Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Brexit Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Ad hoc, Middlesbrough doesn't have a Tory MP, Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland has a Tory MP. It used to be called Langbaurgh and has always been a bit of a swing seat as it contains Middlesbrough's middle class suburbs, a large number of retirees and small town and rural voters in Guisborough, Skelton, Saltburn, Loftus, areas still smarting about the EU* closing Redcar steelworks. It had a Labour MP for the past five elections, in a seat that would probably be safe Tory if it were elsewhere in the country.

    *actually it was the owners and the EU said explicitly that the Tories weren't prevented by state aid rules from intervening to save the plant, but they declined, however the narrative that has taken hold is as above

    Comment


      Are there more scottish labour mp's representing english constituencies, than scottish constituencies?

      Comment


        Starmer and Corbyn are playing a blinder here, aren't they?

        Comment


          Yeah, a couple of weeks after adopting the position people have been begging them to take for months, they achieve (in a Leonard Nimoy/Simpsons sense) something way more substantive than had eluded them previously. Hear that? It's the sound of one hand clapping.

          Comment


            Originally posted by sw2borshch View Post
            Ad hoc, Middlesbrough doesn't have a Tory MP, Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland has a Tory MP. It used to be called Langbaurgh and has always been a bit of a swing seat as it contains Middlesbrough's middle class suburbs, a large number of retirees and small town and rural voters in Guisborough, Skelton, Saltburn, Loftus, areas still smarting about the EU* closing Redcar steelworks. It had a Labour MP for the past five elections, in a seat that would probably be safe Tory if it were elsewhere in the country.

            *actually it was the owners and the EU said explicitly that the Tories weren't prevented by state aid rules from intervening to save the plant, but they declined, however the narrative that has taken hold is as above
            Thanks. So when this lanky streak of piss kept talking about how parliament had "betrayed my constituents in Middlesbrough" (in what I have to say didn't sound much like a Middlesbrough accent) he was over egging the pudding not just in his claim to be speaking for his constituents en masse, but also in the implication that he was bravely speaking up for the forgotten working class? Makes sense. He is, I assume an Erg.

            By the way, how can we convince the media to pronounce Erg how it should be pronounced, as it looks, rather than as three letters.

            Comment


              How do indicative votes work? I haven;t been able to find a satisfactory answer. I understand that they're designed to test opinion rather than have any binding effect, but i don't know the process. Are there a series of votes on different things? (eg Would you be supportive of a second referndum or not?) or is it a sort of ballot with a number of options on? (eg which of these options is your preference A, B, C, D etc?). Is it a secret ballot or is it like the regular parliamentary voting?

              Comment


                So I was in a meeting yesterday and the Brexit plans for the organisation are:
                Being told to expect shortages in 10% of drugs but no one knows which 10%
                Being told to expect fuel shortages
                All the insulin is made in Denmark. That's not an optional drug. People who are prescribed it are called insulin-DEPENDENT for a reason. At the moment no guarantee insulin won't be in the 10%

                There's no actual plan because there's no information to plan with.

                Why the fuck are we doing this as a nation? Nobody voted for this even if they voted Leave.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Janik View Post
                  Yeah, a couple of weeks after adopting the position people have been begging them to take for months, they achieve (in a Leonard Nimoy/Simpsons sense) something way more substantive than had eluded them previously. Hear that? It's the sound of one hand clapping.
                  I was being a little cheeky, and clumsy; I just meant that the focus is rightly on the Tories imploding. However, the position that Starmer and Corbyn - well, Labour - have got is just the playing out of the conference vote . It could only happen now.

                  Comment


                    Just a quick note re Tubby for those concerned; made some inquiries, he's fine, just planning a trip abroad so a bit occupied with that.

                    Comment


                      Thanks wingco, that's very good to know

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by ad hoc View Post
                        Thanks wingco, that's very good to know
                        What ad said.

                        Comment


                          Yes indeed, though It's funny that just as Brexit gets to its most dramatic point Tubby, after two years of pithy remarks and references to Simon Wren-Lewis's tweets, isn't around to wallow in the sloppy climax.

                          Comment


                            This is a really helpful and clear set of informative tweets about what options are available. The writer is the British Advocate General at the ECJ.
                            https://twitter.com/akulith/status/1105976757499367424
                            The thread continues here
                            https://twitter.com/akulith/status/1105978993491263488

                            Comment


                              The process of building consensus around a realistic deal should have begun many months ago but instead it's starting in mid-March, 14 days from doomsday, because the PM wanted to force through something that was unacceptable to at least 2/3 of MPs and waved away any shifts on red lines.

                              Comment


                                The process of building consensus around a realistic deal should have begun many months ago before the Article 50 notification
                                FTFY

                                Comment


                                  Originally posted by Nocturnal Submission View Post
                                  Yes indeed, though It's funny that just as Brexit gets to its most dramatic point Tubby, after two years of pithy remarks and references to Simon Wren-Lewis's tweets, isn't around to wallow in the sloppy climax.
                                  I wonder if the Tubbs is practicing some self-care by checking out of the drama for a few weeks.

