Off Topic Political Debate

The UK parliament has committed the UK to begin the irreversible process of leaving the EU in three month's time. The will of the people will be acted upon, any change, either lesser or greater, of support for Brexit will have no effect.

 

With your last comment you do not show a great understanding of how the World is shaping up at the moment. Donald Trump has threatened a 45% tariff on Chinese imports, he is also talking about bullying firms to return their factories to Americe - so it appears that the EU. is not the only region 'looking inward'. China is also only interested in 'free market economics' in order to find dumping grounds for their cheap exports. Any imports they receive they will 'copy' and produce for themselves within a few years. And these are your 2 future partners ?

 

How are you in a position to state with absolute authority that it is irreversible when many of the best lawyers at home and abroad are not certain of this. Your favourite term 'the will of the people' will also be made to apply if/when the people change their minds over the next couple of years.

 

Actually many Chinese or Taiwanese I have met, similar to the young woman employed in my company do not want copies. Many save their money all year to come to the UK to buy original named goods. I predict a resurgence in demand for 'Made in Britain' goods.

It was the Australian High Commissioner who stated the EU was 'protectionist'. Trump will ensure the UK receives an advantages trade deal and the EU will not.

 

I look forward to re-visiting your comments later.

You fail to understand that once article 50 is evoked we are as good as out. The current UK government is determined that Brexit means Brexit and the EU, particularly the French, will ensure there is no turning back.

 

Once Article 50 is invoked it is the beginning of a long, hard negotiating process which could take years to wrap up completely. New trade deals cannot be opened before this process has been completed. If British opinion has changed over this period enough to justify a new referendum, and, if circumstances have changed accordingly, then it will happen. Britain would remain a member of the EU. during these negotiations and there is no mechanism in EU. law for throwing a country out against their will. This is not hopefull thinking on my part, just fact.

 

There is however one possible benefit to leaving the EU. and one only. Ulster Unionists are even applying for Irish passports now and people of all shades of religion and politics are thinking that a united Ireland is now possible.

 

Even my Brexit voting brother in law has obtained an Irish passport, it does not change anything. I very much doubt a united Ireland will be formed for a very long time but most in England would be sanguine about that. It would take the majority in the North to vote for it, hang on, you don't respect referendum results!!

 

The negotiations need to be completed within an 18 months time frame. It would take all members to agree to go over the designated two years, which is most unlikely with some member countries demanding unreasonable concessions which will not be agreed by the UK.
As indicated by Australia there are probably many working parties being set up with potential new free train partners. As they are not officially recognised as 'negotiating' much work can be done to limit the eventual time taken.

 

The UK looks set to have its own Bill of Rights when we leave the European Court of Human Rights. Details will be in the Conservative manifesto for the 2020 election. This will ensure safe passage through the House of Lords.

 

Interesting bit of research about political allegiance.

https://www.indy100.com/article/qui...anceswith-three-simple-questions--Zymi5JuhtRe

Give it a go.

Does is pan out for you?

 

Yes, it got me!

 

Interesting article on present UK politics from the Independent,


Forget the class divide, voters now cast their ballots over Brexit – and Labour is the loser
We are entering a new era in which voting is influenced by cultural attitudes, and it's a shift that helped put Donald Trump in the White House

• Andrew Grice
• @IndyPolitics
• 19 hours ago
• 299 comments

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

109
Click to follow
The Independent Online

please log in to view this image

Labour has the toughest job to survive in a new political world where party allegiances are no longer based on class divides but social attitudes Getty
The mood at the Christmas party for Labour members of the Scottish Parliament was hardly improved by a presentation just beforehand showing that things for the party north of the border can only get worse. Internal polling suggested that Labour’s last bastion of support in Scotland in local authorities could crumble in May’s council elections. The SNP is on 45 per cent, the rejuvenated Conservatives 25 per cent and Labour just 15 per cent.

Labour's already weakening grip on its once solid Scottish base was broken by the 2014 independence referendum. The SNP lost, but won many Labour voters, landing 56 of Scotland’s 59 seats at the 2015 general election. Now despairing Labour MPs wonder whether the EU referendum will have the same devastating effect in England, as the forces of nationalism again transform the electoral landscape. It might be happening more subtly than in Scotland, but it is certainly happening.

Three recent parliamentary by-elections showed that Brexit is the new dividing line. In Witney, the Tories held on but the anti-Brexit vote was hoovered up by the Liberal Democrats, who achieved a 19 per cent swing while Labour’s support dropped. In Richmond Park, the Lib Dems ousted the Tory Brexiteer Zac Goldsmith with a 21 per cent swing, as Labour’s vote disappeared. In Sleaford and North Hykeham, the Tories comfortably retained a safe seat but Labour dropped from second to fourth place behind Ukip and the Lib Dems, whose share of the vote rose from 5.7 per cent in 2015 to 11 per cent.




