Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[littlebabyjesus]

well to take a single issue 'the EU would not allow nationalising of the rail' to which the answer as usual turned out to be yes and no, but full state ownership uncontested is off the cards. iirc. As for influencing its the EU's direction of travel, well I'm not going to speculate beyond 'I recon' on a counterfactual but from the overall behaviour of the entity we'd get nowhere with that change-from-within idea imo.

Rail would have been an interesting test case. My understanding of the new EU regs for rail is the same as yours, but there are other rather vague provisions within EU rules that allow for things to be done if they are judged to be in the national interest. Get-out clauses, basically. Would a new govt elected with full rail renationalisation as a clear manifesto objective be prevented from doing this by the EU? There are plenty of examples from elsewhere in the EU of its rules being openly flouted by large countries - France breaking the borrowing rules of the euro for years, for instance.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Now we actually have a choice that isn't Tory or Tory-lite then things have changed somewhat and we have a genuine chance at a centre-left government that will make some progress on addressing the serious inequality that has plagued this country for decades.
Pity it could have achieved so much more inside the EU but there we are.
As for a full blooded socialist government nationalising industries and seizing the means of production, Well SpackleFrog I admire your revolutionary zeal but Nope not going to happen not in my lifetime certainly, probably never.
People want fairness and social justice not socialism.

Social democracy cab achieve more inside the EU? Like Syriza you mean? You really are unrelentingly dense.

People do want fairness and justice. And they're never gonna get it on the basis of capitalism, and certainly not on the basis of neoliberalism, of the EU, or any of the other tired, outdated redundant ideas you cling too. People have already abandoned your politics en masse, not that you've noticed. People are searching for solutions, and that inevitably brings them closer and closer to Socialist ideas. So excuse me if I remain indifferent to your pessimism.

 

[SpackleFrog]

L

The opinion that a left-of-centre UK govt in the shape of Corbyn-led Labour could achieve more inside the EU than outside it is one worth examining, though. r/w UK govts have done a lot to shape the character of the EU over recent decades - what kind of influence in a different direction might a l/w govt have? What kinds of practical restraints on policy might a l/w govt outside the EU face? How might the interests of capital dictate to a post-brexit UK? Might they be strengthened, limiting the scope for action even more tightly?

We've had r/w govts everywhere in the EU for decades - how many l/w govts would have to get into power and stay in power before even the tiniest changes were seen?

 

[mojo pixy]

Corbyn has said he wouldn't change his remain vote.

Of course he has, what else could he say, realistically?

 

[sleaterkinney]

Of course he has, what else could he say, realistically?

You think he supports brexit but doesn't want to admit it?

 

[mojo pixy]

I think he's a politician and will say what he thinks he needs to say to keep his party together.

 

[BemusedbyLife]

Social democracy cab achieve more inside the EU? Like Syriza you mean? You really are unrelentingly dense.

People do want fairness and justice. And they're never gonna get it on the basis of capitalism, and certainly not on the basis of neoliberalism, of the EU, or any of the other tired, outdated redundant ideas you cling too. People have already abandoned your politics en masse, not that you've noticed. People are searching for solutions, and that inevitably brings them closer and closer to Socialist ideas. So excuse me if I remain indifferent to your pessimism.

Well looking at the votes cast in the last general election the number of votes cast for overtly Marxist/Socialist Parties (I'm excluding the Labour Party as guess you do) is under 2000 out of 32 million, I must confess I am very impressed by your optimism

 

[SpackleFrog]

You think he supports brexit but doesn't want to admit it?

He's *always* consistently opposed membership of the EU - right up until the point he became Labour leader anyway.

 

[sleaterkinney]

I think he's a politician and will say what he thinks he needs to say to keep his party together.

His party is for upholding the result, so why wouldn't he say he would change his vote now?.

It's a bit of a slight on his honesty to suggest he's lying - or is it just lexiters wishful thinking?

 

[mojo pixy]

It's not a slight on any politician to suggest that what they say is expedient rather than 100% frank. The word politician itself rather suggests expediency over honesty.

 

[elbows]

Brown is echoing some stuff that sounds familiar - anything new in this?

Former prime minister Gordon Brown has warned that the UK may hit a "crisis point next summer" as the UK edges closer to Brexit and held out the possibility that the UK may not leave the EU.