                                  Comment


                                    Originally posted by ad hoc View Post
                                    This is a really helpful and clear set of informative tweets about what options are available. The writer is the British Advocate General at the ECJ.
                                    https://twitter.com/akulith/status/1105976757499367424
                                    The thread continues here
                                    https://twitter.com/akulith/status/1105978993491263488
                                    Pretty interesting in that she says if the UK's red lines changes, then the EU might be willing to reopen the WA - what Corbyn has been arguing - and that a longer period might be possible without holding EP elections if there's some finality about it, which doesn't rule out a people's vote either.

                                    Comment


                                      I wonder if the Tubbs is practicing some self-care by checking out of the drama for a few weeks.
                                      He's a wise man if he is.
                                      Last edited by Nocturnal Submission; 14-03-2019, 13:39.

                                      Comment


                                        Originally posted by ad hoc View Post
                                        How do indicative votes work? I haven;t been able to find a satisfactory answer. I understand that they're designed to test opinion rather than have any binding effect, but i don't know the process. Are there a series of votes on different things? (eg Would you be supportive of a second referndum or not?) or is it a sort of ballot with a number of options on? (eg which of these options is your preference A, B, C, D etc?). Is it a secret ballot or is it like the regular parliamentary voting?
                                        It would be normal division voting, and would be a series of binary aye/no votes, so in theory the could be majorities for contradictory (or at least incompatible) positions. There is some subtlety around whether the votes are amendments to a single motion, or individual motions in themselves, but the principle is the same and would all be 'this House resolves' non-legally binding votes, which essentially last night's was.

                                        Comment


                                          Originally posted by Patrick Thistle View Post


                                          Why the fuck are we doing this as a nation? Nobody voted for this even if they voted Leave.
                                          You will find out that a lot of them actually voted for that, they say now and we'll be fine because WW2, etc, etc

                                          You heard of the Trump base that support him through thick and thin, welcome to the Brexit base, they'll take everything on the chin for their dream...

                                          Comment


                                            From the Graun:

                                            Bercow calls four amendments, including one calling for a second referendum

                                            John Bercow, the speaker, says he is calling four amendments, plus an amendment to an amendment.

                                            They are:

                                            1) Sarah Wollaston’s - calling for an extension to article 50 to allow for time for a referendum on Brexit.

                                            2) Hilary Benn’s - saying next Wednesday should be set aside for a debate that would start the process of allowing MPs to hold indicative votes on Brexit alternatives. There is also an amendment to this amendment, from Labour’s Lucy Powell, changing the timing.

                                            3) Labour’s - saying article 50 should be extended to allow time for MPs to find a majority for a different approach to Brexit.

                                            4) Chris Bryant’s - saying Theresa May should not be allowed to put her deal to the Commons again.


                                            The Tory Brexiter Mark Francois used a point of order to complain about Bercow’s failure to call the Lee Rowley amendment ruling out a second referendum. It has been signed by more than 100 MPs.

                                            Bercow will not go into detail about why he did not select it, but he says sometimes MPs are disappointed by his selection of amendments.

                                            The Labour MP Caroline Flint uses a point of order to say she is pleased Bercow has selected the Wollaston amendment for a second referendum. She says it is the first chance that MPs will get to vote against the idea.

                                            Comment


                                              Guy Verhofstadt is proving rather hawkish on extensions:

                                              http://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1106145647722295296

                                              Comment


                                                I think I'd support all of those amendments

                                                Comment


                                                  So the govt motion of the day goes:

                                                  - if the May deal passes by Wednesday (start of EU council meeting) then the govt will ask for an extension to A50 until end of June to pass all the necessary exit legislation
                                                  - if the May deal doesn't pass by Weds, then we have to ask for a longer extension and we'll need to show a plan of how and when parliament will decide what to do - Lidlington is suggesting indicative votes might be the way forward. Also this means taking part in the Euro elections.


                                                  Lidlington: "If [passing a deal by next Wednesday] proves, for whatever reason, not to be possible, we would be faced with the prospect of choosing only a long extension during which the house would need to face up to the choices in front of it, and the consequences of the decisions that it has taken: that the government recognises that the house will require time to consider the potential ways forward ... in such a scenario the government, having consulted the usual channels at that time, would facilitate a process in the two weeks after the March European council to allow the house to seek a majority on the way forward. But we should be clear about the consequences if that were to happen. If we are in the world of a longer extension, for this house to come to a decision, then we will be required as a condition to hold European parliamentary elections in May."
                                                  Last edited by Kevin S; 14-03-2019, 12:08.

                                                  Comment


                                                    So if Bryant's amendment passes, then we're straight into option 2?

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X