Off Topic UK / EU Future

Don't get me wrong here Frenchie. Ideally I would like to stop the whole thing of Brexit, and, ideally, I would like a Labour Government. But more than these I want Britons to be able to live together afterwards. A hard, or no deal, Brexit will forcibly drag the youth of the country, together with Scotland and Northern Ireland out of the EU. against their will, and could even lead to the break up of the UK. A second referendum (if won by remain) would leave a sizable minority of brexiters believing they have been robbed and sharpening their knives for the next move - it could even lead to Ukip becoming a major force in Westminster. How could a second referendum which remain won by about 52%-48% be taken seriously by the EU ? How can they know that such a situation is stable enough to last the test of time ? A patched up agreement would be mumbled about by many but would, at least ensure us a fair amount of transition time during which we would still be in the EU. but just not voting for anything. This time is of imeasurable importance also to ex pats who would remain citizens of the EU until the end of 2020 - thus giving them ample time to either make other arrangements, or to naturalize themselves in their adopted countries. The one thing I do not know is if Britain can actually stop Brexit altogether during a transition period (presuming that a deal can be reached).

I would also like the four countries to be able to live together, but feel sure that the damage has been done already, and it will take years, if ever, to put it back together. Parts of England are never going to be happy with any deal or no deal, and Boris has already been on the attack over the latest proposals, although he now seems to be a spent force.
As the details slowly emerge of what is currently being proposed, everything that those who campaigned for exit said would happen is proving impossible. Cut red tape. No lots more is going to be the price of the decision. Save money. No lots more people will have to be employed wherever you look. Bare bones deals just to keep the planes flying, MPs admitting that their farms are going to lose out badly, and irony the DUP complaining that some of the companies in NI rely on 60% of their workforce coming from the EU.
What the EU do know is that the UKs parliamentary system does not tie any newly formed government to be tied to laws passed by the preceding administration. It appears that a great deal of effort is going into providing a deal which will help the PM appeal to the moderates in Westminster on both sides of the chamber. Yesterday and today we have heard both Raab and May making direct appeals to Labour members to support the government against the minority of extremists.

 

I feel sure that Labour will end up supporting the government on this Frenchie - they would be in very dangerous water doing anything else. If May agrees a deal with the EU. and then loses the vote in Westminster, then we may see a vote of non confidence but this does not automatically mean new elections, for which there would need to be a two thirds majority of MPs in favour. There is nothing to stop the hard Brexiteers in there from voting against her on the one issue, but keeping her in power on the other thus hoping to simply run out of time and causing a hard Brexit by default. A Labour government in power would probably stop Brexit - partly because they would be unlikely to have a majority, and so would need the help of the SNP and Lib Dems to form a government. But there are too many ifs and buts before such a scenario could take place.

 

I agree 100% that there are too many ifs and buts. I see that there is to be an inner cabinet meeting tomorrow, and I believe it could be very important in deciding if the PM will accept the latest offer from the EU. If she does she will have received information from the whips that there is the possibility that the numbers are there in the Labour party to support her. If she continues along the current road she will split the right wing from the Tory party and draw in those from the Labour party who want the softest of soft Brexits. She is trying to sell the idea that MPs should vote for her ideas as they are for the good of the country. While I cannot for the life of me see what can be gained from this, it is probably keeping the country nearer to the EU than some would like, and therefore at a later date easier to re-enter. That of course would create a whole new argument.

 

The biggest problem is that we do not have a real statesman in British politics. It has been said that this is Britain's biggest crisis since World War 2, but there is one essential difference. At that time Churchill formed a national wartime coalition government, because he realized that he needed the most able people around him, regardless of party. He also realized that the war would involve unpopular decisions, which should not be associated with any one party. This is what we need now, so that moderates of all parties can vote together without worrying about party whips or opinion polls.

 

Today we have found out that not only the M20 into Dover is to be turned into a lorry park, but also the M26 which is 60 miles away is being prepared for a no deal exit. The Tory MP for the area was furious that he had been assured by Grayling that no such thing would happen, and now without any consultation it is. People in Kent have been saying for months that Brexit will have the effect of snarling traffic up for the whole county, yet when mentioned it has just been project fear. Grayling of course didn't wish to say anything, so suggested a private meeting. This is the man who cannot ensure trains run, so what will happen to freight transport and ferries is frightening.

