Topic: Brexit - doesn't really seem to be a very good idea does it? (*)

[Jiminy Cricket]

I'd be more impressed if Millibland had said it was a thundercunting clusterfuck.

Forecast from me is a collapse of the coalition, a new UK election, another hung parliament and the EU telling us to go fuck ourselves unless we roll over. The only way out I can see is to repeal article 50 and rerun the referendum and the election but I'm not sure in which order makes sense.....possibly new UK election with one or more party committing to repeal and repeat referendum?

And what if that party is Labour with Corbyn at the helm? How many people would not vote for the 'remain' party simply because Corbyn is its leader? Not that I really expect a Corbyn-lead Labour party to support remain.

[24/7]

And what if that party is Labour with Corbyn at the helm? How many people would not vote for the 'remain' party simply because Corbyn is its leader? Not that I really expect a Corbyn-lead Labour party to support remain.

Hah! No way I'm forecasting the outcome of THAT! Besides, for the first General Election in my life, I would seriously consider whether it's fucking worth voting for any of the bastards......

Can't see Corbyn going anywhere at the moment, can you? IF an election is called, it will be relatively soon - then Corbyn's likely to be the leader - so your "What if...?" question is a valid and frankly frightening one.

Damned if we do, damned if we don't.

I repeat - a thundercunting clusterfuck.


*edit - we'd probably see Corbyn come out on the side of the majority of his membership, MPS and constituents in that case, regardless of his personal beliefs. Politics is now all about winning the votes to further one's own ambitions, rather than adhering to matters of principle - and this would be the best chance he's ever likely to get of being PM, so.......

[Sarge]

“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake” - Napoleon

What Leo should do and let May sort out the DUP, Foster cannot be seen to attack Westminister so attacking Dublin will sit well in the Shankill. So let her shout and let May bring her in line. Amazing how 10 DUP MPs hold Britian to ramsom.

[Trada]

And if there is an election? It's not all that unlikely.

Even if there is no election until 2022 do you think the electorate will look kindly on a party that stood by and did nothing?

What do you expect Labour to do release a document called Labours alternative Brexit plan Like the Lib Dems used to do with the budget and everyone laughed at them, then the media will spend weeks taking apart this plan and ignoring what the Tories are doing with the real one.

Labour are playing it smart always poking at the tories and getting victories when they can like the Brexit study papers there is not much more they can do.

It all about who comes away from this mess the least damaged.

And if the Tories do manage to pull it off fair play to them.

[cdav]

What do you expect Labour to do release a document called Labours alternative Brexit plan Like the Lib Dems used to do with the budget and everyone laughed at them, then the media will spend weeks taking apart this plan and ignoring what the Tories are doing with the real one.

Labour are playing it smart always poking at the tories and getting victories when they can like the Brexit study papers there is not much more they can do.

It all about who comes away from this mess the least damaged.

And if the Tories do manage to pull it off fair play to them.

We are all damaged by this madness, we will be poorer in the future and that will have an impact on all the important services- NHS, schools, social security, etc.

Sometimes a strong leader is required to step up and show some backbone and principals, even when it could be damaging. The current Brexit trajectory needs to change

[Alan_X]

“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake” - Napoleon

That's a pretty stupid epigram in the circumstances. The whole fucking point of being the Opposition is to stop the Government making mistakes for fucks sake.

Is that really what you think? The Tories are damaging this country, possibly irreparably, and the answer is to do nothing?

Is that the same with every Tory mistake? Let them nationalise the NHS? Cut benefits to the least well off?  Those are huge mistakes. Should Corbyn and his merry band follow the same ridiculous mantra and just let the Tory Government get on with it, sitting back while people suffer (and in some cases die) because it might pay off in the end.

If that really is the way Corbyn is playing politics then it's utterly despicable and cowardly and he should stand aside and let someone with some moral backbone take over.

Jesus wept.

