Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[martin_p]

I used to think that but now doubt that there is no way to do that without undermining the future negotiating position with the EU. As the threat of no deal to get a deal would most likely be undermined.

You’ve changed your argument now, you said it would be unfair not undermine getting a deal (that old classic).

[summitclaret]

What do you think the Supreme Court's job is?

If parliament votes for referendum legislation then they have decided what the question is. Whether the question is fair or not is not something the supreme court decides. The ONLY thing they decide is the legality of the process that led to the question being set.

And in voting for an unfair question will have ignored the advice of EC. I don't know what the law says about that but ir would certainly not be natural justice to allow an unfair question

[summitclaret]

You’ve changed your argument now, you said it would be unfair not undermine getting a deal (that old classic).

Why can't it be both?

[AndrewJB]

The fact is those on the more liberal/left side of the scale are utterly desperate that they resort to smear campaigns because their own arguments no longer stand up to the people.

Politicians who lie shock horror.. every single one of them lie. The worst era being the new labour under Blair with his spin and sleaze.

As you were.

Don't you think though, that the sleaze and lies that surround Johnson will ultimately make him too toxic for voters? We know from recent experience that the character of a party leader is put under a great deal of scrutiny, and their perceived failings widely publicised. There's a certain class of Tory voters who consider lying, and (perhaps unfairly) Johnson's personal life choices to be dishonourable. If he continues to fail as PM, how long do you think he has?

[martin_p]

Why can't it be both?

So explain to me why a three option referendum where you order your preferences would be unfair then because your previous answer was nothing to do with fairness.

[Lancasterclaret]

More detailed stuff on Johnsons deal

Not looking good

https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-anal ... h-problems" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AndyClaret]

And for anyone who says a message on the side of a red bus and posters of Farage with lots of refugees in the background etc weren't taken seriously by anyone and didnt influence the leave vote I give you evidence item #1 above

Just reporting what "experts" are saying, if you don't like it, take it up with them.

[Lancasterclaret]

Steve Baker MP (trustworthy apparently) struggling with claiming such technology to run a frictionless Irish border exists, but unable to give an example of where it has been used anywhere else.

Just reinforces the need for a backstop if we haven't got the tech, and the inability of the anti-backstop supporters to have concrete and credible proposals suggests that they don't know when it will be available either (or of course, it might never exist or more likely, cannot be used in the way that would be required on the Irish border)

https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status ... 6374102018" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Lancasterclaret]

Steve Baker MP (trustworthy apparently) struggling with claiming such technology to run a frictionless Irish border exists, but unable to give an example of where it has been used anywhere else.

Just reinforces the need for a backstop if we haven't got the tech, and the inability of the anti-backstop supporters to have concrete and credible proposals suggests that they don't know when it will be available either (or of course, it might never exist or more likely, cannot be used in the way that would be required on the Irish border)

https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status ... 6374102018" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Essentially the same argument that was in 2016, in 2017, in 2018 and now in 2019. We've got no closer to alternative arrangements in four years.

Why should anyone believe that we'd be ready to deploy it in two years?

[willsclarets]

More detailed stuff on Johnsons deal

Not looking good

https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-anal ... h-problems" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

While I'm not certain, like Jo Swinson and Nicola Sturgeon, that this proposal was "designed to fail" (I think Johnson would benefit massively from getting a deal through), I can't see a customs solution that's going to get universal approval in 10 days. Or ever. Any shifts towards a hard border are a threat to the peace process, any necessary checks that are moved away into different parts of the supply chain in different locations are a threat to the single market. Not withstanding the fact that NI would have to continually and indefinitely debate the issue moving forward.

[Mala591]

Johnson's 'draft plan' will have a certain amount of negotiation flexibility built into it and I suspect that a customs and single market border down the Irish Sea is still a possibility until a 'technological solution' is available which has passed real life trading scenarios.

[Lancasterclaret]

Johnson's 'draft plan' will have certain negotiation flexibility built into it and I suspect that a customs and single market border down the Irish Sea is still a possibility until a 'technological solution' is available which has passed real life trading scenarios.

But that would mean 10 DUP votes against straight away.

That would kill it.

I agree that it makes sense, but its has to get through Parliament and be acceptable to the EU.

The time scale alone makes that nearly impossible, and the pillock has painted himself into a corner by insisting that we leave on Oct 31st.

Course, he might well be relying on being forced to ask for an extension to get his deal through, but I just can't see that level of planning after the disastrous start to his premiership.

[Devils_Advocate]

Just reporting what "experts" are saying, if you don't like it, take it up with them.

Which experts? This is a story (smear) given to the press by Cummings which has no substance to it and is full of holes like claiming No1o will be launching an investigation into the collusion when it doesn't even have the authority to do so

[Mala591]

But that would mean 10 DUP votes against straight away.

That would kill it.

I agree that it makes sense, but its has to get through Parliament and be acceptable to the EU.

The time scale alone makes that nearly impossible, and the pillock has painted himself into a corner by insisting that we leave on Oct 31st.

Course, he might well be relying on being forced to ask for an extension to get his deal through, but I just can't see that level of planning after the disastrous start to his premiership.

Yes I agree, he will lose DUP support but might gain 50 labour MP votes. Massive long term financial investment in NI might help pacify the DUP to some extent.

[Lancasterclaret]

Yes I agree, he will lose DUP support but might gain 50 labour MP votes. Massive long term financial investment in NI might help pacify the DUP to some extent.

He won't gain that many.

If he was serious about Labour MPs support, he'd have come back from the supreme court defeat in a conciliatory mood.

Assuming the EU agree to his deal, there is a chance of Labour support, but they are essentially backing a Tory Brexit and pretty much guaranteeing a Tory election win.

Thats a big step

[summitclaret]

So explain to me why a three option referendum where you order your preferences would be unfair then because your previous answer was nothing to do with fairness.

Because remainers would just tick 1 option whilst some leavers, many? leavers might tick 2. I would put a proper brexit first (if that ever made it on a ballot) and no deal second as I expect most would. However as I say, all remainers have to do is tick remain and they would always beat leave.

[Mala591]

He won't gain that many.

If he was serious about Labour MPs support, he'd have come back from the supreme court defeat in a conciliatory mood.

Assuming the EU agree to his deal, there is a chance of Labour support, but they are essentially backing a Tory Brexit and pretty much guaranteeing a Tory election win.

Thats a big step

It is a big step but it would be a big DEMOCRATIC step.

[Lancasterclaret]

Because remainers would just tick 1 option whilst some leavers, many? leavers might tick 2. I would put a proper brexit first (if that ever made it on a ballot) and no deal second as I expect most would. However as I say, alk remainers have to do is tick remain and they would always beat leave.

This is now when I ask you what a proper Brexit is?

And then when you reply, I then ask you why you back Johnstons plan which isn't a proper Brexit?

[Lancasterclaret]

It is a big step but it would be a big DEMOCRATIC step.

Who for?

They were elected as Labour MPs.

They weren't elected to pass a Tory Brexit plan.

[AndyClaret]

Who for?

They were elected as Labour MPs.

They weren't elected to pass a Tory Brexit plan.

Many faced being purged by Momentum anyway, there hardly going to be loyal to Corbyn.

[Lancasterclaret]

https://twitter.com/GuyReuters/status/1 ... 3676107776" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Plan to give Stormont Veto (essentially the bit that puts the DUP onside) not acceptable.

Bizarre to put it mildly that they thought that bit had a chance.

[Lancasterclaret]

Many faced being purged by Momentum anyway, there hardly going to be loyal to Corbyn.

Not sure that applies to any of the likely backers of this plan to be fair?

None of them are Jewish for starters

[summitclaret]

This is now when I ask you what a proper Brexit is?

And then when you reply, I then ask you why you back Johnstons plan which isn't a proper Brexit?

We have that to death.

[AlargeClaret]

https://twitter.com/GuyReuters/status/1 ... 3676107776

Plan to give Stormont Veto (essentially the bit that puts the DUP onside) not acceptable.

Bizarre to put it mildly that they thought that bit had a chance.

But isnt this part of a “bargaining chip” ( ie. the plan must have some leeways) ,whereas ,if it looks like enough labour mp’s will back the deal then the DUP can be told to sling their hook?

[jontybfc]

Just reporting what "experts" are saying, if you don't like it, take it up with them.

Please could we have the experts? (I know DA has asked this but it's not been answered yet).

[Lancasterclaret]

But isnt this part of a “bargaining chip” ( ie. the plan must have some leeways) ,whereas ,if it looks like enough labour mp’s will back the deal then the DUP can be told to sling their hook?

Numbers don't add up with that one.

They'd need twenty plus.

Can't see them getting that, but who knows?

One thing I think I'm confident on, if they can get a version of this plan through the EU, then it will pass through Parliament.

But that would involve a lot of changes to the current plan, and those changes would alienate ERG/DUP

[AlargeClaret]

Numbers don't add up with that one.

They'd need twenty plus.

Can't see them getting that, but who knows?

One thing I think I'm confident on, if they can get a version of this plan through the EU, then it will pass through Parliament.

But that would involve a lot of changes to the current plan, and those changes would alienate ERG/DUP

Can’t argue with that tbh. I’m amazed the ERG are even on board with Boris’s “ May re-heated “ effort but then again a deal going through no matter how crap would likely rejuvenate the Tories and a whiff of power and Boris’s “ thank you’s” could keep the ERG happy ...possibly

[aggi]

He won't gain that many.

If he was serious about Labour MPs support, he'd have come back from the supreme court defeat in a conciliatory mood.

Assuming the EU agree to his deal, there is a chance of Labour support, but they are essentially backing a Tory Brexit and pretty much guaranteeing a Tory election win.

Thats a big step

Which doesn't look that good in the short term. However, politically, there is capital to be made from Labour being able to say that it was a Tory Brexit plan and what happens afterwards isn't their fault.

[AndyClaret]

Please could we have the experts? (I know DA has asked this but it's not been answered yet).

see post 16493.

[Lancasterclaret]

Which doesn't look that good in the short term. However, politically, there is capital to be made from Labour being able to say that it was a Tory Brexit plan and what happens afterwards isn't their fault.

There is that, but those Labour MPs will still have voted for it, and it means they almost certainly disobeyed the Leadership to do it.

That won't look good to them or the leadership.

Mind you, if Corbyn is still labour leader if they lose another election then that will be the least of their problems!

[summitclaret]

Can’t argue with that tbh. I’m amazed the ERG are even on board with Boris’s “ May re-heated “ effort but then again a deal going through no matter how crap would likely rejuvenate the Tories and a whiff of power and Boris’s “ thank you’s” could keep the ERG happy ...possibly

A major difference is that he makes it explicit that we want a free trade deal at the next stage. May's was neutral.

[jontybfc]

see post 16493.

So no one then.

[Devils_Advocate]

So no one then.

Yep see post 16499

[willsclarets]

Which doesn't look that good in the short term. However, politically, there is capital to be made from Labour being able to say that it was a Tory Brexit plan and what happens afterwards isn't their fault.

It would still be a plan they backed, I don't think there's any capital to be made politically, and any deal is at odds with Corbyn's "wait and see" neutral stance prior to asking the public on a Labour deal with the EU post-election. Essentially Corbyn's stance makes it impossible from a party perspective for a new proposal to be voted in. Taken to it's logical conclusion, what both labour and the lib-dems want is a rejection of this proposal and a no-deal brexit blocked before a general election is held. But that's party politics, what Labour MPs vote for personally in the commons might well mean a deal would get through parliament, I think there might be enough Labour MPs that swing in favour of a EU backed deal for sure. But if that happens it won't be about party political gain.

[AndyClaret]

Mark Francois, ERG supports the deal
Alistair Burt, whip withdrawn tory, reacts positively to it.

[Lancasterclaret]

It would still be a plan they backed, I don't think there's any capital to be made politically, and any deal is at odds with Corbyn's "wait and see" neutral stance prior to asking the public on a Labour deal with the EU post-election. Essentially Corbyn's stance makes it impossible from a party perspective for a new proposal to be voted in. Taken to it's logical conclusion, what both labour and the lib-dems want is a rejection of this proposal and a no-deal brexit blocked before a general election is held. But that's party politics, what Labour MPs vote for personally in the commons might well mean a deal would get through parliament, I think there might be enough Labour MPs that swing in favour of a EU backed deal for sure. But if that happens it won't be about party political gain.

They only need three to pass it in its current form, but as the current form isn't acceptable to the EU, any compromises have to make sure more Lab MPs back it to counter balance those that will drop out.

Essentially, Parliamentary mathematics are against him unless he signs up for a deal that includes a CU.

[AndyClaret]

Frank Field suggests an indicitive vote before the EU summit.

Greg Clarke and Gauke sound positive.

[Lancasterclaret]

Frank Field suggests an indicitive vote before the EU summit.

Greg Clarke and Gauke sound positive.

Indicative votes don't really help in this case.

If the EU accept the deal, it will pass Parliament no problem

[CrosspoolClarets]

This will clearly pass the Commons now, today makes that clear, so it is a total game changer. It now becomes a political, not a safety, issue. In other words, how do the EU stop us becoming a trading rival to their single market and customs union?

EU attempt 1 - for the U.K. to remain in a customs union (May’s deal and the backstop).

Attempt 1 failed, the public, NI and the Commons all rejected it.

EU attempt 2 (imminent) - probably to gamble on a U.K. election because worst case for them remains Boris, as now.

If attempt 2 fails (I see that as highly probable if not certain) then, finally, it will be up to the EU to come up with ideas themselves that still leaves the U.K. in a customs union of our own.

So....basically I see it as very probable we will leave either on this proposal or on an EU variant (e.g. Stormont doesn’t agree changes, a committee mix of EU, Commons and Stormont does). All Benn Bill does is make no deal more likely because it is uncertain if No. 10 has a trick up their sleeve to bypass it.

[AndyClaret]

Several Labour MP's defying Corbyn's orders not to support the deal, Barry Shearman suggests cross-party talks should start up again.

[Lancasterclaret]

This will clearly pass the Commons now, today makes that clear, so it is a total game changer. It now becomes a political, not a safety, issue. In other words, how do the EU stop us becoming a trading rival to their single market and customs union?

EU attempt 1 - for the U.K. to remain in a customs union (May’s deal and the backstop).

Attempt 1 failed, the public, NI and the Commons all rejected it.

EU attempt 2 (imminent) - probably to gamble on a U.K. election because worst case for them remains Boris, as now.

If attempt 2 fails (I see that as highly probable if not certain) then, finally, it will be up to the EU to come up with ideas themselves that still leaves the U.K. in a customs union of our own.

So....basically I see it as very probable we will leave either on this proposal or on an EU variant (e.g. Stormont doesn’t agree changes, a committee mix of EU, Commons and Stormont does). All Benn Bill does is make no deal more likely because it is uncertain if No. 10 has a trick up their sleeve to bypass it.

You need to stop viewing this from a Brexiteer point of view CC.

Us passing the deal through parliament in an indicitive vote is meaningless if the EU don't accept it.

This deal is very pro-Brexit, its not got a lot that the EU can agree to without throwing Ireland under the bus, which it will never do.

The cynic in me is screaming "this is all a con to make sure the Johnston wins his battle to be seen to be reasonable and the EU not to be"

[Lancasterclaret]

What is being said by Johnson does not tally with what is in the white paper sent to the EU yesterday.

It just doesn't add up

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/statu ... 2420041732" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[JohnMcGreal]

I didn't think this would need saying, but evidently it does, going off the last few pages of this thread:

It doesn't matter if 500 MPs are prepared to vote for a deal, if that proposal is unacceptable to the EU. Having an indicative vote on it would be like voting for a fantasy. It would be voting for something that doesn't exist.

[AndyClaret]

You need to stop viewing this from a Brexiteer point of view CC.

Us passing the deal through parliament in an indicitive vote is meaningless if the EU don't accept it.

This deal is very pro-Brexit, its not got a lot that the EU can agree to without throwing Ireland under the bus, which it will never do.

The cynic in me is screaming "this is all a con to make sure the Johnston wins his battle to be seen to be reasonable and the EU not to be"

We have been repeatedly told though that the EU won't offer any concessions because they were unsure if they would be passed by a vote.

[willsclarets]

It's difficult not to be cynical about Johnson's motivation, but it might be possible he's genuinely trying to pass a deal by leveraging pressure in Brussels to avoid a no deal. That said, the more you read about the proposal the more it seems impossible the EU could possibly accept it. The Ireland impasse looks as big a void as it always has to me.

[aggi]

I didn't think this would need saying, but evidently it does, going off the last few pages of this thread:

It doesn't matter if 500 MPs are prepared to vote for a deal, if that proposal is unacceptable to the EU. Having an indicative vote on it would be like voting for a fantasy. It would be voting for something that doesn't exist.

It would increase the pressure on the EU though if Parliament showed that the deal would be approved.

It also boosts the narrative that No Deal would be the EU's fault, not the UK.

[aggi]

It would still be a plan they backed, I don't think there's any capital to be made politically, and any deal is at odds with Corbyn's "wait and see" neutral stance prior to asking the public on a Labour deal with the EU post-election. Essentially Corbyn's stance makes it impossible from a party perspective for a new proposal to be voted in. Taken to it's logical conclusion, what both labour and the lib-dems want is a rejection of this proposal and a no-deal brexit blocked before a general election is held. But that's party politics, what Labour MPs vote for personally in the commons might well mean a deal would get through parliament, I think there might be enough Labour MPs that swing in favour of a EU backed deal for sure. But if that happens it won't be about party political gain.

I was more thinking in terms of a small number of Labour MPs (some of whom would probably end up being deselected) backing it rather than it being policy.

[aggi]

I did find the Anna Soubry comment amusing though:

“I congratulate the Prime Minister on getting a deal with the ERG and the DUP”

[Lancasterclaret]

Not a single DUP MP in the chamber.

Thats pretty significant

Surely they would be there if they thought it was credible?

[willsclarets]

It would increase the pressure on the EU though if Parliament showed that the deal would be approved.

It also boosts the narrative that No Deal would be the EU's fault, not the UK.

From the EU's perspective, they can still claim Johnson's proposal was closer to meeting objectives but in the relatively minuscule timescale available it was impossible to feasibly strike a workable deal with regard to customs. They still hold the very strong card, narrative wise, that the time wasted since 2016 has made a no deal inevitable should that come to fruition.