He said that he was not now advocating a second referendum, but suggested that there "may be scope for a reassessment" as voters began to realise, he suggested, that the promises of the Leave side of the referendum campaign would not be fulfilled.

He suggested that there could be a "game changer" from the EU side that allowed the UK to rethink.

Gordon Brown warns of Brexit 'crisis point'

 

[BemusedbyLife]

Brown is echoing some stuff that sounds familiar - anything new in this?
Gordon Brown warns of Brexit 'crisis point'

Nah I make no secret of the fact that I think voting to leave was the stupidest thing the population of this country has ever collectively done but I'm sure we're going to leave and let the shit land where it falls, I can only see 2 possible scenario's to stay, 1. The City finally loses its rag with the Tories and cuts off all that sweet cash they so love or 2. There's another election soon and a minority Labour government strikes a deal with the SNP to knock it on the head. I don't consider either scenario more than wild fantasies, Brexit has been the most divisive issue in this country since we broke from Rome and ain't nobody going to suddenly see sense. We're going to have to deal with this shit whatever it turns out to be.

 

[Winot]

A prediction of how it’s likely to go here (not sure who he is but it sounds plausible):

How Brexit will unfold – Britain will get a deal, but it’ll come at a price | Charles Grant

 

[Pickman's model]

A prediction of how it’s likely to go here (not sure who he is but it sounds plausible):

How Brexit will unfold – Britain will get a deal, but it’ll come at a price | Charles Grant

you could have done a quick google and his interest would have become apparent Charles Grant

 

[BemusedbyLife]

He's undoubtably a lot more qualified on the subject than anyone on these forums but he's assuming that the politicians are acting rationally, dangerous assumption especially with the tossers doing the negotiating for the UK

 

[SaskiaJayne]

While no 'leading politicians'(if that is the correct phrase)& also those like Gord whose opinions might be considered newsworthy are actually yet coming out & stating publicly this whole thing is not fit for purpose, brexit should be stopped. & politics should just get back to normal things like running the country they are getting closer to it. Heseltine on R4 this lunchtime was on much the same tack.

I think Gord is about right on the timing though. It will take until around the middle of next yr for it to either have some sort of workable agreement properly taking shape or the whole thing will have descended into chaos & something seismic will occur.

 

[Pickman's model]

While no 'leading politicians'(if that is the correct phrase)& also those like Gord whose opinions might be considered newsworthy are actually yet coming out & stating publicly this whole thing is not fit for purpose, brexit should be stopped. & politics should just get back to normal things like running the country they are getting closer to it. Heseltine on R4 this lunchtime was on much the same tack.

I think Gord is about right on the timing though. It will take until around the middle of next yr for it to either have some sort of workable agreement properly taking shape or the whole thing will have descended into chaos & something seismic will occur.

By next June we will be burning politicians at the stake for being mildly inconsiderate to someone 30 years ago

Bring it on

 

[kabbes]

At this point, the momentum seems to be more towards a slower exit rather than a cancelled one. It has the feel of countless projects I have been involved with over the years — somebody sets an unrealistic deadline, everybody pretends that deadline has been writ by God himself and panics trying to achieve it and then as the deadline approaches people start asking why that deadline actually is the deadline and it gets pushed further out. Generally, the bigger the project, the more this happens, and with several iterations of it to boot. Eventually, the project does achieve its end (with some or all of its goals), but rarely to the original date.

 

[not-bono-ever]

May is being utterly stupid on attempting to set a fixed departure date. She really has no fucking intelligence or grasp on reality at all

 

[kebabking]

May is being utterly stupid on attempting to set a fixed departure date. She really has no fucking intelligence or grasp on reality at all

On the contrary, she's making a virtue out of a necessity - according to the A50 process the UK will fall out of the EU on the 2nd anniversary of the triggering of A50 unless the UK government asks for an extension, which the rest of the EU is not obligated by the treaty to agree to. The UK government is not going to ask for such an extension for several reasons, one being that it knows that the granting of that extension will be a negotiation requiring concessions in itself, another being that it doesn't believe that an extension will change much within the negotiations - the EU doesn't want to make a trade deal with the UK before it leaves (for several reasons), so the Government view is that we would go from a two year negotiation where one side doesn't really want to play, to a four year negotiation where one side doesn't really want to play.

I voted remain by the way...