 

https://www.which.co.uk/news/2018/10/no-deal-brexit-could-be-chaotic-which-warns

Most people are deeply worried or are unclear about what an deal Brexit means.

Really telling of the inherent dishonesty in our political systems that was apparent in the whole pre referendum rhetoric... Oh for honesty...

The ignorance most people have means they are ill equipped to make the wisest decisions

Sent from my F8331 using Tapatalk

 

Unfortunately this whole thing has shown up the instability of the British political system Yorkie. If Britain had had a system of proportional representation none of this mess would have happened. Britain is, essentially, a rotating one party state where the majority are always against the government of the day, yet are incapable of influencing it. What we desparately need is for MPs to vote according to their consciences and not the party whip - maybe secret voting would really be an advantage here. TM cannot come up with a deal which pleases both the EU. and her lunatic Brexit fringe, and her orange day nutters in Belfast. She has to make a pitch for Labour MPs - so now we are going to find out - is Corbyn really a hard Brexiter ? Can Labour afford to vote against any deal which TM may bring back from Brussels - if they do then the whole thing could plunge into chaos, or is that what they want ?

 

Curiously, the British system is stable even though it it is inherently unrepresentative. PR would reflect the wishes of the people but wouldn't reflect the wishes of the (current) ruling class. That is an argument all by itself.
Ignoring that... After 2 years of negotiation on trivial details, the main EU issue is... the same problem has not gone away, namely - and UNIQUELY for the UK - to maintain the Good Friday Agreement in NI means we cannot leave the EU customs union and single market. Why oh why have we pretended otherwise ?
Although the majority of English people have no understanding of NI, and the NI people have no interest in the rest of the UK unless it affects them directly, nevertheless the UK govt has committed (rightly) to a system in NI that improves the peace prospects there. This commitment means we MUST retain an open border. The EU can only countenance an open border if we agree to keep their trading rules. All the rest is fudge and pretence.
The attitude of the 'hard' Brexiteers disgusts me in so far as it risks condemning NI to a return to the Troubles.

 

I think that one could argue that the British system is stable, until you throw a referendum into the mix. It is quite obvious that as more and more no deal notices are published that the public were given a false prospectus of what they could have if they voted one way. The result seems to have turned normally sane, alright that is another argument, MPs into zombie like individuals unable to think for themselves. Although having just written that maybe they are thinking about their own personal situations rather more than what is the right thing for the country.
Judging by the news this evening, there now seems to be even more open warfare in the government ranks. While the PM seeks to find a form of words that can mean anything to anyone in an attempt to hold the whole mess together, members of her own government are using the situation to try to push her in a direction that she knows is unsustainable, or even remove her from the job. Having to rely on a party that represents a tiny proportion of the electorate can lead people to ask, who is actually in charge, the PM or the leader of the DUP who doesn't even have a seat in Westminster. This is not stable government no matter how you look at it.

 

I would raise doubts about the inherent stability of British politics Frenchie. The fact is that if it is possible for a party to get a majority based on only 37% of the vote, then you can say that, at any time, the majority of the population are against that government - which leads, in turn, to the alienation of the populous from politics. If you also have dwindling party membership then parties become more susceptible to entryism - just how many hard Brexiters, or Ukipers would it take to take over the Tory Party and its majority ? The situation we have today is a direct result of our political system, because in any other country of the EU. you would have needed a coalition of parties all wanting a referendum - what actually happened could only have happened in the UK. Instead of a 'stable' system we have a group of MPs paralysed by the apparent 'holiness' of a referendum result, and by the party whip. Have a secret vote in the house of commons tomorrow - in which no one party could be blamed for the outcome, and you would see a second referendum agreed to instantly.

 

Although I agree with much of what you say regarding 37% or so electing the government, it doesn't take into account the unknown percentage of the population who have no interest in voting for any politician. Many that I came across in the UK would accept whatever the outcome without wishing to have their say. Mind you many of them were the first to moan when they were impacted. I believe that when under normal boring times MPs got on with organising day to day matters, then the system of checks and balances with the two houses could work quite well, but under the current situation it certainly shows up the limitations.

