Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[danny la rouge]

I think it's been a mistake for Labour to just keep talking about "6 tests" without summarizing what they mean. It's a bit abstract - better would have been to add a couple of sentences each time explaining that it meant keeping environmental and worker protections (which aren't even explicitly mentioned), maintaining strong security contacts with the EU, etc, etc.

I don't think they seriously wanted any inspection of their tests. They just wanted a sonic screwdriver to wave at the Tories. "You're in charge of the negotiations. We have this doohicky. But look: your negotiating is crap".

 

[Winot]

I think it's been a mistake for Labour to just keep talking about "6 tests" without summarizing what they mean. It's a bit abstract - better would have been to add a couple of sentences each time explaining that it meant keeping environmental and worker protections (which aren't even explicitly mentioned), maintaining strong security contacts with the EU, etc, etc.

The 6 tests are a nonsense though - the 'exact same benefit' language was Keir Starmer quoting David Davies back at him in a "ah gotcha" moment. It wasn't a stupid thing to do politically at the time, but hanging the entirety of Labour's Brexit policy on it and saying nothing else was stupid (of course they couldn't really have said more without having one - and they can't have one which satisfies both Corbyn and Starmer).

 

[TopCat]

grape, wine and piss

Any chance to all fuck off on a whimsical tangent. I blame brexit.

 

[Wilf]

The 6 test thing was a logical starting point, an entry into the issue of whether can we get social democracy and a decent degree of regulation inside the EU or outside (to be clear, I don't believe you can get either, but I'm talking about Labour's analysis and strategy). It should have been about the world they wanted, the active campaigns they sought to build and the rest, but just became a defensive way of dealing with brexit in interviews. They've waited for the tories to fuck up and deliver the keys to number 10 to corbyn, largely through McDonnell or Starmer coming out with varying statements and minor shifts. But it hasn't worked. For all their fuck ups, the tories are still in power and, even now (to me at least) are favourites to win the next election.

edit: as danny la rouge said, 3 posts ago.

 

[Winot]

The 6 test thing was a logical starting point, an entry into the issue of whether can we get social democracy and a decent degree of regulation inside the EU or outside (to be clear, I don't believe you can get either, but I'm talking about Labour's analysis and strategy). It should have been about the world they wanted, the active campaigns they sought to build and the rest, but just became a defensive way of dealing with brexit in interviews. They've waited for the tories to fuck up and deliver the keys to number 10 to corbyn, largely through McDonnell or Starmer coming out with varying statements and minor shifts. But it hasn't worked. For all their fuck ups, the tories are still in power and, even now (to me at least) are favourites to win the next election.

Agree with all of this.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The 6 test thing was a logical starting point, an entry into the issue of whether can we get social democracy and a decent degree of regulation inside the EU or outside (to be clear, I don't believe you can get either, but I'm talking about Labour's analysis and strategy). It should have been about the world they wanted, the active campaigns they sought to build and the rest, but just became a defensive way of dealing with brexit in interviews. They've waited for the tories to fuck up and deliver the keys to number 10 to corbyn, largely through McDonnell or Starmer coming out with varying statements and minor shifts. But it hasn't worked. For all their fuck ups, the tories are still in power and, even now (to me at least) are favourites to win the next election.

tbh it appears to me like Labour have been banking on the tories doing brexit (or indeed abandoning brexit) and that breaking them in such a way that Labour get back in, but brexit has been done one way or another. Labour's actions have in no way prepared them for an eventuality in which they get back in and brexit still hasn't been done.

 

[Kaka Tim]

i think one of the fundamental problems with a 2 ref is what you have on the ballot paper?
there are very good arguments for not having "no deal - just fuck off now" on there - because it would be chaotic and destructive and no government will want to do it - and parliament may well block it even if it did.
the only way that would go on is if whoever was supporting 2nd ref was absolutely certain it was not going to win - and even then it would be a massive gamble.
But if "no deal" is not on there - what do you have as a brexit option? may's shitty deal that everyone hates? or a "renegotiation" (which the EU has already said is not going to happen). Without a proper "brexit" option the referendum is severely lacking in any kind of legitimacy. The whole thing would be seen (correctly) as a massive stitch up.
I also think that there is no guarantee that "remain" would win. there is evidence of some movement - but its not massive and polling is always uncertain. you'd need to see remain consistently polling at 60% or above to be in anyway sure.
It would be more honest for parliament to just rescind A50 and be honest with the voters - "sorry - but its a massive fuck up - we did our best but - tbh - tough shit. blame cameron."
Thats why i think 2nd ref failing to get off the ground, no deal looming, escalating panic and a last minute pressing of the big red "stop!" button is a plausible scenario.

 

[philosophical]

While that is of course an issue that exercises people near that border and (to a degree) those responsible for the negotiations, I think you're overestimating it as a killer point on the path to the ballot box.