 

[Silas Loom]

May saying she “will not tolerate” any enemy-of-the-people stuff from Westminster w/r/t the glorious march over the cliff. I wonder if that means that the whip will end up being withdrawn from Clarke and Soubry? May tends to fuck up showdowns. Hopefully, if she decides to play hardball with the remainist backbenchers, she’ll miscalculate and lose her majority.

 

[SpookyFrank]

May saying she “will not tolerate” any enemy-of-the-people stuff from Westminster w/r/t the glorious march over the cliff. I wonder if that means that the whip will end up being withdrawn from Clarke and Soubry? May tends to fuck up showdowns. Hopefully, if she decides to play hardball with the remainist backbenchers, she’ll miscalculate and lose her majority.

She can't withdraw the whip from anyone at all with the numbers as they are.

 

[Silas Loom]

She can't withdraw the whip from anyone at all with the numbers as they are.

You'd have thought so, but in that case, what does "will not tolerate" even mean?

 

[SpookyFrank]

You'd have thought so, but in that case, what does "will not tolerate" even mean?

Nothing if we assume that she can tolerate the ruin of her own premiership even less.

 

[kebabking]

She can't withdraw the whip from anyone at all with the numbers as they are.

Depends on timing I would say - with, say, a month to go for the exit date and it being obvious that there won't be a deal - she could probably withdraw the whip from quite a few. At that stage Labour aren't going to try and stop Brexit, the political cost at home would be too high so they might criticise, but they aren't going to try to stop it. So who can these ex-tory rebels vote with to stop it?

in a vote of no confidence, even abstaining would end their careers, and they aren't going to vote for Corbyn to become PM - and neither are the DUP.

She doesn't need a majority of the house to be Tory and DUP, she just needs a majority who don't want to end their careers or want Corbyn to be PM. That's all that matters in a vote of no confidence, she needs 50%+1, where those votes come from, whether signed up Tories and DUP or 'independants' is of no consequence...

 

[Silas Loom]

Depends on timing I would say - with, say, a month to go for the exit date and it being obvious that there won't be a deal - she could probably withdraw the whip from quite a few. At that stage Labour aren't going to try and stop Brexit, the political cost at home would be too high so they might criticise, but they aren't going to try to stop it. So who can these ex-tory rebels vote with to stop it?

in a vote of no confidence, even abstaining would end their careers, and they aren't going to vote for Corbyn to become PM - and neither are the DUP.

She doesn't need a majority of the house to be Tory and DUP, she just needs a majority who don't want to end their careers or want Corbyn to be PM. That's all that matters in a vote of no confidence, she needs 50%+1, where those votes come from, whether signed up Tories and DUP or 'independants' is of no consequence...

Historically, any defeat of the government on a major policy issue has been treated as a lost vote of confidence. How that plays with the definition of VONCs in the FTPA is complicated and untested, I was reading up on this when thinking about the opportunities for the House to oust Johnson.

 

[kebabking]

Historically, any defeat of the government on a major policy issue has been treated as a lost vote of confidence. How that plays with the definition of VONCs in the FTPA is complicated and untested, I was reading up on this when thinking about the opportunities for the House to oust Johnson.

I fear that 'historically' is no longer applicable - particularly if she were to win a no confidence vote immediately afterwards.

Cameron lost a 'war and peace' vote in the commons as part of a coalition, there was no subsequent NC vote and it wasn't treated as such, whereas historically it would have been.

 

[Silas Loom]

I fear that 'historically' is no longer applicable - particularly if she were to win a no confidence vote immediately afterwards.

Cameron lost a 'war and peace' vote in the commons as part of a coalition, there was no subsequent NC vote and it wasn't treated as such, whereas historically it would have been.

I actually see this as a good thing (cf the Govt of National Unity thread), in that - if you're right - there's an opportunity for Tory rebels and the rump of Labour to push a BINO or kick the can, without triggering an election in which parties and candidates on both sides might be forced to sign up to a Lancaster House position.

Whether or not one is enthused by the prospect of a Corbyn government, there's no reason for optimism that Corbyn would win any election following a government collapse - the latest YouGovs show Lab has made not a dent in the Tory share of vote, despite the shambles May is making of government. The risk of May getting her majority back is real; so is the current opportunity to thwart hard Brexit in Westminster.

 

[ruffneck23]

EU playing hardball

The EU just warned Britain it has 14 days to stop Brexit being a disaster

and why not the ball is so in their court

 

[Silas Loom]

Good trend now on the polling air cover for a reverse ferret: