com/BBCWalesNews/status ... 2445579264" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?

Worth a watch just to see the level that political discourse in this country has fallen to

[If it be your will]

.

[AndyClaret]

Just watched this interview with David Davies (not Davis), a Brexit supporting MP, being interrupted by a not so rational Brexit voter. You can see him thinking why the **** am I doing this as it goes on https://twitter.com/BBCWalesNews/status ... 2445579264" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?

Worth a watch just to see the level that political discourse in this country has fallen to

A bit like the Stop Brexit bloke interrupting an MP being interviewed, then it was pointed out to him that the MP was a remainer.

[JohnMcGreal]

Just watched this interview with David Davies (not Davis), a Brexit supporting MP, being interrupted by a not so rational Brexit voter. You can see him thinking why the **** am I doing this as it goes on https://twitter.com/BBCWalesNews/status ... 2445579264" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?

Worth a watch just to see the level that political discourse in this country has fallen to

This reply is brilliant, and very apt:

https://twitter.com/MightMaggie/status/ ... 9486422016" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RingoMcCartney]

2008 - Labour bail out the banks and saves London based bankers jobs. Costing the nation billions.

The EU says , " that's fine."

2019 - The tories want to save thousands of steel workers jobs in the industrial north. Costing the nation millions.

The EU says, "No can do , UK"

Like the old Real Labour MPs always said, "the EU is a bankers club.

[aggi]

2008 - Labour bail out the banks and saves London based bankers jobs. Costing the nation billions.

The EU says , " that's fine."

2019 - The tories want to save thousands of steel workers jobs in the industrial north. Costing the nation millions.

The EU says, "No can do , UK"

Like the old Real Labour MPs always said, "the EU is a bankers club.

That's an outright lie though isn't it.

[Lancasterclaret]

2008 - Labour bail out the banks and saves London based bankers jobs. Costing the nation billions.

The EU says , " that's fine."

2019 - The tories want to save thousands of steel workers jobs in the industrial north. Costing the nation millions.

The EU says, "No can do , UK"

Like the old Real Labour MPs always said, "the EU is a bankers club.

I didn't think you could keep up your hot streak of "not making things up"

[CrosspoolClarets]

In a moment of incredible timing the Tory party have just sent me their member’s email newsletter, entitled “let’s keep in touch”. The irony for this most out of touch of parties is hilarious.

I only joined so that I could get a vote on the new leader, as a last stab to making them the party they used to be (I will join the SDP after Brexit unless something astonishing happens). But talk is of another stitch up to keep Boris off the ballot (I would prefer Raab personally, a more of a head for detail on these crucial times despite the Dover jokes, and a true advocate of social mobility)

[nil_desperandum]

I only joined so that I could get a vote on the new leader, as a last stab to making them the party they used to be (I will join the SDP after Brexit unless something astonishing happens).

What? You're going to join a party that ceased to exist in 1988. Stop chasing unicorns.

[Lancasterclaret]

In a moment of incredible timing the Tory party have just sent me their member’s email newsletter, entitled “let’s keep in touch”. The irony for this most out of touch of parties is hilarious.

I only joined so that I could get a vote on the new leader, as a last stab to making them the party they used to be (I will join the SDP after Brexit unless something astonishing happens). But talk is of another stitch up to keep Boris off the ballot (I would prefer Raab personally, a more of a head for detail on these crucial times despite the Dover jokes, and a true advocate of social mobility)

Its looking like she might go tonight.

I'm not sure how it helps like, but I think she has realised that she can't do anymore unless something drastic changes. And it isn't going to.

[RingoMcCartney]

I didn't think you could keep up your hot streak of "not making things up"

"Do the rules prevent support for the steel industry?

The EU Commission says too much steel is produced in Europe. As a result, it has been inclined to take a fairly tough line on state aid in this sector.

In 2016 for example, the commission ordered Belgium to recover 211m euros in illegal state aid it had given to its steel industry.

That does not mean all state aid is impossible, but the government would have to make a case that assistance was within the rules, or fell under one of the exemptions.

One possibility would be to argue that the steel industry was essential for national security, but it is far from clear the commission would accept that.

Would state aid be easier after Brexit?

If the UK left the EU single market, it would no longer formally be bound by the EU's state-aid rules.

However, the EU is concerned the UK could use Brexit as an opportunity to undermine the single market, by giving its companies an unfair advantage.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41392469" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Lancasterclaret]

That does not mean all state aid is impossible,

Cheers Ringo

You are doing rather well this week for agreeing with me.

