EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

Interesting developments on the (farcical) Dominic Cummings saga

https://twitter.com/amberdebotton/status/1004369020471185408

(Background: The Speaker agreed today that the issue - of what to do about Dominic's no-show before the DCMS - can be debated in the house tomorrow)

Keir Starmer explicitly rules it out in the BBC link I posted... :(

What am I missing? I don't see it? I do see this:

Brexit minister Suella Braverman said: "Labour have shattered their promise to respect the referendum result - this amendment means accepting free movement and continuing to follow EU rules with absolutely no say in them, which is the worst of all worlds."

Okay, I see this, which is pretty explicit but unclear where it comes from? The amendment draft shared on Twitter didn't say this?

Labour has said it will abstain in Tuesday's vote on the EEA and put forward its own amendment - which rules out the free movement of people but calls for "no new impediments" to trade.

Starmer said:

Unlike the Tories, Labour will not sacrifice jobs and the economy in the pursuit of a reckless and extreme interpretation of the referendum result,

The plan seems to be that Labour will sacrifice jobs and the economy in the pursuit of a reckless and exteme attempt to keep the Labour party intact because

key members of the shadow cabinet (and quite a few backbenchers with pro-leave constituencies) believe the referendum result revealed that voters want to see immigration control on a scale incompatible with free movement

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/06/what-is-keir-starmers-internal-market-brexit-proposal

My slight optimism is subsiding.

Unless Corbyn thinks that he can convince the EU 27 to allow the U.K. three freedoms whilst they all have to have four.

Bearing in mind the migration crisis and the various limits many countries have on FoM (both covert and overt), will real FoM survive long term in the EU? I'm not sure anymore.

In which case FoM-light could be a possibility.

Not by October it won't.

Freedom of movement chapters have nothing to do with EU agreement RE refugees anyway.

Conflation of those is ukip territory

Labour have said that the first thing they'd do would be to guarantee the rights of EU citizens already living in Britain, but as far as I know they've never said they would maintain freedom of movement. It just seems hard to understand how they would want to get this past the EU's insistence on the 'four freedoms'. Perhaps they think they won't get their view past Parliament, anyway, and are just using it as a 'compromise' to try and unite Labour. As so little detail has been made available, I still don't understand it, though.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/06/brexit-keir-starmer-says-labour-divided-norway-style-deal-amendment

I like this mistake that has crept into the editing of the above article, probably because the writer changed 'stressed' to 'said' or vice versa:

An EU diplomat said Labour was “not serious about this amendment” and knew it would self combust. But the EU remained open to changing its offer, should the UK’s red lines change, they said stressed.

Can't really blame them for being stressed, can you? :)

Arguing for and encouraging free movement of people should be the key political issue. Both major parties are pandering to their xenophobic and racist members instead of confronting them and exposing their views to scrutiny.
I have ranted about how important FoM is in another post here:
https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/139552/?offset=52475#comment14251123

We can limit immigration very significantly within FOM - we simply chose never to do so.

It allows for the UK to deport people who have failed to find work within three months of arrival, and to deport them for welfare fraud etc - but we never registered immigrants from the EU so we have no idea how long they've been here, so we couldn't do any of that. As EU immigrants cost less/contribute more than UK citizens there was no economic argument for said registration, so it never got done.

The biggest issue here is that the vote for Leave was based on stopping brown people from living here, and in general the inward immigration of brown people is not from the EU, so this is all meaningless from that perspective - but we don't seem to want to confront that, because it would mean confronting the reality that most leavers are racists, to some extent.

Or idiots, sorry - forgot that.

(4) as has been widely speculated in the media, it's mainly a sop to Labour's internal party politics as the frontbench know it won't go anywhere in Parliament, anyway.

Bingo!

"Labour leader Mr Corbyn said: ‘We are confident we can build a new relationship with the EU. We want the UK to have a better deal than the Norway model.’ Sources within the party say they are confident they can negotiate full access to the single market without accepting free movement. They also said they could secure exemptions from the EU’s state aid rules and competition policy, despite them being central to the operation of the single market."

New editor of Daily Mail might signal reduction in vehemence of ensuring Tories follow the OneTruPath to Brexit.

I love how Brexiteers suddenly feel confident in the EU's ability to make a swift decision (<10 months) on something, and that this decision will be something that feels exactly right for one state in particular.

I mean, if a super efficient international organisation like that ever existed... wouldn't you kind of want to .... join it?

Loose lips sink ships...

I wonder how drunk he was

Without a doubt a deliberate leak on his part (coincidentally with May out of the country...).

I thought the same. I've felt for a long time that he'll somehow end up PM.

Can the Tory party survive this level of back stabbing, unfortunately I think they can.