Brexit - the next steps

[Nearly Sane]

So you think the complete schism during the campaign is now somehow miraculously healed do you? Don't be daft. There may currently be a bit of an uneasy truce, but it won't last as negotiation aspiration becomes clearer and things get tougher. The pro-remain Cameroons haven't gone away - they are biding their time and boy do they hold a grudge.

You do struggle not to personalise this, don't you. You get awfully emotional. This schism has been there for the last forty years. They still end up pulling together because it's about power. Individuals may resign but the Tory party likes power and is good at it.

[ProfessorDavey]

You do struggle not to personalise this, don't you. You get awfully emotional. This schism has been there for the last forty years. They still end up pulling together because it's about power. Individuals may resign but the Tory party likes power and is good at it.

Nope not personal at all - merely challenging your unsubstantiated assertions ... which you have clearly now refuted yourself by confirming that the Tories remain torn asunder on this issue.

What is new now is that the two way split of the first half of 2016 (Brexit vs Remain) has now split further into three, with the Brexit factions now schisming into hard vs soft Brexit. We are just beginning to see the division, most notably demonstrated between those that belief the current immigration controls are too restrictive (in other words the economy should be as free to take non EU workers as EU ones) and those that believe that immigration must be restricted and isn't controlled enough. It is a debate age old within the Tories (and in other places within right wing politics), between free market liberalisation versus good old fashioned isolationism.

The Tories believed the referendum would lance the boil, but actually it has spawned yet more boils, and sadly we are all losers in their family squabble.

[Nearly Sane]

Nope not personal at all - merely challenging your unsubstantiated assertions ... which you have clearly now refuted yourself by confirming that the Tories remain torn asunder on this issue.

What is new now is that the two way split of the first half of 2016 (Brexit vs Remain) has now split further into three, with the Brexit factions now schisming into hard vs soft Brexit. We are just beginning to see the division, most notably demonstrated between those that belief the current immigration controls are too restrictive (in other words the economy should be as free to take non EU workers as EU ones) and those that believe that immigration must be restricted and isn't controlled enough. It is a debate age old within the Tories (and in other places within right wing politics), between free market liberalisation versus good old fashioned isolationism.

The Tories believed the referendum would lance the boil, but actually it has spawned yet more boils, and sadly we are all losers in their family squabble.

see boldened bit, and yet they don't split.

[ProfessorDavey]

see boldened bit, and yet they don't split.

Split is a broader term than the narrow - a party splits to create two parties (in the manner of the SDP) that you seem to assume I am implying. A party can be fundamentally split internally - the Tories are now, and not just in two, but in three ideologically on the EU. Other parties may be just as split on other grounds, but none is more split on the EU.

And I suspect strongly that this will result in more splits (in your terms) soon. We have already seen splits off from the hard right end (Carswell) and last week's split from the soft Brexit faction. There will be more. The problem for May is that she can now only appease one of three factions, so all the time there will be two factions against her. Even Major only had two factions to deal with.

[Nearly Sane]

Split is a broader term than the narrow - a party splits to create two parties (in the manner of the SDP) that you seem to assume I am implying. A party can be fundamentally split internally - the Tories are now, and not just in two, but in three ideologically on the EU. Other parties may be just as split on other grounds, but none is more split on the EU.

And I suspect strongly that this will result in more splits (in your terms) soon. We have already seen splits off from the hard right end (Carswell) and last week's split from the soft Brexit faction. There will be more. The problem for May is that she can now only appease one of three factions, so all the time there will be two factions against her. Even Major only had two factions to deal with.

internal splits are irrelevant to whether there will be a second referendum. A second referendum would produce an external split, so not going to hapoen

[ProfessorDavey]

internal splits are irrelevant to whether there will be a second referendum. A second referendum would produce an external split, so not going to hapoen

So internal splits didn't lead to the first referendum - hmm, I think history demonstrates it did. The whole reason we ended up voting in a referendum on an issue that typically rated in the single digits of most important issues in the longstanding MORI survey of key issues was critically because the Tories were fundamentally split on the issue. Cameron played a short term game - lancing his internal party boil by promising a referendum, fulling believing he wouldn't win an overall majority and therefore could quietly drop it in coalition.

