EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[nlogax]

Corbyn is unelectable. This is all very frustrating, as if Labour fielded a moderate (Blairite style but without the phony wars and stupid grin) in an election next week I'm near certain they would win it with a landslide.

There's not a chance Corbyn will get anywhere near No.10 even as a plus-one at a drinks reception. It's completely natural that Johnson wants an election. He'll likely win it, regain a Tory majority and see the WAB pass by the end of January if not sooner. Very difficult to imagine any other scenario now with the polls the way they are.

 

[Esker-pades]

How long before the EU turns round and says enough is enough, no future extension. Either accept the deal, leave next Thursday or send a letter to revoke A50.

The thing is that any agreement to extension has to be unanimous amongst the remaining 27 member states. President Macron of France is quite likely to veto any extension soon, because he wants the EU to focus on other stuff.

 

[Peter Kelford]

Corbyn is unelectable. This is all very frustrating, as if Labour fielded a moderate (Blairite style but without the phony wars and stupid grin) in an election next week I'm near certain they would win it with a landslide.

Shame we Brits are so phobic of a socialist. And anyway, he's not going to get his most controversial policies through anyway, and he won't suspend parliament to force them through, nor fire MPs for insubordination.

 

[Puffing Devil]

Corbyn spent his back-bench life rebelling against the Government. As others have said, he's a better protestor than a leader. Unless the Labour party replace him, they will not capture the floating voters, nor the many who have left the party due to the increasing presence of "Momentum" AKA the Militant Tendency.

For those looking to a GE to put an end to this sh!tshow, it's not going to happen. The only way to resolve will be a watertight referendum on the final deal then a GE to get down to the implementation, or not.

 

[Bletchleyite]

For those looking to a GE to put an end to this sh!tshow, it's not going to happen. The only way to resolve will be a watertight referendum on the final deal then a GE to get down to the implementation, or not.

I'd go with a binding referendum, i.e. that Parliament would vote for the outcome of the referendum mandating its immediate implementation, be that acceptance of the deal or withdrawal of Article 50.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I don't often post external satire here, but this seems to sum up the situation brilliantly...

BRITAIN’S Remain voters have pointed out that Brexit could have happened ages ago if Brexiters had not been such ****s about it.

Half the country explained that in 2016 the UK was pretty much resigned to Brexit, the Tories had a majority, and the whole thing could be done and dusted if not for kn*bheads pushing their luck.

Tom Booker of Maidenhead said: “You won, yeah? So when are you planning to get over it?

“Honestly, three years ago everyone was like ‘Well, that’s it, Brexit.’ Then May laid down all her impossible red lines, then she lost her election, and ever since it’s been like watching a thick bloke trying to argue his way out of a speeding fine.

“You could have had it! All you had to do was stay in a customs union and you could have stopped immigration, which was all you cared about anyway. But no.

“Nobody had heard of bloody no-deal before last summer but suddenly that was all you wanted and nothing else would do and look where it’s got you.

“Now we’re at the point where you’ve got an actual Brexit deal actually passed and the first thing you do is stop everything because you’re not allowed to ram it through in three days. Seriously?”

Brexiter Norman Steele said: “It’s not us. It’s everyone else.”

 

[nlogax]

"ever since it’s been like watching a thick bloke trying to argue his way out of a speeding fine"

Many a true word spoken in jest.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

So that Boris Johnson can (this analogy comes from this thread) go into his computer store and 'explain' why computer and electronic stores are closing and why people are out of employment and why the high street is in decline by saying that the 'corporate fat cats' are refusing to accept compromises thus destroying society, but his 'compromise' is £20 instead of £10 on a £500 computer.

In other words, so he can say 'they' stopped Brexit, not me. They don't want Brexit. They are anti-democratic, not me.

The fact that the 'deal' is accepted is of no consequence. He set this bill up to fail. He wanted it to be rejected by parliament, but realising he might actually win the vote, he decided to make a routine programme motion un-votable by making it rushed and then saying that he would withdraw the whole bill if the programme motion was rejected.

That was my computer analogy that I thought up,

Not convinced that's the reason though. Boris knows that his support depends crucially on delivering a hard-ish Brexit soon. If he mucks that up by throwing his toys out of the pram over the 3-day timetable, he'll be at the mercy of the Brexit party in the next election - and I can't see him deliberately putting himself in that situation.

