Brexit - the next steps

[Stranger]

This is quite funny:

Why did Varadkar say he wanted to be Athena to Johnson's Hercules?

[Spud]

The SNP leader shook the Speaker's hand as he departed.
And because they were so hot and sweaty from such a long session, they all went for a late night swim in the river Thames.
Every year after that, they would have a vote on Brexit, but it never happened.
And they all lived happily ever after.
The end.

[Anchorman]

The SNP leader shook the Speaker's hand as he departed.
And because they were so hot and sweaty from such a long session, they all went for a late night swim in the river Thames.
Every year after that, they would have a vote on Brexit, but it never happened.
And they all lived happily ever after.
The end.

   



"They all lived happily ever after"?
Not if we can help it.
The beginning.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Heard a rumour yesterday that in the coming GE BS Boris will be parachuted into my (solid tory seat) constituency of Uttlesford (North-West Essex, centred on the pretty market town of Saffron Walden).

Remember, you read it here first.

Or not.

[Walter]

Heard a rumour yesterday that in the coming GE BS Boris will be parachuted into my (solid tory seat) constituency of Uttlesford (North-West Essex, centred on the pretty market town of Saffron Walden).

Remember, you read it here first.

Or not.

Safron Walden ?
Does he wear a straw fedora ? I think I know him 😎

[ippy]

To paraphrase the Scottish actor Brian Cox, on Question Time a while back, separation from England (and England is the problem as regards Brexit) isn't the same thing as separation from the EU.

It seems to me, from a Scottish perspective, that you guys in England are listening to a different political drum these days - and if you can't drum out the Tories and their Brexit madness then I see no future in the UK.

I have virtually no time for the Tories for much the same reasons, as far as I can tell, as you, but on this occasion I'll do a deal with the devil and vote whichever way is the most likely to disconnect the UK from the EU's political structures, even if it involves voting Tory.

Regards, ippy.   

[ippy]

Gordon,

Indeed - whenever a no deal politician opens with, "what the people want..." I reach for my blunderbuss.

Likewise for me when any thinly disguised attempt to suggest we have another referendum, such as a peoples vote, that has already been taken in 2016.

That was very difficult for me to write, when you take into consideration I'm someone that's supposed to not know what they were voting for back in 2016.

If they end up trying to lock up Boris, that is, if he were to ignore the law about asking for an extension, that could be a trigger for a modern day version of storming the Bastille, if that did happen I'll make certain to be there!

Regards, ippy.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Ippy,

I have virtually no time for the Tories for much the same reasons, as far as I can tell, as you, but on this occasion I'll do a deal with the devil and vote whichever way is the most likely to disconnect the UK from the EU's political structures, even if it involves voting Tory.

Sadly, I believe you. Leaving aside for now though whether a “disconnect the UK from the EU's political structures” is a good thing or a bad thing (damn them with their safety standards and workers’ rights, sharing of security information, huge bargaining power to negotiate trade deals with the rest of the world that we could never hope to emulate, billions of £££s of benefit from trading in a single market etc) what price for this disconnect would be too high even for you? 

How about increases in food prices? Shortages of medicines? The dissolution of the Union as Scotland and maybe others go their own way? How about the US carving out chunks of the NHS, or perhaps demanding that their lower safety standard foods must be part of any trade deal?

Is any price too high, or would you still feel vindicated as you stood in the smoking ruins clutching your blue passport (that we could have had in any case) and shouting “fish”?

[Roses]

Ippy,

Sadly, I believe you. Leaving aside for now though whether a “disconnect the UK from the EU's political structures” is a good thing or a bad thing (damn them with their safety standards and workers’ rights, sharing of security information, huge bargaining power to negotiate trade deals with the rest of the world that we could never hope to emulate, billions of £££s of benefit from trading in a single market etc) what price for this disconnect would be too high even for you? 

How about increases in food prices? Shortages of medicines? The dissolution of the Union as Scotland and maybe others go their own way? How about the US carving out chunks of the NHS, or perhaps demanding that their lower safety standard foods must be part of any trade deal?

Is any price too high, or would you still feel vindicated as you stood in the smoking ruins clutching your blue passport (that we could have had in any case) and shouting “fish”?

Good post.

[ippy]

Good post.

Well LR, it would be a good post to a remainer.

We've both dug our trenches donned our tin hats and won't be changing sides, if remain does get their way for another referendum or we have an election either way I'm sure if you take another look at the result and the amount of  UK's brexit reps now sitting at Brussels it'll be giving you a good indication of where either of these two events (election or referendum), are likely to be taking the UK.

Regards, ippy.

[Stranger]

Likewise for me when any thinly disguised attempt to suggest we have another referendum, such as a peoples vote, that has already been taken in 2016.

