UK Politics & Current Affairs Discussion & DIY Home Improvement Thread

[Smith John]

1 hour ago, sivispacem said:

A sh*tty one-liner or gif would be closer to an actual contribution than your last four posts.

I mean it's not like your pals on "your side" do the same:

 

25 minutes ago, Finite said:

You know he's just desperate to post something like this:  

 

...case In point.

 

It's no wonder you harbour the same 'rule for thee but not for me' attitude your Canadian hero, Sir Peoplekind, also embrace. Again, the self-unawareness gets increasingly impressive! But let's keep this in The Pit, friend. This section is for serious discussion.

[sivispacem]

As far as I can see it, I've let you both post non-contributory content. Remind me where the contradiction is here?

 

And if you actually wanted to

14 minutes ago, Smith John said:

keep this in The Pit

Because D&D is for 

14 minutes ago, Smith John said:

serious discussion

Then you should have come to the discussion armed with, at the very least, the basic ability to explain your own comments.

[Secura]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49810261
"This is the unanimous decision of all 11 Justices"

Nice.

Edited September 24, 2019 by Finite

[Uncle Sikee Atric]

The most damning part of this is the fact it's a unanimous decision, making it impossible to let Boris off the hook with the excuse of it being a close and split decision.

He's going to struggle to escape this now, the Commons is due to sit from 11:30 tomorrow.

 

[Ned Bingham]

In respect of the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court judgement: Take back control? It appears that control has been firmly taken back.

 

It remains to be seen whether the judges decision has effectively scuppered the progress of the good ship Brexit.

My money is now on a second referendum.

[Uncle Sikee Atric]

57 minutes ago, Short Stay said:

My money is now on a second referendum.

 

It's fairly obvious now....  It's going to be a hung parliament (and a hung Boris, from the gallows), with Labour and the Lib-Dems on the same page.  The LD's are pushing for revoke A50, but they'll only do that with a parliamentary majority giving them a mandate to do so.  A coalition between those two and the SNP will produce a No-Deal / Remain 2nd Ref.  The biggest question is, which out of the LD's and Labour will be the biggest party, especially since Red Jezza has decided to continue with fence sitting?

[Smith John]

Definitely cute how the BBC have been wheeling out all of the usual high profile remoaners all day long. Forget their poster girls, Miller, Swinson, Cherry, Lucas, etc, they hate Sturgeon and Corbyn, but preventing Brexit is of the utmost importance that they'll even give them all the airtime necessary.

 

Now I await legal proceedings against another high profile remoaner, John Major's proroguing of parliament back in 1997. But we all know that won't happen.

[sivispacem]

9 minutes ago, Smith John said:

Definitely cute how the BBC have been wheeling out all of the usual high profile remoaners all day long.

They've had plenty of Brexiteers on, usually grumbling about how they don't agree with the decision but will respect it.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the majority of them have been pretty quiet today. Almost like they've been handed a pretty substantial defeat. 

 

10 minutes ago, Smith John said:

but preventing Brexit is of the utmost importance

It's funny how brexiteers spend so long waxing lyrical about the how leaving the EU is "taking back control", and yet the moment our democratic instruments exercise control over government, at the request of the legislature and unanimously supported by the highest branch of judiciary in the land, and the outcome is contrary to what they want, then it all becomes a "remoaner conspiracy".

 

The real issue, which you'd understand if you read the judgement, was that the government put all of their eggs in the "judiciary can't decide on this" basket and failed to make representations to defend their position before the court.

 

16 minutes ago, Smith John said:

Now I await legal proceedings against another high profile remoaner, John Major's proroguing of parliament back in 1997

I'm not sure how many more ways this could be a swing and a miss.

 

Whataboutism? Check

False equivalence? Check

Straw man? Checkmate

 

All it really serves to do is highlight the fact you seem to get most of your political opinions from viral FaceBook posts.

[Ned Bingham]

The biggest problem with a 2nd referendum remains (sic) the fact that it would be undemocratic, despite all talk of giving the people a chance to reconsider their opinion now that more of the ramifications and implications of leaving the EU have been exposed to scrutiny (though the actual reality of leaving cannot be known before the fact).

 

Another problem is that a 2nd Ref would fuel the suspicion that it was the better half of society taking the reins out of White Van Man's hands. Despite talk of Leavers and Remainers each being a mixed bunch, all the best people would rather WVM keep his hands on the wheel and his opinions to himself.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Short Stay
getting my homos mixed up again

[Secura]

All the quotations about the arrival of fascism suggest that it would be a subtle, gradual affair. Boris seems to be jumping a few steps tonight. The man is a disgrace. If a majority of the people in this country feel that he represents their views this is really scary.