 

[edwin_m]

I don't get why the Government have put the legislation for the current deal on hold. It's pretty clear from the Commons votes that the deal probably has the numbers to pass the Commons - it's just that MPs want proper scrutiny of it. It looks like, all the Government has to do is accept a short delay to Brexit, rearrange the timetable for their legislation to give MPs time to look at it properly, and there's a good change it would be passed and we'd be out of the EU by 31 January.

Instead, they've put it on hold, Boris is calling for an election but he doesn't have the numbers in Parliament to get one. It seems like a strongly pro-Leave Government has just sabotaged our chances of leaving with a deal.

Can anyone explain why/what's (probably) going on?

The second reading vote (passed on Monday night) is an agreement to take the Bill forward to more detailed examination and possible amendment. It's possible that some people who supported it then may actually want to see it amended rather than going through in its present form, but it had to pass that vote first. Some of the amendments might be unacceptable to the government and/or require more negotiations with the EU.

I suspect either Boris is throwing his toys out of the pram because he can't get the 31st of October, or they realise that their aim of bouncing this through Parliament has failed and once MPs get time to look at it properly more of them will realise it's a rotten deal and try to amend it or just vote against. They're now hoping that the current Tory lead in the polls and general dissatisfaction with Corbyn will translate into a workable majority at an election, in much the same way that it didn't in 2017.

The thing is that any agreement to extension has to be unanimous amongst the remaining 27 member states. President Macron of France is quite likely to veto any extension soon, because he wants the EU to focus on other stuff.

It seems likely that the EU will accept an extension, but may be less willing to go back into negotiation on an alternative deal because that's the part that takes the focus. By this logic they might support a long extension which can be cut short if a deal is agreed, rather than a short one that might have to be extended again in a few weeks time. However I believe if it drags on into the second half of 2020 then it starts upsetting the process of setting the new EU budget, probably because they don't know whether they will have the UK's contribution after the transition period.

 

[furnessvale]

I'd go with a binding referendum, i.e. that Parliament would vote for the outcome of the referendum mandating its immediate implementation, be that acceptance of the deal or withdrawal of Article 50.

No parliament can bind its successor. All that any following parliament of a different persuasion needs to do is enact legislation changing the position.

That is true no matter which way any "binding" referendum went, especially if the winning party had that in their manifesto.

 

[HSTEd]

No parliament can bind its successor. All that any following parliament of a different persuasion needs to do is enact legislation changing the position.

An act enabling the referendum could empower, and direct, the Chief Counting Officer to send the notification that the United Kingdom accepts the deal immediately upon a yes result being confirmed, or to send the notification that the United Kingdom wishes to revoke its Article 50 notification immediately upon a no result being confirmed.

There would be no time for Parliament to reverse it, and it would be a fait accompli.

 

[Peter Kelford]

An act enabling the referendum could empower, and direct, the Chief Counting Officer to send the notification that the United Kingdom accepts the deal immediately upon a yes result being confirmed, or to send the notification that the United Kingdom wishes to revoke its Article 50 notification immediately upon a no result being confirmed.

There would be no time for Parliament to reverse it, and it would be a fait accompli.

But before such a referendum, I am sure that those who seek to silence the will of the people will go before the courts to judge on the legality of the matter. Arguing, ironically, the exact opposite case to last time.

 

[Dave1987]

So Brexiteers are by far the most vocal on social media. The Daily Fail and Express are reporting a total whitewash in the next election and that Parliament will feel the rath of 17 million voters blah blah blah. Well May called an early GE thinking she would easily get a thumping majority so did not bother in campaigning. She underestimated the electorate and lost seats. Who is to say that lots of people won’t vote based on Brexit. Who is to say that BJ will get a massive majority?

 

[nlogax]

So Brexiteers are by far the most vocal on social media. The Daily Fail and Express are reporting a total whitewash in the next election and that Parliament will feel the rath of 17 million voters blah blah blah. Well May called an early GE thinking she would easily get a thumping majority so did not bother in campaigning. She underestimated the electorate and lost seats. Who is to say that lots of people won’t vote based on Brexit. Who is to say that BJ will get a massive majority?

The polls are pointing firmly in Johnson's direction, increasingly so in recent weeks. Hard to keep track of what's likely to happen though. What seems likely one day may be entirely unlikely a short while later. I've made a few contradictory statements on this very thread recently all which felt logical when I made them but less so now as things have developed.