[Alan_X]

What do you expect Labour to do release a document called Labours alternative Brexit plan...

Yes of course I do. Do you actually grasp what is happening?

[TheShanklyGates]

What do you expect Labour to do release a document called Labours alternative Brexit plan Like the Lib Dems used to do with the budget and everyone laughed at them, then the media will spend weeks taking apart this plan and ignoring what the Tories are doing with the real one.

Labour are playing it smart always poking at the tories and getting victories when they can like the Brexit study papers there is not much more they can do.

It all about who comes away from this mess the least damaged.

And if the Tories do manage to pull it off fair play to them.

Err, yes?

Everyone would laugh at the Lib Dems because they have no chance of gaining power so any such document coming from them would have zero chance of being implemented. Labour on the other hand keep telling us that they're a government in waiting - if that's true then they need to have some fucking idea of what they do if given the chance.

Both parties are putting party politics above the national interest and I'm fucking sick of it.

[Kashinoda]

Yes of course I do. Do you actually grasp what is happening?

Is May even making a hash of Brexit?

I mean on the face of it, she is.

But by all accounts it's looking like she's trying to shoe-horn in a very palatable Brexit to the point we might as well just remain.

All Labour can do is hold the Tories to account at this stage because no one knows absolutely anything.

[BoRed]

What do you expect Labour to do release a document called Labours alternative Brexit plan

To be fair, they've already done that in their manifesto, only no one seems to have noticed.

[Andy Hunter]

Moyes may well be looking for a new job soon. Could he possibly do any a worse job of Brexit?
There will be pubs everywhere with murals of Brexiting without Brexit.

--ps I think Labour are a shambles over this. They clearly have nothing to offer and no ideas.  They seem as divided over Brexit as the tories.  They need , desperately need, to find a way to square the circle of offering what's best for the country  whilst still respecting the 'will of the sheeple'.

If he reversed Brexit I'd have this outside Westminster and Buckingham Palace (and my front lawn).

Especially if the woman comes with it (those eyes )

[Alan_X]

Is May even making a hash of Brexit?

I mean on the face of it, she is.

But by all accounts it's looking like she's trying to shoe-horn in a very palatable Brexit to the point we might as well just remain.

All Labour can do is hold the Tories to account at this stage because no one knows absolutely anything.

It is a irresponsible for Labour to be betting the farm on May fucking up completely. Because while she is unquestionably negotiating poorly, the deal is still getting done in some fashion.

[TheShanklyGates]

To be fair, they've already done that in their manifesto, only no one seems to have noticed.

https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/negotiating-brexit/

'retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union'
'put jobs and the economy first'
'no return to a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland'

All meaningless bollocks.

[Alan_X]

To be fair, they've already done that in their manifesto, only no one seems to have noticed.

They didn't really - it's those same weasel words that Starmer used today. Vague platitudes about jobs and achieving 'the benefits of' the single market and customs union. Unless there's a different draft.

[Alan_X]

https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/negotiating-brexit/

'retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union'
'put jobs and the economy first'
'no return to a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland'

All meaningless bollocks.

Exactly - meaningless drivel.

[Jiminy Cricket]

The best way for him to defend working people is by becoming Prime Minister, and his best chance of becoming Prime Minister atm is to let this Tory government continue to implode.

Supporting Brexit/coming out against Brexit makes no difference at this stage, it's happening either way.

As much as I would love Labour to take a strong stance against Brexit I'm not sure what there would be to gain from taking that position atm.

This is really tired. If there is a hard Brexit, it will make no difference which party controls Government. There will be no money to do anything - everything will be fucked. The economy will shrink massively, and for a very long time. The country is already debt riddled, the UK's credit-worthiness will be shattered, and interest rates on borrowings will go up massively in response.

[BoRed]

https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/negotiating-brexit/

'retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union'
'put jobs and the economy first'
'no return to a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland'

All meaningless bollocks.