[Ned Bingham]

Fascism just around the corner? Hmmm, scare tactics. The man may be a disgrace but he was probably quite tired after his NY trip, and then had to face not only a very hostile commons but an extremely shrill and hectoring Paula Sherriff. Perhaps she was chosen because she gives a very good tongue-lashing and Boris is suspected of being particularly susceptible to that kind of treatment. Perhapsthe gals all squeezed into the one toilet cubicle and plotted their tactics beforehand?

 

Anyway, I've now decided to split my bet. Half on a second referendum and the other on Boris succeeding and us being out on 31st October. Says nothing really cause nobody knows.sheet. 

[The Queenslayer]

Here we are, still part of the EU and the electorate still ignored because of self-serving traitors.

An above poster talks about Boris being hung from the gallows.  But what of Swinson?  She outright wants to stop the 2016 result completely, never mind a 2nd vote.  That's the biggest FU to the UK public that I've ever seen from a party leader.  I'd like to see her hanged for that.  Corbyn, lifetime Eurosceptic, backtracked on everything he believed about the EU to satisfy the morons and communists in his party (which will get smashed on December 12th) but what else would you expect from a terrorist supporter.  The guy that shouted "wanker" at him got it right.

 

As for the woman bringing up the murder of Jo Cox, disgusting.  The Left will stoop to any level and rape any corpse to gain brownie points.  I'm no fan of Boris either.  He said he'd get us out on October 31st but I never thought he would.

Try as they may, cry and moan all you want, we WILL leave.

[Uncle Sikee Atric]

7 hours ago, The Queenslayer said:

Try as they may, cry and moan all you want, we WILL leave.

 

Leave, how?  

 

Bog snorkel much?  Because there's every chance it's about to become Boris new hobby, I'm sure you'll follow fashion.

[The Queenslayer]

14 minutes ago, Uncle Sikee Atric said:

 

Leave, how?  

 

Bog snorkel much?  Because there's every chance it's about to become Boris new hobby, I'm sure you'll follow fashion.

 

Alright Owen Jones, calm down.

[Uncle Sikee Atric]

1 minute ago, The Queenslayer said:

 

Alright Owen Jones, calm down.

Says Rod Liddle....

 

I just wonder whether your preference is pineapple or egg?

[sivispacem]

9 hours ago, The Queenslayer said:

Here we are, still part of the EU and the electorate still ignored because of self-serving traitors.

The fanatical (and fantastical) leaver rhetoric of "remainer traitors" being the cause for the current impasse is frankly laughable. The majority of these so-called "traitors" have voted more positively, on more occasions, for Brexit furthering motions than the hard-line ERG lunatics, who are the real cause of the mess we're in. 

 

In truth, it has been the pursuit of an ever-harder Brexit amongst a small clique within the Conservative party (and the Tory leadership's pandering to this), over a broader political consensus designed to bring at the very least sizeable portions of other parties (on whose consent any deal would have been predicated even before the disastrous 2017 election) that has truly been traitorous to both the desires of the country and the best interest of its citizens.

 

9 hours ago, The Queenslayer said:

But what of Swinson?  She outright wants to stop the 2016 result completely, never mind a 2nd vote.  

Swinson is not the PM and therefore doesn't (and doesn't have to pretend to) represent a consensus view of the wider population. Her accountability is to her direct electorate in East Dunbartonshire and to the membership of the Liberal Democrats. Both of whom her (and her political party's) position on the subject are aligned with. 

 

Which isn't to say it's isn't democratically challenging, but from a (personal) position of generally thinking the British electorate are a bunch of moronic plebs who have been fed and/or bought into an utterly bullsh*t rhetoric through a combination of wilful ignorance, latent xenophobia and delusional nationalism, it's a great position- if nothing else the apoplectic rage it incites amongst the politically clueless acts as a fabulous lighthouse in indicating people I should either avoid or ridicule.

 

 

 

The truth is, had the starting position on Brexit been one of close regulatory alignment and customs union (if not actual common market access) the whole thing could have been resolved fairly quickly. The issue has been those on the far right arbitrarily trying to redefine what "Brexit"- IE rescinding our membership of the EU- actually "means", to suit their personal political whims.

 

Nobody was asked on the 23rd June 2016 what they wanted our relationship with the EU to be other than their views on membership of it; not one individual who cast their ballot that day voted for a specific flavour of Brexit. So any claims of a particular version of Brexit being representative of the actual wills of the 51.9% is frankly delusional nonsense.

[Smith John]

I know this post will most likely trigger the sh*t out of sivispacem, and will do well to not be deleted, but it's f*cking hilarious how the BBC disable comments on their latest "those Russians under my bed" tin foil sh*t.

[Ned Bingham]

On 11/1/2019 at 12:14 PM, sivispacem said:

Nobody was asked on the 23rd June 2016 what they wanted our relationship with the EU to be other than their views on membership of it; not one individual who cast their ballot that day voted for a specific flavour of Brexit. So any claims of a particular version of Brexit being representative of the actual wills of the 51.9% is frankly delusional nonsense.

This line of argument has long puzzled me.  When one considers how many flavours of Brexit are possible and how many individual choices on the ballot paper this would entail, the whole notion of 'Nobody voted for this type or that type of Brexit' is ludicrous.  You might suppose that three choices max would have been possible: Remain, Leave, or Leave but only with a deal.  But then the question would have been 'What kind of deal?'  No, only a binary choice was possible, with the form of Leave to be decided after the fact.

[sivispacem]

4 hours ago, Smith John said:

the BBC disable comments on their latest "those Russians under my bed" tin foil sh*t.

I mean, there's an intelligence agency report into Russian interference which has been declassified and cleared for public release and yet the government refuses. Even pro-Conservative news outlets are reporting that's because it contains damaging allegations about party funding. It sounds to me more like the Beeb is protecting them given the circumstances.

 

Meanwhile Gordon Corera openly mocks the recent Labour party "sophisticated" cyber attack which transpired just to be a noddy DoS.

 

2 hours ago, Short Stay said:

This line of argument has long puzzled me.  When one considers how many flavours of Brexit are possible and how many individual choices on the ballot paper this would entail, the whole notion of 'Nobody voted for this type or that type of Brexit' is ludicrous.  

You're misunderstanding the point entirely. I'm not saying that nobody supported a particular form of Brexit when they voted, I'm saying that nobody explicitly voted for one, because that wasn't the question they were asked. 

 

The narrative that one form of Brexit- hard, soft, hot, cold, firm, wobbly, whatever- is representative of the views of the majority is self evidently bunk. That's my point- when far right wingers say that "we can't countenance a customs unions because that's not Brexit", they're only representing their own views, not those of the 51.9%. 

[Tchuck]

Also known as the No True Brexit fallacy.

 

Why not come up with a new consultation regarding the form of brexit the people actually want? Because the first thing was such bullsh*t filled with propaganda and lies, people really didn't think through what they were voting on. And to just simply accept such an uninformed decision is beyond retarded.

[Uncle Sikee Atric]

It was incredibly flawed, and it's resulted in the chaos we see today.  Three and a half years later and Leavers still don't know what they won!

[Ned Bingham]

16 hours ago, sivispacem said:

You're misunderstanding the point entirely. I'm not saying that nobody supported a particular form of Brexit when they voted, I'm saying that nobody explicitly voted for one, because that wasn't the question they were asked. 

 

The narrative that one form of Brexit- hard, soft, hot, cold, firm, wobbly, whatever- is representative of the views of the majority is self evidently bunk. That's my point- when far right wingers say that "we can't countenance a customs unions because that's not Brexit", they're only representing their own views, not those of the 51.9%. 

The form of Brexit that people voted for was of the "No longer a member of the EU type" and that was it.  What happened after we left, how and when we left and what the long-term consequences would be were not at question at the point of voting.  You are perfectly correct with "I'm saying that nobody explicitly voted for one, because that wasn't the question they were asked.", because no one was asked about varieties of Brexit, just as they weren't advised to think long and hard about the Irish question before they voted. It has only been after the vote and its implications have become apparent that serious questions have been raised.

 

Politics is mostly about compromise but that referendum was about the Will, the will of the people (or 51.9% at least).  If I misunderstand the point it's only because if you remain in a customs union you haven't actually left, you've just moved up into the draughty attic room.  I didn't vote to leave but I sure as hell am watching all the squirming, weasel-worded debate and machinations that's going on with a mixture of relish and disgust.

[Bartleby]

It is perfectly possible to be outside of the EU while being in a customs union with them. Unless you consider Turkey to be in the EU, which I don't think anyone would.