 

I agree about the 'unknown percentage' Frenchie, that exists here as well - people who simply say 'Those at the top do what they want anyway'. I do not believe that the system of checks and balances in Britain has anything more than a symbolic significance - the Lords can only block to a certain extent and if the Commons really wants to push something through then it can. There are no effective checks anywhere else (at least internally) because Britain is one of the most centralized countries in the Western World. We have no equivalent of the Federal states of Germany, the USA, or Australia - nothing between Westminster and the County Councils, who have very little power. Even much smaller countries such as Switzerland, The Netherlands and Austria are more decentralized than the UK. is. For point of reference a German state such as Bavaria is capable of signing international treaties on its own behalf, which Scotland cannot do. Even Karnten in Austria has its own flag and anthem. In Germany the states have their own parliament, and are also directly represented in the Bundesrat in Berlin - which is the counterpoint to the Bundestag. Decentralization is the key to stability - how is it that Switzerland can incorporate a country with 4 languages, where many Swiss do not actually understand each other, into one very stable country. 'Stable' countries do not have independence movements within them such as the SNP or Plaid Cymru, nore are they in imminent danger of breaking up.

 

There was an interesting report today on how the Tory party is struggling from the reduced membership to find candidates who are willing to stand for election as MPs. Maybe this is because the younger people who were not in favour of Brexit do not wish to get themselves or their families caught up in the chaos that the party has brought about. It might also have something to do with not wishing to get the abuse that is certain to follow from unhappy electors and trying to defend the indefensible. To be cannon fodder, and not do what you believe is right for the country first and put party second is not an appealing situation that you would walk into.
The system that used to work, and still does on the mundane, has fallen apart for the reason that the country doesn't have enough income from exports. In 2,000 kms of travelling the autoroutes when I went on holiday, I didn't see a single UK registered lorry. Either nothing to export, or the country is using foreign lorries. Just about every country within the EU had goods on the move, yet none visible from the UK. With central government having a stranglehold on local councils spending, and pushing even county councils over the edge, it is right that the UK has become far too centralised.

 

I wouldn't read too much into Brit trucks on the road OFH. I paid a spaniard to do a truck round trip of over 1800 kilometres. It cost 500 Euros. I wouldn't want Brits doing that. But I understand why businesses use, as I did, such services. And my spanish brother in law does 4 nights every week sleeping in his truck and is paid a pittance. Brits would have a hard time competing.

I think also luxury goods tend to be low volume. Cheap goods high volume.

Interesting on the conservatives though. Could be a great time for 18-year olds of the conservative persuasion to get in and do their leg work years. They'd be ripe as candidates when the next upturn comes around.

Here's a little inside snippet: Penny Mordaunt as a long shot to be next Tory leader when the time comes to rebuild. Not press speculation. I know her cousin.

 

More talks but no real movement towards an agreement on certain issues like the Irish boarder.

Will there be a time when both parties just agree there can be no deal?

 

I am not quite sure why the PM chose to make a statement to the commons this afternoon as she could only hint that there had been some progress, but nothing on the NI border. The MPs who asked questions received no answers, and it is so clear that there is no agreement between the various factions in the commons. It looks as if the UK could have a longer transition period simply because many details will still require sorting that cannot be done it a couple of years. The PM refused to say that the longer the UK stayed associated it would not increase the money to be paid.
The PM seems to be cornered by her own MPs and how she can get out of it is far from certain.

 

What we desparately need is secret voting in the House of Commons on any final deal. No party whips, just MPs voting according to their consciences. If May's deal involves staying in the customs union, and avoiding the precipice of a hard Brexit then Labour MPs should, in all conscience, back her on it, but will Corbyn give a free vote on this ?

 

It would help, but it will not happen in time for this mess.
An interview with a Tory MP on the news, suggested that they should take a line closely aligned with the Labour position, take the Norway option, ie stay in the single market and customs union. You would have left the EU, but it gets rid of all the problems over NI. It seems as if the moderates are not far apart wherever you look, but what was obvious how not one MP supported the current stance.

 

Macron is struggling to revive his ailing fortunes by a cabinet reshuffle. When even his wife describes him as 'arrogant' he is in rather a spot of bother. Can his popularity drop any further?

 

Why is this remotely relevant ?