Given that a previous PM saw a referendum as a way to manage internal splits, there is a strong argument that May may do the same. And the challenge is more acute that previously where you only had half the party against you. Whatever May does she is likely to have two thirds of the party against her. I don't envy her challenge.

She also has a problem on a general election - we've had loads of press over Corbyn and deselection of MPs. But what of the Tories - should they look to deselect the two thirds who aren't of her view on Brexit. Actually pretty well impossible as the Tory party gives greater power to individual constituency parties than does Labour. And if she ends up after a general election (early or otherwise) with a bunch of emboldened MPs, with mandates more recent than the referendum, but who don't agree with her negotiating strategy ... well heaven help her.

[Nearly Sane]

So internal splits didn't lead to the first referendum - hmm, I think history demonstrates it did. The whole reason we ended up voting in a referendum on an issue that typically rated in the single digits of most important issues in the longstanding MORI survey of key issues was critically because the Tories were fundamentally split on the issue. Cameron played a short term game - lancing his internal party boil by promising a referendum, fulling believing he wouldn't win an overall majority and therefore could quietly drop it in coalition.

Given that a previous PM saw a referendum as a way to manage internal splits, there is a strong argument that May may do the same. And the challenge is more acute that previously where you only had half the party against you. Whatever May does she is likely to have two thirds of the party against her. I don't envy her challenge.

She also has a problem on a general election - we've had loads of press over Corbyn and deselection of MPs. But what of the Tories - should they look to deselect the two thirds who aren't of her view on Brexit. Actually pretty well impossible as the Tory party gives greater power to individual constituency parties than does Labour. And if she ends up after a general election (early or otherwise) with a bunch of emboldened MPs, with mandates more recent than the referendum, but who don't agree with her negotiating strategy ... well heaven help her.

who is in govt?

[ProfessorDavey]

who is in govt?

Who was elected as PM last year ... and where is he now?

[Nearly Sane]

Who was elected as PM last year ... and where is he now?

and which party is in Govt, and ahead in the opinion polls? The reason why the Tories do well is they have forgotten about Cameron and are still in power and doing well

Go back to 1990, And then think 1992

[ProfessorDavey]

and which party is in Govt, and ahead in the opinion polls? The reason why the Tories do well is they have forgotten about Cameron and are still in power and doing well

Go back to 1990, And then think 1992

The discussion was about whether the Tories were split, not their polling. And their split has already claimed the scalp of the PM voted in just last year.

On your issue vs 1990 and 1992 - in part you are correct, but in other aspect wrong. Major had no option to have a general election in 1992, May is 'safe' until 2020 - indeed she actually has a problem with being able to call an early election. So you are right that Major won in 1992 (he had no choice) - would he have won in 1994, which would be the equivalent date in relation to May attaining PM. Hmm - I think we know the answer. Things can change pretty quickly in politics.

[Nearly Sane]

The discussion was about whether the Tories were split, not their polling. And their split has already claimed the scalp of the PM voted in just last year.

On your issue vs 1990 and 1992 - in part you are correct, but in other aspect wrong. Major had no option to have a general election in 1992, May is 'safe' until 2020 - indeed she actually has a problem with being able to call an early election. So you are right that Major won in 1992 (at his choice) - would he have won in 1994, which would be the equivalent date in relation to May attaining PM. Hmm - I think we know the answer. Things can change pretty quickly in politics.

no, the discussion is about what the Tories will do and how it works with the electorate. They are ruthless. The point about 1990 and 1992 is that getting rid of a leader is easy for them.