0:00
/
1:06





Brexit for bankers and corporate world ‘not good enough’ says Corbyn in New Year's message
The results confirm a continuing trend spotted by academics working on the British Election Study, who found before and just after the June referendum that voters’ political identity was shaped more by Brexit than their traditional party allegiance. It suggests we might be entering a new era in which voting is influenced more by cultural attitudes (such as those towards immigration) than by class – a shift which also helped Donald Trump reach the White House. Will it prove a temporary effect? I doubt it, since Brexit will dominate UK politics for years, and certainly until the next general election.

Labour looks certain to be the big loser. The party already had an electoral mountain to climb, because of its collapse in Scotland and boundary changes that will give the Tories an estimated 20-seat advantage.

Brexit makes Labour’s climb even steeper. The danger is that the party appears irrelevant on the biggest challenge facing the country. Labour will struggle to win the confidence of both Leavers, because officially it backed Remain, and strong Remainers, angry about Jeremy Corbyn’s half-hearted referendum campaign and with a new champion in the Lib Dems, who unashamedly target “the 48 per cent”.

please log in to view this image

• READ MORE

Angela Merkel is not guaranteed a fourth term as German Chancellor
Strong Remainers will find little comfort and joy in Corbyn’s New Year message. He promises not to “stand by” while the Tories make a mess of Brexit, but equally insists that Labour accepts and respects the referendum result and “won’t be blocking our leaving the EU”.

His words sum up Labour’s acute dilemma. Almost 70 per cent of Labour-held constituencies voted Leave, so the party would provide Ukip with booster rockets by fighting Brexit. The Tories would love it too, accusing Labour of “defying the will of the people”.

But by sitting on the fence, Labour risks being squeezed out by Ukip and the Tories on the one hand and the Lib Dems on the other. Brexit also makes it harder for Labour to forge the coalition it always needs to win power – between its middle-class supporters who largely voted Remain, and its working-class voters who are more likely to be Leavers.

What experts have said about Brexit

• 11show all

Labour’s response to the Brexit vote has been appalling. First Labour MPs played the man by trying to oust Corbyn; I can find no Labour figure who now thinks that was a good idea. Labour maintained a virtual radio silence on Brexit for three months. The Opposition finally started to oppose when Sir Keir Starmer was appointed shadow Brexit Secretary.

Starmer’s pitch, that Labour is the only party capable of uniting the country after the age, class and regional divisions exposed by Brexit, sounds clever enough. But Labour’s own divisions on the issue undermine its attempt to get in the game. The party cannot speak with one voice on immigration, with Corbyn rejecting growing demands from Labour MPs to end the party’s support for free movement. John McDonnell’s remarks about Brexit’s “enormous opportunities” hampered Labour’s appeal to “the 48 per cent.” Its challenge in 2017 is to reach them by mounting strong and credible opposition to a hard Brexit.

In any case, Labour’s playing the unity card will be trumped by Theresa May, who acknowledged in her Christmas message the need for people to “come together”. May is in a stronger position than Labour to unite the nation because she can act on her pledge and, as a reluctant Remainer now implementing Brexit, is better

 

Funny how I post an interesting piece of research for people to consider on a thread that has been quiet for days and then we get a big cut and paste of something else by someone who is posting more and more cut and pastes which IMO distract and often detract from discussion.

 

Interesting eh.... any views from other colleagues on the evidence which informs this?

 

Ah diddums!

I'm sure posters realise they are free to respond when they like. I thought you might like the last one, it was from the left wing Independent.

 

It got me as well Yorkie. So we can presume that if us lefties prefer verbs then we must be closer to real life - which is always changing. So the tree is never a 'tree' because it is never a finished product. So the tree is, in fact, in the process of 'treeing'. Thus, nature knows only the present continuous tense.

 

Life is for living .... etc . All very interesting and I have never put a political slant on it...

 

It just presumes that all things living are subject to the cycle of birth - growth - maturation - decay - death - and maybe rebirth. The same is true of all things made by humans. So there is no such thing as a finished product - to call it that is to miss the point. So, democracy is a living thing - either it is growing, or it is dying - there is no such thing as a finished product. Those who say that this or that country is a 'democracy' know that the best way of stopping someone from fighting for something is to convince them that they have it already. Language is, by its nature, 'political'.

 

I think I would rather have been asked the questions without knowing the rationale behind them - fear of being labelled right-wing may well have driven me to 'fix' my answers...

Thinking a little about the claims made by the researchers tends to make me say that they are obviously correct. The use of adjectives - or, I suppose, adverbs (as per the question on Xmas party conduct) - labels a behaviour at a particular point in time, whereas the use of nouns labels an individual, with a high degree of permanency.

I'd say the latter reflects accurately how right-wing politicians think of others - unbending attitudes due to inability or unwillingness to recognise that they themselves are not always correct.