In your opinion, perhaps. To me, they're describing staying in the EU (in all but name), without spelling it out.

[TheShanklyGates]

In your opinion, perhaps. To me, they're describing staying in the EU (in all but name), without spelling it out.

Not sure how you can come to that conclusion if you scrutinise those bullet points beyond a superficial level. If you want to retain the benefits of the customs union and the single market you should commit to staying the single market and customs union, which in turn has the benefit of putting jobs and the economy first and preserving a soft border between Northern Ireland and the Republic. If they're committed to anything short of that then they're effectively backing a Hard Brexit 'without spelling it out.'

[Alan_X]

In your opinion, perhaps. To me, they're describing staying in the EU (in all but name), without spelling it out.

'retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union'

How is that going to happen? We are now deep into discussions and the EU is making it clear that this kind of fudge isn't going to happen:

Barnier last month:

"He said: "You can not be half in the Single Market and half out. We can not want to put an end to the free movement of people while maintaining the free movement of goods, services or capital through a system of general equivalences. We can not want to leave the internal market and continue to enact the rules. We can not leave the customs union but want to benefit from a free trade with the European Union."

'put jobs and the economy first'

It's absolutely clear that putting jobs and the economy first means staying in the EU. End of story. Any 'jobs Brexit' is an oxymoron. Labour might gain power but a reduced economy will mean less to go around and a reduction in jobs.

'no return to a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland'

Well, we've seen how easy that one is to solve.

It's meaningless.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Precisely.

It is the fudgiest fudge since Grandma Fudge decided to give away free fudge from her fudge shop in Fudgetown.

Clearly the DUP weren't informed and didn't recognise the fudgeyness of the stunt and pulled their fudge plug before May was able to explain it to them.

Still, no one is talking about the Brexit Papers.   

I think someone has been overdoing binge-watching of Blackadder.

[BoRed]

'retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union'

How is that going to happen? We are now deep into discussions and the EU is making it clear that this kind of fudge isn't going to happen:

Barnier last month:

"He said: "You can not be half in the Single Market and half out. We can not want to put an end to the free movement of people while maintaining the free movement of goods, services or capital through a system of general equivalences. We can not want to leave the internal market and continue to enact the rules. We can not leave the customs union but want to benefit from a free trade with the European Union."

'put jobs and the economy first'

It's absolutely clear that putting jobs and the economy first means staying in the EU. End of story. Any 'jobs Brexit' is an oxymoron. Labour might gain power but a reduced economy will mean less to go around and a reduction in jobs.

'no return to a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland'

Well, we've seen how easy that one is to solve.

It's meaningless.

I don't get it. Doesn't staying in the EU satisfy all of those points?

It's been said on this very thread that the only way to retain all benefits of single market membership is to retain membership. By committing to retaining those benefits, Labour have effectively committed to staying in the single market. No need to spell it out, is there? No hard border between the two Irelands only reinforces that (it also implies freedom of movement between the UK and the EU, but that's another story).

Just about every sentence in the Brexit section of the manifesto contains words like "retain", "maintain", "remain" and "continue" or phrases like "no change", "no rolling back" and "no gaps". They're describing staying in the EU (in all but name - in the worst case).

[Jiminy Cricket]

I think Labour are playing a blinder on Brexit in the end it doesn't matter what they think unless an election is called.

Intrigued. Please explain how Labour are 'playing a blinder'. I've heard the exact same phrase about Labour used elsewhere - similarly, without explanation.

[ShakaHislop]

I don't get it. Doesn't staying in the EU satisfy all of those points?

It's been said on this very thread that the only way to retain all benefits of single market membership is to retain membership. By committing to retaining those benefits, Labour have effectively committed to staying in the single market. No need to spell it out, is there? No hard border between the two Irelands only reinforces that (it also implies freedom of movement between the UK and the EU, but that's another story).