I believe that another referendum will be meaningless without a border solution, because without a solution there can be no brexit as the UK is discovering at the moment and as lots of people have realised since before the last vote.

 

[not-bono-ever]

So has the AG Cox not resigned yet ?

Mays leadership leaves a trail of bodies that puts napoleons retreat from Moscow to shame

 

[danny la rouge]

I believe that another referendum will be meaningless without a border solution, because without a solution there can be no brexit as the UK is discovering at the moment and as lots of people have realised since before the last vote.

I know you believe that.

 

[Wilf]

So has the AG Cox not resigned yet ?

Mays leadership leaves a trail of bodies that puts napoleons retreat from Moscow to shame

I was wondering the same thing. Government is agreed to have held Parliament in contempt and nobody resigns - it's not so much a breach of some fucking ancient protocol, it's fucking shameless.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

It would be more honest for parliament to just rescind A50 and be honest with the voters - "sorry - but its a massive fuck up - we did our best but - tbh - tough shit. blame cameron."

Strikes me as the best option.

 

[not-bono-ever]

Bang to rights Theresa. Take her down

 

[not-bono-ever]

It’s pretty astounding /Not astounding that she fought to hide this. Columbo would have kept unexpectedly popping into number 10 if he had been assigned this case

“ something that’s been bothering me prime minister....”

 

[The Fornicator]

The Back Stop looks impossible in this form. Surely the Advice must lead to a renegotiation, god knows by whom.

 

[Patteran]

If Corbyn promises a second referendum he'll probably lose the votes of most of the Labour Brexit voters - "Vote for me and I'll see about overturning your earlier vote" isn't much of a platform - and he'll likely discover that most Tory Remainers would sooner leave the EU than have him as PM.

Right on cue.

 

[TopCat]

Anyone summarise the advice?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Fucking tories conflating 'the tory interest' with 'the national interest'. It was May's big play yesterday as well. Bastards will be trotting that fucking line out again and again and again.

 

[Crispy]

The advice is here btw:

Exiting the EU: Publication of Legal Advice

 

[SpackleFrog]

This article is an instructive read about Labour and the EU - (I've posted it before, but it's worth another look). Labour has no internal infrastructure for making a decent lexit argument. It's a minority crank position in the party, and two years wouldn't have changed that. Helen Thompson | Returning to Democracy: The British Left and the Constitutional Temptation of the European Union - Judicial Power Project

They could have made a start in two years.

 

[TopCat]

The advice is here btw:

Exiting the EU: Publication of Legal Advice

Ta.

 

[sleaterkinney]

This article is an instructive read about Labour and the EU - (I've posted it before, but it's worth another look). Labour has no internal infrastructure for making a decent lexit argument. It's a minority crank position in the party, and two years wouldn't have changed that.

Same with Brexit and the Tories.

 

[Pickman's model]

The advice is here btw:

Exiting the EU: Publication of Legal Advice

i am confused how they managed to make the gist of it into a 50 page document the other day

 

[The Fornicator]

There's no point reading the Advice. It's particularly cunning and opaque - lawyers will reflect on it over today and there will be much analysis of the analysis. Fwiw, I want to hear more of the potential for NI staying in the customs union alone. Obv. can't happen.

Starting point is Article 50 says you can leave unilaterally, Back Stop says 'not without our consent' - after which the potential of it gets very, very tricky and intentionally opaque.

Instinct is it's a well disguised bait and switch, hence they didn't want to publish.

 

[killer b]

Same with Brexit and the Tories.

Sorry, but this just isn't true. They may be cranks, but they've enjoyed majority support by the membership and a large base in parliament for decades.

 

[killer b]

They could have made a start in two years.

Which would have made recent Labour infighting look like pure tranquility. There would have been a formal split, with a substantial part of the membership leaving too.

 

[Winot]

There's no point reading the Advice. It's particularly cunning and opaque - lawyers will reflect on it over today and there will be much analysis of the analysis. Fwiw, I want to hear more of the potential for NI staying in the customs union alone. Obv. can't happen.

Starting point is Article 50 says you can leave unilaterally, Back Stop says 'not without our consent' - after which the potential of it gets very, very tricky and intentionally opaque.

Instinct is it's a well disguised bait and switch, hence they didn't want to publish.

The advice is fairly clear imo. There's nothing particularly surprising in there.

Not sure what you mean by bait and switch - you think they are gearing up to revoke Art 50?

 

[The Fornicator]

One issue flagged up so far relates to the temp Back Stop not being a temp measure at all, but over time having the potential to lead to different outcomes for GB and NI.

Arlene Foster last seen reaching into her hadnbag for the knuckledusters.

Sections 26-30.

 

[The Fornicator]

The advice is fairly clear imo.

Get back to me when you're earning £500,000 a year giving professional advice and not a bloke on the internet.

 

[Winot]

Get back to me when you're earning £500,000 a year giving professional advice and not a bloke on the internet.