[RingoMcCartney]

Cheers Ringo

You are doing rather well this week for agreeing with me.

Agreeing with you. You're more deluded than May!

Nobody's saying that not all state aid is impossible.

But stop picking and choosing which part of that sympathetic BBC report you want to ignore!

"As a result, it has been inclined to take a fairly tough line on state aid in this sector."

Hence the minister responsible admitting in Parliament just a few hours ago that his hands were tied and "we have to work within EU Rules"

Are you saying you know more about state aid rules than the minister in charge.

Oh hang on, forgot! You know more about everything than anyone.

Hold me hand up.

[Lancasterclaret]

Cheers again

We both agree that state aid for the steel industry is perfectly possible.

You and me will going out for a pint at this rate.

[RingoMcCartney]

Cheers again

We both agree that state aid for the steel industry is perfectly possible.

You and me will going out for a pint at this rate.

1 Has the government been able to bail out British steel?

Yes


Or



No?

2 Is it because it has to work "withing EU rules" that limit state aid.


Yes



Or



No?

[Lancasterclaret]

It hasn't tried

You do this all the time

its not as simple as you want it to be. I know you don't like going into specifics (because it ends really badly for you) but questions like this are complex.

I know enough to know that if the UK declared today that the jobs where safe and they were going to nationalise to save it, then it would take time before anything was done about it. Lots of people would say stuff, but actually doing something about it would take some time.

But the Conservatives don't bail out stuff like this, so its a moot point.

There are a couple of PDFs online about the Italian plant on Taranto in 2016 if you want to check it out.

[claret_in_exile]

Its looking like she might go tonight.

I'm not sure how it helps like, but I think she has realised that she can't do anymore unless something drastic changes. And it isn't going to.

They'll keep her in until after the European elections are announced. She'll be the scapegoat for their absolute drubbing.

After having the second vote offer thrown back in her face, I think she has realised there's nothing more for her to do. I would be amazed (though not surprised) if she stayed after the election votes are counted. They're projecting 7%!

[Lancasterclaret]

They'll keep her in until after the European elections are announced. She'll be the scapegoat for their absolute drubbing.

After having the second vote offer thrown back in her face, I think she has realised there's nothing more for her to do. I would be amazed (though not surprised) if she stayed after the election votes are counted. They're projecting 7%!

That sounds optimistic

I'll be amazed if they get that.

[Lowbankclaret]

So we bailed out the banks.

The EU owe British steel £120 million in payments for carbon reductions.

The EU will not let us save the Company.

God bless the EU for being so good for us.

[If it be your will]

.

[Lancasterclaret]

Very briefly:

Subsidising British Steel: Not allowed
Renationalising British Steel: Allowed
Renationalising then subsidising (or offering any other market advantage): Not allowed

You could play around with the exemptions to state aid rules, but you'd run the risk of every steel company in the EU taking you to court.

You know a bit more about this than me (not hard!) so in theory could you renationalise all the things that you want under a Lexit? ( I know you say you can't, so is there something different for steel as opposed to water utilities (for example)?

[cbx750]

Commons leader Andrea Leadsom has quit the cabinet, saying she no longer believes the government's approach will deliver Brexit.

[CrosspoolClarets]

What? You're going to join a party that ceased to exist in 1988. Stop chasing unicorns.

https://sdp.org.uk/new-declaration/

That’s me.

I think.

[dsr]

Very briefly:

Subsidising British Steel: Not allowed
Renationalising British Steel: Allowed
Renationalising then subsidising (or offering any other market advantage): Not allowed

You could play around with the exemptions to state aid rules, but you'd run the risk of every steel company in the EU taking you to court.

Surely if you nationalise a bankrupt company but aren't allowed to subsidise it, then it's still bankrupt and you won't save any jobs? I suppose they could cobble together a "rescue package" that looks good enough to persuade the purchaser (themselves) that they can invest in the company and rescue it, and by the time the process of the EU looking for illegal subsidies has been gone through, things would have moved on.

You would think that in the volatile and uncertain circumstances, the government could buy a small percentage of the company (new shares, not shares owned by existing shareholders) and use that investment to keep the company running until we know where we are. This would give the government a valuable asset, though possibly not that valuable, and they could always sell it later if things recover.

[If it be your will]

.