So this is basically a tacit admission that you think public opinion is no longer behind Brexit, now that facts have become clear. Which also suggests what has been argued by those supporting another referendum: people voted for the fantasy they were presented with, not "Brexit and any and all costs".

Otherwise, why would you oppose it?

If they end up trying to lock up Boris, that is, if he were to ignore the law about asking for an extension, that could be a trigger for a modern day version of storming the Bastille, if that did happen I'll make certain to be there!

Yet you still can't or won't come up with even a single, solitary, real-world, practical reason - something about the UK being in the EU that has made your life worse, or something about leaving that will make it better.

Not one.

Yet you'll risk real people suffering (possibly dying from medicine shortage or in new troubles in NI), you'd support the PM challenging the rule of law, and now some sort of attempted revolution(?), in order for what? So you can have a warm, fuzzy feeling that the UK is not subject to the ECJ and we won't be part of some "federal Europe"?

I've been asking the same question about practical reasons elsewhere and I've still not found a single Brexiteer who will answer it.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Ippy,

Well LR, it would be a good post to a remainer.

We've both dug our trenches donned our tin hats and won't be changing sides, if remain does get their way for another referendum or we have an election either way I'm sure if you take another look at the result and the amount of  UK's brexit reps now sitting at Brussels it'll be giving you a good indication of where either of these two events (election or referendum), are likely to be taking the UK.

Why if the evidence changed (or even just became available) wouldn’t you change your mind?

As for a second referendum, what do you so have against democracy that you wouldn’t want people to decide on the facts as they now are rather than on the promises as they were three years ago?

[Christine]

Ippy  said this on the Searching for God thread

"Sovereignty, is at the top of my list among several other, I think very good solid reasons why we the UK should leaving.

I think for various reasons family and friends etc we're all set with our decisions I won't be altering my wish to leave the EU decision and as I've said from my own experience everybody seems to be wearing their tin hats ready for battle.

I really do think the'll be a lot of unpleasant trouble if remainers get anywhere near to  frustrating the referendum winning leave vote I sincerely hope not.

I don't see any point in discussing brexit one way or another, will you be changing your pov, I doubt it well nor will I.

Kind regards ippy"

And also referenced Lord Pearson who thinks the BBC is biased against leaving the EU.  He's a former leader of UKIP.

You don't seem able to give an argument to support your view of the EU.  How has our sovereignty been compromised by being a member of the EU?  I don't think it has, but I can't argue against your position if all you say is "sovereignty". 

From my own experience of listening to BBC news (especially Today on R4 (and I know anecdotes aren't evidence)) I would say its bias is towards the Conservative Party.  Today is edited by a friend of Johnson's and regularly presented by a committed anti-European (John Humphrys) and a chap who's held a number of official positions within Conservative Party organisations (Nick Robinson).  Listen to an interview by Humphrys of David Davis or Mogg, then to an interview of any Labour or remain supporting politician.  While I accept that I'm more likely to notice when my existing opinions are being reinforced, the double standards are blatant.

And when you say nobody will change their minds, speak for yourself.  I am open to rational, logical arguments and ready to change my mind if I'm convinced.  All I'm seeing at the moment is a gang of tin-pot would-be despots, liars and incompetents, with no respect for democracy, hi-jacking our woefully inadequate "constitution" to drive through a policy that they are well aware a majority of the electorate don't want any more (if they ever did).  Mogg, Martin, Banks etc want out of the EU before January when anti-tax avoidance laws come into effect and if they can destabilise the EU, which has been an effective counter to economic domination by US into the bargain, that will only make them happier.  These charlatans need holding to account, but they appear to be able to lie without challenge on the BBC.

Watching The Rise of the Nazis last night brought two things to mind.  In 50 years time, if civilisation survives (not leaving the EU, climate change) how will this episode be seen and will those who've used positions of influence to facilitate people like Farage be proud of their role; and if you're right about "unpleasant trouble" from people who prefer violence to rational argument, I might get to die fighting fascists instead of dribbling my last days away in an underfunded and neglectful care home.  That you think threats are a substitute for rational argument is depressing, but I know you're not the only one because I look at Twitter.

[jeremyp]

Likewise for me when any thinly disguised attempt to suggest we have another referendum, such as a peoples vote, that has already been taken in 2016.

We took a referendum in 1975. Why is the 2016 referendum allowed to subvert that democratic decision?

[Christine]

Just a couple of links to information about Lord Pearson:

He invited Stephen Yaxley-Lennon to Westminster

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/932318/ukip-lord-pearson-rannoch-tommy-robinson-westminster-baroness-warsi

He invited Geert Wilders to Westminster

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Pearson,_Baron_Pearson_of_Rannoch

Draw your own conclusions.