As of today I think Johnson would get a majority of ten to fifteen seats based upon the most recent polls. One thing hasn't changed - Corbyn isn't PM material and he continues to put off a chunk of Labour voters.

 

[JonasB]

It's interesting to compare what politicians are saying today to what they said three years ago: https://www.sajidjavid.com/news/saj...ng-eu-guarantees-lost-decade-british-business

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The polls are pointing firmly in Johnson's direction, increasingly so in recent weeks. Hard to keep track of what's likely to happen though. What seems likely one day may be entirely unlikely a short while later. I've made a few contradictory statements on this very thread recently all which felt logical when I made them but less so now as things have developed.

As of today I think Johnson would get a majority of ten to fifteen seats based upon the most recent polls. One thing hasn't changed - Corbyn isn't PM material and he continues to put off a chunk of Labour voters.

I think the big unknown is the extent to which Remain supporters and left-leaning voters are willing to vote tactically to keep the Tories out. Based on the Tory lead over Labour in the polls, The Tories ought to win at least a medium-sized majority, even with the Brexit party syphoning off some of their votes. However, the more Johnson pushes for a hard Brexit and cuddles up to those extremists who don't respect our constitution or judiciary etc., the more he is likely to be annoying moderates and Remain supporters. That's likely to push tactical voting to a much greater level than we saw in 2017 - which is why I personally still feel that there's a reasonable chance an election could return a hung Parliament. Hopefully I'm not being too over-optimistic, as even ignoring Brexit, the thought of Boris as PM for 5 years fills me with horror

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

Corbyn isn't PM material

....and Johnson is,presumably?

 

[Struner]

It's interesting to compare what politicians are saying today to what they said three years ago: https://www.sajidjavid.com/news/saj...ng-eu-guarantees-lost-decade-british-business

Well, they’re politicians, aren’t they?

 

[Peter Kelford]

....and Johnson is,presumably?

Hardly. On the other hand, Ian Blackford and Jo Swinson are.

 

[nlogax]

....and Johnson is,presumably?

Doesn't matter what we think. Whatever way you look at it polls would suggest Johnson is relatively popular, certainly when compared to the prospect of Corbyn in that role.

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

Hardly. On the other hand, Ian Blackford and Jo Swinson are.

Well, why? What does not 'PM material' mean? The phrase is always being banded about, but with no explanation. Not attended the right school? Not a decent chap? Not one of us? Everyone has their own reasons for supporting a particular individual but this phrase is meaningless (as is the 'not fit to be Prime Minister' tag)

 

[Peter Kelford]

Well, why? What does not 'PM material' mean? The phrase is always being banded about, but with no explanation. Not attended the right school? Not a decent chap? Not one of us? Everyone has their own reasons for supporting a particular individual but this phrase is meaningless (as is the 'not fit to be Prime Minister' tag)

As in electable, rather than any rational metric.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Corbyn spent his back-bench life rebelling against the Government. As others have said, he's a better protestor than a leader. Unless the Labour party replace him, they will not capture the floating voters, nor the many who have left the party due to the increasing presence of "Momentum" AKA the Militant Tendency.

For those looking to a GE to put an end to this sh!tshow, it's not going to happen. The only way to resolve will be a watertight referendum on the final deal then a GE to get down to the implementation, or not.

What happens if the referendum is a 51% vote to remain? Because that will by no means be the end of Brexit?

 

[Puffing Devil]

What happens if the referendum is a 51% vote to remain? Because that will by no means be the end of Brexit?

That's the end of it. The agreed deal kicks in and we're out. The battle will then start to re-join in the future, just as the leavers will continue to battle to leave if it were 51/49 the other way.