Just about every sentence in the Brexit section of the manifesto contains words like "retain", "maintain", "remain" and "continue" or phrases like "no change", "no rolling back" and "no gaps". They're describing staying in the EU (in all but name - in the worst case).

The Common Travel Area agreement solves the free movement problem between Northern Ireland (and the rest of the UK) and the ROI, not EU free movement.

Speaking of EU free movement, how do you square Labour's commitment to the ending of it, and Corbyn's dislike of Single Market state aid rules with your view that Labour's end goal is staying in the EU?

[Alan_X]

I don't get it. Doesn't staying in the EU satisfy all of those points?

It's been said on this very thread that the only way to retain all benefits of single market membership is to retain membership. By committing to retaining those benefits, Labour have effectively committed to staying in the single market. No need to spell it out, is there? No hard border between the two Irelands only reinforces that (it also implies freedom of movement between the UK and the EU, but that's another story).

Just about every sentence in the Brexit section of the manifesto contains words like "retain", "maintain", "remain" and "continue" or phrases like "no change", "no rolling back" and "no gaps". They're describing staying in the EU (in all but name - in the worst case).

I must have missed something. Corbyn was committed to leaving the EU on the morning after the referendum and has whipped Labour through the lobbies.

“The British people have made their decision. We must respect that result and Article 50 has to be invoked now so that we negotiate an exit from European Union".

http://labourlist.org/2016/06/corbyn-article-50-has-to-be-invoked-now/

And in the same article:

“There will be job consequences as a result of this decision. We have to do everything we can to protect jobs and working conditions in Britain.”

On the Single Market:

"We need to look very carefully at the terms of any trade relationship because at the moment we're part of the single market, obviously, that has within it restrictions on state aid and state spending, that has pressures on it through the European Union to privatise rail, for example, and other services."

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/09/jeremy-corbyn-refuses-back-eu-single-market-membership

[BoRed]

Speaking of EU free movement, how do you square Labour's commitment to the ending of it, and Corbyn's dislike of Single Market state aid rules with your view that Labour's end goal is staying in the EU?

Corbyn is a person, Labour is a party. Corbyn also dislikes Trident, but its renewal is right there in the manifesto. Besides, even if Corbyn does dislike some elements of the single market, it doesn't mean he doesn't dislike the alternative even more.

When did Labour commit to ending EU free movement? From the manifesto, it looks like they're planning to extend it to the rest of the world.

[Alan_X]

Intrigued. Please explain how Labour are 'playing a blinder'. I've heard the exact same phrase about Labour used elsewhere - similarly, without explanation.

It translates as "...doing fuck all while people's lives are destroyed in the hope that the Tory fuck up is bad enough to make Corbyn electable..."

[BoRed]

I must have missed something. Corbyn was committed to leaving the EU on the morning after the referendum and has whipped Labour through the lobbies.

That was just a rushed statement after an unexpected result, hardly a party policy.

“The British people have made their decision. We must respect that result and Article 50 has to be invoked now so that we negotiate an exit from European Union".

Putting pressure on the Tories - it's your mess, deal with it. It worked, the Tories are in disarray, they lost their majority in parliament, and more and more people are realising that Brexit is a bad idea.

Besides, Article 50 means nothing more than leaving the EU, there's no word in there about single market membership or anything else. This is what Labour voted for, regardless of how some are trying to rewrite history:

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2016-2017/0132/17132.pdf

"Negotiate an exit" on Labour terms, judging by the manifesto, may just as well mean "let's keep everything as it was, just formally remove us from the list of members". Labour also ruled out "no deal", meaning no exit until there is a deal, which could take decades, by which time another referendum would be perfectly acceptable to everyone.

"We need to look very carefully at the terms of any trade relationship because at the moment we're part of the single market, obviously, that has within it restrictions on state aid and state spending, that has pressures on it through the European Union to privatise rail, for example, and other services."