[wigginhall]

Yes, Brexit has been hijacked by the hard right.  Some leavers seem to relish that, others say, can't be helped.   Trump mk 2.

[Roses]

Yes, Brexit has been hijacked by the hard right.  Some leavers seem to relish that, others say, can't be helped.   Trump mk 2.

Very scary!

[bluehillside Retd.]

What's bewildering and scary I find is that apparently otherwise decent people like ippy have drunk so much of the Brexit propaganda Kool Aid that they seem not only to be lurching toward a sort of Poundland fascism but to be doing it with full bunting, marching band and 21-gun salute.

"What's that you say? All the evidence we have now falsifies the leave campaign BS? I JUST DON'T CARE! SOVEREIGNTY! BLUE PASSPORTS! FISH DAMMIT!!!"

[Udayana]

Very much agree with your great post Christine.

Ippy  said this on the Searching for God thread

"Sovereignty, is at the top of my list among several other, I think very good solid reasons why we the UK should leaving.
..."
...
You don't seem able to give an argument to support your view of the EU.  How has our sovereignty been compromised by being a member of the EU?  I don't think it has, but I can't argue against your position if all you say is "sovereignty". 
...

We could say that "sovereignty" is always an issue - balancing the power, needs or desires of the individual vs. those of the family or society, those of different clans or tribes against each other,  nations in international organisation or even, eventually, of planets in or out of a United Federation of Planets

We will always have both competition and cooperation between different groups or identities and there will always be a to and fro about the boundaries between them.

Civilisation could be seen as being defined by how these issues are resolved: Carefully maximising freedom and equity within mutually supporting frameworks vs. tearing down existing structures - that may have become irredeemably corrupt - usually to install a new regime with a much more primitive outlook.

[Christine]

Very much agree with your great post Christine.

We could say that "sovereignty" is always an issue - balancing the power, needs or desires of the individual vs. those of the family or society, those of different clans or tribes against each other,  nations in international organisation or even, eventually, of planets in or out of a United Federation of Planets

We will always have both competition and cooperation between different groups or identities and there will always be a to and fro about the boundaries between them.

Civilisation could be seen as being defined by how these issues are resolved: Carefully maximising freedom and equity within mutually supporting frameworks vs. tearing down existing structures - that may have become irredeemably corrupt - usually to install a new regime with a much more primitive outlook.

Hi Udayana,

I agree about how sovereignty inevitably has to be managed.  I think the "pooling" of sovereignty for mutual benefit, at any level, is both the right thing to do and the best way to live together.  Personally I would prefer to live in harmony with my neighbours, which isn't always possible, but thanks to the agreed norms and rules of society, when we disagree we have a framework to resolve our differences without us both burning our houses down. 

[ProfessorDavey]

Hi Udayana,

I agree about how sovereignty inevitably has to be managed.  I think the "pooling" of sovereignty for mutual benefit, at any level, is both the right thing to do and the best way to live together.  Personally I would prefer to live in harmony with my neighbours, which isn't always possible, but thanks to the agreed norms and rules of society, when we disagree we have a framework to resolve our differences without us both burning our houses down.

That's correct - there are trade offs that are made between complete ability to do as we wish as an individual (which is the ultimate form of sovereignty) and pooling our sovereignty for collective benefit. And we do this all the time - the UK's membership of NATO or the UN limits our national sovereignty but that is beneficial overall. I strongly think the same to be true of membership of the EU, although of course others differ in that view

But there is a broader issue here - too often when people talk about sovereignty it is in the context of the nation state, as if this is somehow inalienable and unarguably primacy. I simply don't see this - nation states aren't fixed and indeed the whole concept of the nation state as the primary level of governance is a relatively new thing - perhaps a few hundreds of years. Prior to that there was much greater flux with the primacy at a much smaller level.

And of course for those that keep on banging on about the UK as if it is an entity unchanging for millennia worth noting that the current form of the UK is less than 100 years old.

[ippy]

Ippy,

Why if the evidence changed (or even just became available) wouldn’t you change your mind?

As for a second referendum, what do you so have against democracy that you wouldn’t want people to decide on the facts as they now are rather than on the promises as they were three years ago?

 
In my book democracy is and still was the vote taken in 2016, surly you're not still not looking for the best out of three - five, we're supposed to be the dippy ones that didn't know what we were voting for.

More than likely I won't be changing my mind for similar reasons to why you won't be changing your mind because we don't necessarily agree on what we think are the facts and it wouldn't matter how many clay pidgins I launched what would be the point we're at completely opposite ends on this one Blue, shame I usually go along with most of your lines of thought.

Stranger, this could be more or less another attempt by me to convey why I'm not debating have a read I know this post is addressed to Blue but it could equally be to your good self or any other remainer.

Regards, ippy.