[ProfessorDavey]

no, the discussion is about what the Tories will do and how it works with the electorate. They are ruthless. The point about 1990 and 1992 is that getting rid of a leader is easy for them.

So you are suggesting that May will be knifed in due course? Well I guess that rather proves my point.

You and I are up too late, and probably focussing more on events on the other side of the pond. Let's focus on that drama, shall we rather than a rather sterile dialogue on Brexit.

[Nearly Sane]

So you are suggesting that May will be knifed in due course? Well I guess that rather proves my point.

You and I are up too late, and probably focussing more on events on the other side of the pond. Let's focus on that drama, shall we rather than a rather sterile dialogue on Brexit.

Happy with that tonight. Take care

[ProfessorDavey]

Happy with that tonight. Take care

And to you.

[jeremyp]

A second referendum would produce an external split, so not going to hapoen

You are assuming that the political landscape in two years time will be the same as it is now. Two years of unremitting bad news about Brexit could change everything.

[ProfessorDavey]

You are assuming that the political landscape in two years time will be the same as it is now. Two years of unremitting bad news about Brexit could change everything.

Indeed - and the big news today isn't going to help as the US turns inward, isolationist and protectionist.

[Harrowby Hall]

Indeed - and the big news today isn't going to help as the US turns inward, isolationist and protectionist.

And wait until next year, when Marine Le Pen becomes president of France ....

[ProfessorDavey]

no, the discussion is about what the Tories will do and how it works with the electorate. They are ruthless. The point about 1990 and 1992 is that getting rid of a leader is easy for them.

Actually when you think about it the last 3 former Tory PMs were all brought down by splits over Europe.

Cameron had to promise a referendum to keep the Eurosceptic faction quiet - he lost, he went.

Major - sure he was eventually kicked out in a general election, but he was a lame duck for years prior to 1997 due to the splits in his party over Europe - remember him resigning and seeking re-election, and remember his comment about Eurosceptics in his cabinet as bastards.

And of course Thatcher - although the external perception was about the poll tax the key internal reason she was knifed was over Europe and the knifer in chief being Geoffrey Howe - remember his killer comment over her attitude to europe  - "It is rather like sending your opening batsmen to the crease only for them to find the moment that the first balls are bowled that their bats have been broken before the game by the team captain."

Who is to say that the Tory splits over europe won't claim a 4th PM scalp in May. I think she will find it impossible to reconcile and satisfy the three wings, pro-EU, hard Brexit and soft Brexit and whatever she does she will have two factions gunning for her - at least Cameron, Major and Thatcher had the somewhat simpler task of managing just two factions.

[Jack Knave]

Again, the EU is falling apart so much of this is by the way, and in two years time things could be radically different making our leaving easier.

[ad_orientem]

And wait until next year, when Marine Le Pen becomes president of France ....

Hopefully.

[wigginhall]

Why not go the whole hog, and bring in fascism?  That would deal with immigrants, trade deals, trade unions, wages, and so on.

[ProfessorDavey]

Again, the EU is falling apart so much of this is by the way, and in two years time things could be radically different making our leaving easier.

Possibly - alternatively UK Brexit and Trump may give pause for thought elsewhere in the EU with a redoubling to the project. Don't forget that affection for and engagement with the EU has always been much stronger in virtually all other EU countries compared to the UK.

Also in globally uncertain times there is a tendency to stick with what you know and to unite. If the US goes all protectionist under Trump I think it is less likely that other EU countries would jump into the unknown on trade by leaving the EU.

[Jack Knave]

Hopefully.

I think the US election result will give them hope and the people of France that change is possible.

[Jack Knave]

Why not go the whole hog, and bring in fascism?  That would deal with immigrants, trade deals, trade unions, wages, and so on.

We have fascists, it's called the EU, and it hasn't worked.

[Nearly Sane]

I think the US election result will give them hope and the people of France that change is possible.

what vote do you hope for in France?