EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

Neither do I, but do you think by now the rhetorics are really getting out of hand? It is not just Farage anymore, but the actual PM of the UK.

Anyways, my very first point was that often conversations are "driven" by fearmongering/anger creation, and then called "the will of the people".

The attacks on Polish immigrants, refugees as cockroaches, I don't see what is perse conspiracy theory about it. The idea is to stir people up, make sure they don't think clearly/logically and then claim it to be "will of the people"

What we have to remember is if the EU puts visa on British retirees in Spain, it wont be good news for any of the centre or far gammon parties.

I think (and hope) this is just posturing.

Yes it’s all divisive. Not sure it tells us anything. It’s the product of a country radicalised on one weird issue that’s become a catch-all issue for some. Extremists are in charge because MPs didn’t act on the advice of the ref result and the opposition were also split.

That’s bullshit. How did MPs not act on the referendum result, given that they voted by a large majority to trigger article 50?

The problems have arisen because of May’s red lines, which are incompatible with the Good Friday agreement, not because of MPs.

The problems have arisen because of May’s red lines, which are incompatible with the Good Friday agreement, not because of MPs.

It's not a binary choice. May was thinking about placating party membership and the Brexit-voting part of the electorate and she put that before thinking about what was practical. But MPs would probably have struggled to agree on the implementation (as opposed to the simple action of triggering article 50) in any case.

It's a lot easier to get a majority of any group to agree that "something must be done" than to make them agree on how to do it.

Exactly. The issue is WITH 'the advice of the referendum result', not a failure to follow it. The mandate was never clear; May's red lines merely pushed the overton window to the right and resolved nothing; in fact it emboldened those of us who voted Remain to push back.

If we'd gone for a soft Brexit following the A50 vote, leaving the EU, losing our MEPs, and remaining in the CU/SM, remainers like me would've accepted it. I could even probably have handled leaving one or other of the CU/SM.

But when a hard Brexit is chosen as the only valid type, and anyone who disagrees is against 'the people', and there's no room for nuance, you're either with the ERG or against them, you can't blame MPs for not being able to come together on that. They're just reflecting the country.

MPs have their problems but failing to act on a clear mandate is not one of them.

If we'd gone for a soft Brexit following the A50 vote, leaving the EU, losing our MEPs, and remaining in the CU/SM, remainers like me would've accepted it.

Same here, though living in NI I can tell you that trying to ditch either the CU/SM would be Backstop Hell all over again.

The UK simply doesn't have the patience to negotiate something that can be checked with technology and then spend 10 years and lots of £££££ to build it.

'Soft Brexit'?
Michel Barnier and Donald Tusk have always been clear that the Four Freedoms
are a package, and that cherry-picking of those you don't like is not allowed,
prompting the astute observation, that, whilst a Member of the EU the UK demanded opt-outs,
and once it deceided to leave it (impotently) demanded opt-ins.

Yes @andyp of course the ref was ill conceived and the advice based on a house of cards. Again. Does not change the political reality.

Why do you bring up A50? That’s a statement of intent... which has not been carried through. Doesn’t that compound my point?

@BleakRefs If you are left leaning, pro freedom of movement etc all realistic outcomes post referendum are not nice. MPs should have voted for May’s deal if nothing else was feasible with the foresight that harder versions of Brexit were likely. They made their respective political calculations and largely voted against a withdrawal agreement.

No ‘proposal’ since May’s deal has been better for peace in NI.

This result (no deal via a wrecking ball Boris) was entirely predicted.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/brexit-tory-mp-backtracks-over-food-scarcity-in-ireland-1.3725093

You are probably right-I think the details of these matters are lost in the ether with Brexiteers and they operate solely on inherited wisdom and historical tropes to operate though. We've had enough of experts, after all!

But you can also argue that is appeasement of something based on lies and threats that cannot be delivered. There is no "Brexit that works for jobs/one that stops the furrin's/one that gives the UK more sovereignity..."

The behaviour of May (invoking A50 and bypassing parliament and all sorts) hasn't exactly been of a good standard.

"Do vote for this, or you get Boris" is not really an argument, but a threat.

And some of the proposals for alternatives to the WA/stopping a hard Brexit failed on a few votes.

I think you've misunderstood me. The idea of cherrypicking relates to a very specific thing the Brexiters were trying to do - all of the benefits, none of the cost. The EU were quite reasonably saying that you can't have access to the Single Market without taking Freedom Of Movement. That's cherry picking.

But you can absolutely choose your level of membership based on the level of 'cost' you're prepared to absorb. That's not cherrypicking, that's tiered membership and it's perfectly 'allowed'. Norway would've been relatively soft - in the Single Market for the Remainers, but out of the Customs Union, no more FoM for the Brexiters - to the point where I would've accepted it, and I think we could've coalesced around it.

But these ERG types are like a crocodile - you toss them a leg and they say 'the leg was nice, what about your arm?'. The subsequent extremification of the debate means it's not a realistc possiblity anymore.

1 Attachment

"Do vote for this, or you get Boris" is not really an argument, but a threat.

Yes! It's moral blackmail and it should be beneath us

@BleakRefs If you are left leaning, pro freedom of movement etc all realistic outcomes post referendum are not nice. MPs should have voted for May’s deal if nothing else was feasible with the foresight that harder versions of Brexit were likely. They made their respective political calculations and largely voted against a withdrawal agreement.

There's a significant difference between 'not nice' and 'people dying unnecessarily because they can't get the drugs they need'. And I think while your view is correct with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, MPs don't in fact have foresight. May owns more of the blame here than they do.

But you can also argue that is appeasement of something based on lies and threats that cannot be delivered. There is no "Brexit that works for jobs/one that stops the furrin's/one that gives the UK more sovereignity..."