[ippy]

Ippy  said this on the Searching for God thread

"Sovereignty, is at the top of my list among several other, I think very good solid reasons why we the UK should leaving.

I think for various reasons family and friends etc we're all set with our decisions I won't be altering my wish to leave the EU decision and as I've said from my own experience everybody seems to be wearing their tin hats ready for battle.

I really do think the'll be a lot of unpleasant trouble if remainers get anywhere near to  frustrating the referendum winning leave vote I sincerely hope not.

I don't see any point in discussing brexit one way or another, will you be changing your pov, I doubt it well nor will I.

Kind regards ippy"

And also referenced Lord Pearson who thinks the BBC is biased against leaving the EU.  He's a former leader of UKIP.

You don't seem able to give an argument to support your view of the EU.  How has our sovereignty been compromised by being a member of the EU?  I don't think it has, but I can't argue against your position if all you say is "sovereignty". 

From my own experience of listening to BBC news (especially Today on R4 (and I know anecdotes aren't evidence)) I would say its bias is towards the Conservative Party.  Today is edited by a friend of Johnson's and regularly presented by a committed anti-European (John Humphrys) and a chap who's held a number of official positions within Conservative Party organisations (Nick Robinson).  Listen to an interview by Humphrys of David Davis or Mogg, then to an interview of any Labour or remain supporting politician.  While I accept that I'm more likely to notice when my existing opinions are being reinforced, the double standards are blatant.

And when you say nobody will change their minds, speak for yourself.  I am open to rational, logical arguments and ready to change my mind if I'm convinced.  All I'm seeing at the moment is a gang of tin-pot would-be despots, liars and incompetents, with no respect for democracy, hi-jacking our woefully inadequate "constitution" to drive through a policy that they are well aware a majority of the electorate don't want any more (if they ever did).  Mogg, Martin, Banks etc want out of the EU before January when anti-tax avoidance laws come into effect and if they can destabilise the EU, which has been an effective counter to economic domination by US into the bargain, that will only make them happier.  These charlatans need holding to account, but they appear to be able to lie without challenge on the BBC.

Watching The Rise of the Nazis last night brought two things to mind.  In 50 years time, if civilisation survives (not leaving the EU, climate change) how will this episode be seen and will those who've used positions of influence to facilitate people like Farage be proud of their role; and if you're right about "unpleasant trouble" from people who prefer violence to rational argument, I might get to die fighting fascists instead of dribbling my last days away in an underfunded and neglectful care home.  That you think threats are a substitute for rational argument is depressing, but I know you're not the only one because I look at Twitter.

Treat yourself to the book titled 'The Noble Liar', Robin Aitken and see what you think.

Regards, ippy.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Ippy,

In my book democracy is and still was the vote taken in 2016,…

So regardless of a corrupted referendum and regardless of the evidence that’s become available since nonetheless you think that that one vote on that one day should now be binding, even though it was only ever advisory in any case? (Oh, and it was only because it was advisory by the way that it wasn't scrapped and re-run lawfully as it would have been had it been a binding vote.)

And you think that’s democratic? Seriously though?
 

.. surly you're not still not looking for the best out of three - five, we're supposed to be the dippy ones that didn't know what we were voting for.

That’s a tory BS trope that collapses as soon as you examine it. You’d only have a best of three (or whatever) if the circumstances were the same each time and you were just hoping for a different answer. The circumstances now though are very different from those in 2016 – we actually have a factual basis for knowing what Brexit would look like, and it’s not at all pretty.

My promised supercar I sold you a while back for £1k that turned out to be a rusty old banger instead – I do hope you won’t ask to change tor mind about your decision. After all, it’s not a best of thrree you know. 

More than likely I won't be changing my mind for similar reasons to why you won't be changing your mind because we don't necessarily agree on what we think are the facts and it wouldn't matter how many clay pidgins I launched what would be the point we're at completely opposite ends on this one Blue, shame I usually go along with most of your lines of thought.

Doesn’t work. This isn’t evidence of the “marmite tastes nice/no it doesn’t type” – this is evidence from multiple, highly qualified sources that’s already beginning to happen as businesses close, investments are cancelled etc. You can maintain an Alan Burns type faith position – “no logic or evidence will ever change my mind” – if you want to, but it’s not a good look as you know full well from your dealings with him.   

Stranger, this could be more or less another attempt by me to convey why I'm not debating have a read I know this post is addressed to Blue but it could equally be to your good self or any other remainer.

Yes we know Ala – er – ippy.

[jeremyp]

 
In my book democracy is and still was the vote taken in 2016,

Why? We had a vote in 1975. Why ignore that vote?

why I'm not debating

We know why you're not debating. It's because you have nothing to debate with. We've repeatedly asked you to tell us how the EU makes your life worse and how it will be improved by Brexit but you have no answer.