We were all screwed by the initial referendum that should have required a supermajority to leave for such a huge change for the country. I still believe a large number of leavers do not fully understand the massive implications beyond the tribal tabloid headlines.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Well, why? What does not 'PM material' mean? The phrase is always being banded about, but with no explanation. Not attended the right school? Not a decent chap? Not one of us? Everyone has their own reasons for supporting a particular individual but this phrase is meaningless (as is the 'not fit to be Prime Minister' tag)

Interesting question. To me, being fit for Prime Minister means, broadly having the skills and qualities of character needed to do the job effectively. It doesn't mean having to have any particular viewpoints, but I would disqualify someone who doesn't respect democracy and the constraints that working within a representative democracy imposes. So, the things I would look for in judging whether someone is fit to be PM would be:

1. Reasonably honest and of sound and stable character.
2. Not corrupt
3. Has an idea of where they want to take the country.
4. Motivated to a large extent by the desire to help people and do good for the country and all of humanity
5. Pragmatic: Willing to change their approach according to circumstances
6. Willing to listen to and respect expert opinion, scientific evidence etc., and to change their mind based on that evidence
7. Respectful of democracy, the law, the judiciary and the British constitution
8. Has the basic managerial skills needed to work with people and get things done
9. Reasonably intelligent - enough to be able to read complex documents, and work with complex problems and figure out possible solutions rationally.

I would say that Boris Johnson very clearly fails on 'reasonably honest...' and also on 'respectful of democracy...' I'm also pretty dubious about 'motivated by a desire to help people', as from where I'm standing it looks like Boris is motivated exclusively by his own career ambitions and a sense of entitlement. For those reasons I'd feel pretty confident in saying that Boris is not fit to be PM.

Corbyn on the other hand... I don't agree with everything he says, and I appreciate that other people disagree with him even more - and may very much not want him to be PM because of policy disagreements. But I can't really see that he decisively fails any of my 'fit for PM' tests - although I have some doubts on 'has the basic managerial skills'.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

What happens if the referendum is a 51% vote to remain? Because that will by no means be the end of Brexit?

Then the Government cancels Article 50 and starts to get on with the job of Governing the country and actually devoting its bandwidth to all the serious non-Brexit-related problems the country faces. Of course, with a margin that narrow, I'm sure that the Brexit party and various other groups will feel motivated to carry on campaigning, doubtless in an attempt to secure a third referendum at some point in the future. And that's fine. That's democracy. The point is, at least it'll just be political groups campaigning, we won't have a paralysed Government.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

What happens if the referendum is a 51% vote to remain? Because that will by no means be the end of Brexit?

That's the end of it. The agreed deal kicks in and we're out.

Ummm, I think that's what would happen if a referendum on a specific deal produced a 51% vote to leave, not a 51% vote to remain!

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I can say now that having a second referendum with a remain vote would cause disaster. I have canvassed People in places like Kent who take the mentality that their vote means nothing and so they will no longer exercise it. There are leave voters who generally think there is a system running against them (true), and we are in terrible danger of disenfranchising people by proxy. I’m afraid that the people I have spoken to in person who are most rabid about a second referendum bat away how leavers will feel with a remain vote with a hand wave.

The downfall of Margret Thatcher by europhille forces caused a toxic atmosphere of undying loyalty to Mrs Thatcher and thus euroscepticism in the Conservative Party which ultimately blew up in Cameron’s face. Cancelling Brexit will cause an atmosphere in that party far worse.

 

[nlogax]

All boils down to Corbyn appearing to be utterly out of the loop when it comes to Labour's policies on Brexit, his apparent inability to stamp out antisemitism within his party and a general air of not being bothered or being clear about his position. Many of Labour's policies have a lot of broad support across the country, especially when it comes to public bodies such as the NHS - but the man himself is less popular than those policies and is a real liability and obstacle to Labour regaining power.

That's the reality. In an ideal world a PM would possess most of the personal qualities on @DynamicSpirit's list. Arguably Corbyn does, and Boris Johnson certainly doesn't. Practically that doesn't matter to voters nearly as much as you might think. When I say 'not PM material' this is in the eyes of voters, not against a list of reasonable qualities. It's going to take a miracle campaign for Corbyn to get anywhere near beating the incumbent

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can say now that having a second referendum with a remain vote would cause disaster. I have canvassed People in places like Kent who take the mentality that their vote means nothing and so they will no longer exercise it.

Well, their loss, then. Perhaps they might be a bit less stupid and spend the time to understand why revisiting the question in the face of changing evidence now makes sense?

FWIW, I think the outcome might well actually be in favour of the deal. No deal is unlikely - that's what the most vocal right-wing pitchfork-wavers want - is ruling that out what they are scared of?

Are you suggesting they might carry out acts of terrorism? If so, I hope the Army is sent in against such people; there is no room for that, nor for choosing a course of action based on muffled threats of violence.