We should all be discussing this in terms of actions going forward. To argue this ^ ... what kind of response are you hoping for? A shrug? It’s of no use. None of us are privy to all the facts on every political issue. In politics you have to work with peoples beliefs as they are first, as you’d like them to be, perhaps another day.

Sorry to be glib but ... one course of action is leaving the EU. That’s what was asked for. There was even a withdrawal agreement with the EU :-)

The behaviour of May (invoking A50 and bypassing parliament and all sorts) hasn't exactly been of a good standard.

"Don't vote for this, or you get Boris" is not really an argument, but a threat.

Yes, how horrible. But so what? How does that change what happens next? Are you going to let the presentation or leadership style of May put you off the deal? And usher in a decade of entrenched ‘anti globalist’ zealots? That would be extremely stupid.

And some of the proposals for alternatives to the WA/stopping a hard Brexit failed on a few votes.

Yes and I’m not saying they shouldn’t have tried. Too much faith was put on amendments a/ passing and b/ holding any weight again due to a disconnect, a miss-reading of the political climate outside Westminster.

There's a significant difference between 'not nice' and 'people dying unnecessarily because they can't get the drugs they need'.

Not on a national population level. The latter is already a figure that exists. Let’s keep explicitly emotive arguments in perspective.

And I think while your view is correct with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, MPs don't in fact have foresight. May owns more of the blame here than they do.

I called it from day one. Magic grandpa’s position was pragmatic but he got drowned out my the majority of Labour MPs and members (I mean ... you can only fight that for so long).

I agree about the lack of foresight!

May was useless (and hamstrung by her horrible pact with the DUP and weak position) but more than anything the failure of those on the left to acknowledge and respond to the direction of travel has been a shame.

There was even a withdrawal agreement with the EU :-)

But not really, as it has not passed parliament. May made a stupid mistake by not involved all parties and everybody that voted to invoke A50 without parliament also made a stupid mistake, why vote for something big before seeing any sort of plan. Amazing.

Are you going to let the presentation or leadership style of May put you off the deal?

Threats to bypass parliament are pretty serious stuff.

How does that change what happens next?

Well, actually...it can a lot. The government is not setup to deal with something as big as Brexit that can run over several governments. Breaking trust is not going to help there.

Too much faith was put on amendments a/ passing and b/ holding any weight again due to a disconnect, a miss-reading of the political climate outside Westminster

The climate that now polls towards Remain?

But yes, that is now the past. Going forward I think first thing is that parliament has to get back control and sneaking out a Brexit w/o approval should be stopped.

Then hurdle two if there is a GE...ask the EU for an extension. Again, parliament may have to force it.

Ideally, not a GE because Labour looks like they are going to lose big time and it it not even likely yet that the LibDems will get enough votes for a coalition with Labour (akwards silences during negotiations to follow)

Perhaps another round of votes (the EU will sign up to a CU/SM agreement pretty quickly I think and no backstop is needed for that, so, em, everybody wins? Brexit done, not too much damage to the UK...) will happen, but it all depends on what will happen in September.

Perhaps the WA is revived and put to a public vote VS Remain/No Deal <-- really...but that may happen and then another "fun" campaign follows.

For everyone's sake and sanity and peace a SM/CU Brexit is my preference, I really rather Remain but it is going to eat up more time (and the UK has some big issues to sort) and then hopefully we can move on.

But if there IS another vote, well I am waiting on citizenship acceptance and then I will go round the doors to get people to vote. Which will be "fun" in some Belfast areas :)

I thought a pre-brexit vote that split the Tory and Brexit party voters was a good move for labour and the libdems?

That's an outrageous slur on crocodiles.

Labour is not doing well in the polls and the LibDems are taking mostly Conservative voters...but even a few Labour ones.

In a proportional voting system it would be good by splitting Conservatives, but I don't know for sure it will pan out.

Can't be worse than what we have now you'd think...but then I thought that before :)

There was a link I'd followed from maybe the Corbyn thread that about some election modelling that looked positive, but I am not an expert so may have wilfully misinterpreted it!

The climate that now polls towards Remain?

Thankyou for the example of tone deaf reading of what the polls show;

• The Conservatives at 40%.
  
• Labour at 27%.
  
• 50% would support a second ref.
  
• 20% support No Deal
  
• little support for an extension
  
• little support for a GNU
  
  

My guess is you see that and are drawn to 50% supporting a 2nd ref? Amiright? But a 2nd ref contains splits over what choices and arguably is not an outcome in itself.

I see the polls reflecting a country desperate for Britain to shit or get off the pot. Reaching for Boris (for leavers and casual believers) or a 2nd ref (for remainers and the agnostics/materialists).

Maybe I’m reading too much into it :D

Not on a national population level. The latter is already a figure that exists. Let’s keep explicitly emotive arguments in perspective.

I'm sorry but no, you don't get to frame a legitimate argument about the relative levels of damage between a soft brexit, hard brexit, and no deal brexit as being purely emotional just because it was expressed quickly. Deaths are a practical measure not only of short term border disruption but also longer term economic fallout. The difference between the relative damage each type of Brexit does is absolutely a relevant thing to call out.

And we're talking about MPs and what they should have done here. Your argument about what the 'national population' thinks is not relevant because MP's responsibility is to the interests of their specific constituents. And that can include disagreement, and in fact it should. The argument that people are stupid so MPs have to vote stupid because people are stupid is a circular one.

Oh dear. Statistics on a national population level.

If you have estimates on the percentage increase in unnecessary deaths due to medical shortages then that’s great. It should help you argue why this version of Brexit is fucking shit. Which you can have with someone else.

Yeah hopefully with someone who can read next time