What's wrong with "look carefully"? And having looked carefully deciding that keeping all the benefits (i.e., staying in) is the best option. In any case, anything Corbyn may have said a year and a half ago cannot override later manifesto pledges.

[ShakaHislop]

Corbyn is a person, Labour is a party. Corbyn also dislikes Trident, but its renewal is right there in the manifesto. Besides, even if Corbyn does dislike some elements of the single market, it doesn't mean he doesn't dislike the alternative even more.

When did Labour commit to ending EU free movement? From the manifesto, it looks like they're planning to extend it to the rest of the world.

Corbyn isn't just any old Labour person though. He's the Labour leader and a strikingly popular one within the party at least. He has both hard and soft power, so what he says will have a big influence on Labour's Brexit policy. As for the single market, he seems at ease with leaving it to me. In this video, he reiterates what was in the manifesto that we will leave the Single Market and goes on to describe an immigration system that will be based on jobs and doesn't sound like free movement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4okLzPWPAE

Unfortunately the public are sceptical enough of just EU free movement but it may be able to be convinced of its worth in order to keep Single Market membership. Getting free movement for the rest of the world has no such clear incentive for the public to back it. I'd be surprised if it became policy even under a Corbyn-led Labour.

[Jiminy Cricket]

It translates as "...doing fuck all while people's lives are destroyed in the hope that the Tory fuck up is bad enough to make Corbyn electable..."

That's it, isn't it. Corbyn and his supporters imagine the rise - phoenix-like - of a great socialist republic from the ashes of Brexit. Being a Tory is bad enough, but fantasists (whatever their political leanings) are the real problem - you simply cannot reason with them.

[oldfordie]

That was just a rushed statement after an unexpected result, hardly a party policy.

Putting pressure on the Tories - it's your mess, deal with it. It worked, the Tories are in disarray, they lost their majority in parliament, and more and more people are realising that Brexit is a bad idea.

EU referndum 23th June. following day Corbyn says we must trigger Art 50. now if the story ended their then what you say could well add up.
 25 th June Corbyn sacks Hillary Benn and issues a long statement to all Labour supporters, how they should should look upon leaving the EU positively.
Corbyn did not look at leaving the EU as a mess, he looked at it as a positive opportunity.

[SP]

The invocation of article 50 without a clear plan was madness. The only thing madder would have been to invoke it earlier, say June 24th as Corbyn called for.

The Tories are not in a mess because of Labour. They are in a mess because of the DUP. The lack of opposition allowed the Tories to redefine the referendum as a mandate for leaving the Single Market and the Custom Union. The Norway option evaporated without a whimper. Effective immediate opposition would have forced the Tories to justify that quantum shift. Instead Corbyn whipped Tory policy through. Labour conceded the "you fucked it up" moral high ground with their cavalier whipping. Corbyn will be judged harshly by history for standing aside whilst the country self-immolates. Labour should have an emperors new clothes policy. Campaign to revoke article 50. Not because Brexit is cancelled, but because May has completely fucked up the process. It is not logistically possible to prepare for Brexit in anything like that timescale. Claim that Article 50 is not fit for purpose and campaign for negotiations to replace it with something fit for purpose.  Legally if the case is made that Article 50 is not practically implementable, it causes severe legal issues for several countries who would not legally be able to implement the EU treaties. Make that case well enough, and the EU will be forced to renegotiate article 50. Then pledge that the country will get a referendum on the whether to invoke the new Article 50 with concrete proposals for both sides. If he was a great statesman he could pull that off. There is a narrative that rails against the crap handling of the Brexit, and the obviously destructive immediate consequence of doing it badly. Pitch it right and appeal to people wanting Brexit done properly, and remainers. Above all it would show real leadership and fill a void. The current fudge does not make Corbyn look like a Prime Minister in waiting. It looks like he is hiding from the biggest issue of the day - and that gets noticed by the people that you need to persuade to elect him.