[sivispacem]

The above pretty much covers it off. Our referendum was on continued membership of the EU; inferring from it a view on customs arrangements, common market access or any other ongoing membership of other institutions which are not the EU is a mistake.

 

The EC, for instance, is not the EU. It's an entirely distinct entity.

[Smith John]

Your usual, intentionally confusing waffle aside, sivis, a customs union is still a union. It's in the name ffs...

[sivispacem]

"Customs union" is a colloquialism anyway, but are you now saying the issue is unions in general? What about the Union, which Brexiteers are trying so hard to destroy? And are you genuinely suggesting that "voting to leave the EU" means "voting to leave all unions and communities which our EU membership entitles us access to"? Because even the most ardent Farage worshipers don't seriously countenance that. And I'm pretty sure that wasn't the question at hand.

 

As usual, you're contributing nothing of relevance, or even basic coherence. Pretending that "the EU" is interchangable with "the European Community" or "European Economic Area" is utter twaddle that only the most ignorant could entertain.

[Bartleby]

2 hours ago, Smith John said:

Your usual, intentionally confusing waffle aside, sivis, a customs union is still a union. It's in the name ffs...

Apparently, his post of a grand total of four sentences proved such an arduous challenge to read that you forgot that the referendum asked specifically about the European Union, not any other “union”.

 

Terms like customs arrangements and common market access are fundamental terms for understanding the nature of EU membership. If they’re throwing you for a loop, then you badly need to do some basic research.

[Ned Bingham]

I accept that it's possible to be outside the EU and still be in a customs union with them - but is that going to cut the mustard?  We move from being a full member and world's fifth largest economy, to fifth largest economy which then takes its economic orders from an external entity.  Sure, you can form a customs union with the EU if you are approaching it from the outside, but to peel off from the herd and still expect the herd to listen to an outrider?  Then of course you'd have all the internal UK voices pointing to the faults of the new reality and how much better full membership would be and couldn't we just change our minds and go back in?

 

The problem with opposing Leave is that you can't just say "Remain", because the two sides aren't just opinions, there was a vote.  That means you have to go rhetorical, questioning exactly what leaving meant and suggesting that we do leave but only a little teensy bit.  Or using every legal obstacle and challenge known to man in order to remain whilst po-facedly maintaining a respect for the democratic process.  Was that referendum a case of too much democracy?

 

 

 

 

Edited November 14, 2019 by Short Stay

[Bartleby]

20 minutes ago, Short Stay said:

I accept that it's possible to be outside the EU and still be in a customs union with them - but is that going to cut the mustard?

Economically speaking it would, considering its positive effects on the reduction of trade barriers and increased international investment, as evidenced in Turkey. Being in a customs union with the EU does not in any way imply that the state is a member: what it tends to mean is nothing further than the creation of a free trade area with a common external tariff. This does not have to apply to all sections of the economy, as (if I recall correctly) the EU-Turkey customs union does not include agriculture, public procurement, or the service industry.

 

As for being "listened to" as an outsider, if your point is that the UK would inevitably be the junior partner with regards to trade with the EU that's true......however that would be true even without a customs union. It would remain true even with any other kind of agreement as well, which the UK inevitably would have to make as the EU will very likely continue to be their most important trading partner going forward.

 

I don't see how a customs union would give any more leverage to remainers than, say, a no-deal Brexit; if anything it appears to me the latter would be more likely to do that, given its larger amount of immediately visible economic impact, especially as I've known a fair few leavers who gleefully point to how the economy hasn't altogether imploded as evidence of their vindication.

[Ned Bingham]

The idea that people only voted to leave the EU, and therefore by default acquiesced to remain in all the other parts of the European Project, is disingenuous. I suspect that most Leavers wanted to leave Europe per se. I also suspect that more generally they'd rather do without 'Community','Partnerships','Stakeholders', and quite possibly 'equality and diversity' too. Many Leavers probably find those concepts 'Problematic'.

 

I accept that we may well be better off at least in customs union but I, for one, just can't get excited about, or even get along with, some harmonised behemoth of Orwellian proportions.

For some reason unknown to me I've never liked it when politicians in my neck of the UK make the case that we should emulate the high tax, social welfare economies of some of our European neighbours. I've looked at what was on offer and thought "That looks really interesting - not".

 

I've long thought that talk of how the economy has done well since the vote, despite dire warnings to contrary, was premature because the economic shock would probably come after we left.