[Alan_X]

That was just a rushed statement after an unexpected result, hardly a party policy.

Putting pressure on the Tories - it's your mess, deal with it. It worked, the Tories are in disarray, they lost their majority in parliament, and more and more people are realising that Brexit is a bad idea.

Besides, Article 50 means nothing more than leaving the EU, there's no word in there about single market membership or anything else. This is what Labour voted for, regardless of how some are trying to rewrite history:

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2016-2017/0132/17132.pdf

"Negotiate an exit" on Labour terms, judging by the manifesto, may just as well mean "let's keep everything as it was, just formally remove us from the list of members". Labour also ruled out "no deal", meaning no exit until there is a deal, which could take decades, by which time another referendum would be perfectly acceptable to everyone.

What's wrong with "look carefully"? And having looked carefully deciding that keeping all the benefits (i.e., staying in) is the best option. In any case, anything Corbyn may have said a year and a half ago cannot override later manifesto pledges.

The point is that the country is in the middle of negotiations following the triggering of Article 50. While Labour are 'looking carefully', keeping their powder dry, quoting Napoleon and generally 'playing a blinder' the country is being sold down the river with no idea from Labour what the alternative is.

The fact that you can interpret those vague statements in the way you do shows just how vacuous they are.

[Alan_X]

And let's be honest, the real reason Jezza and John want out of the EU is so they can play trains:

"We need to look very carefully at the terms of any trade relationship because at the moment we're part of the single market, obviously, that has within it restrictions on state aid and state spending, that has pressures on it through the European Union to privatise rail, for example, and other services."

[Elmo!]

And let's be honest, the real reason Jezza and John want out of the EU is so they can play trains:

"We need to look very carefully at the terms of any trade relationship because at the moment we're part of the single market, obviously, that has within it restrictions on state aid and state spending, that has pressures on it through the European Union to privatise rail, for example, and other services."

Which is complete nonsense of course because it's perfectly possible have a state owned rail company in the EU, as the likes of Germany and the Netherlands show. You just need to allow private companies to operate as well. Germany have private operators running a small number of services but it is effectively nationalised.

The EU stops you doing things that shouldn't be done anyway, such as propping up a failed national operator for political purposes via state aid.  Let the national rail company run as a not for profit but politically independent company and the EU will have no problems with it.

[Sarge]

"Well Arlene, what's it to be. You've won £1.5 billion in cash and also the 'special deal' prize that protects your economy, jobs and cross border trade.  The decision you have to make is ... do you want to trade it all in for ... a flag?"

"I'll have the flag please."

Lighten the mood a little.

[TepidT2O]

"Well Arlene, what's it to be. You've won £1.5 billion in cash and also the 'special deal' prize that protects your economy, jobs and cross border trade.  The decision you have to make is ... do you want to trade it all in for ... a flag?"

"I'll have the flag please."

Lighten the mood a little.

Trouble is, it’s bloody true! 

[Sarge]

Trouble is, it’s bloody true! 

I know, its crazy how a Country that deals in exports trade of 550bn is held up by 10 nutters from the North East corner of Ireland. May has to put Britian first and tell them to go fuck off.

[TepidT2O]

I know, its crazy how a Country that deals in exports trade of 550bn is held up by 10 nutters from the North East corner of Ireland. May has to put Britian first and tell them to go fuck off.

None of this, not one bit of it has anything to do with putting Britain First.

Mostly it’s been down to a mistrust of foreigners plus some MPs who think its some kind of German conspiracy to control Europe and a few others who think it’s an elitist capitalist conspiracy to control Europe..

[Alan_X]

Trouble is, it’s bloody true! 

And when it comes down to it, it's true of Brexit as a whole. Throwing everything away for 'sovereignty'.

[Sarge]

And when it comes down to it, it's true of Brexit as a whole. Throwing everything away for 'sovereignty'.

Yes true that never looked at it that way, fair point.