Brexit - the next steps

[bluehillside Retd.]

ippy,

These last few post are as good an example I've seen showing just how far apart the two sides of this brexit argument still are, I just like the remainers wont be changing my mind anytime soon.

I don't see anything wrong with remainers complaining, it's the stand taken against the democratic process by various remainers that's so wrong, the reasons for wanting to remain are irrelevant, remain plane and simple lost the vote.

So does that mean I can keep the £1k you paid for the bag of rust I delivered when I'd promised you my Ferrari then? The reasons for wanting your money back are it seems all irrelevant - you "lost the vote" after all.   

[Roses]

Getting back to Brexit, it looks as if today might be a make or break day in getting a deal with the EU.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50044873

[SusanDoris]

The point is that the referendum in 2016 happened in spite of the fact that we had already had one referendum on what is now the EU. That gives the lie to the idea that we can't have a third one. The EU may not have changed much in three years but the British people have.

Do you think that might be just wishful thinking?

[ippy]

In an advisory referendum nigh on 3 and a half years ago with a brexit which wasn't defined.

Ippy - are you sure there is a popular mandate for either no deal or May's deal or Boris' deal (if that ever appears). Are you sure that were any of those three were clearly stated as the brexit option in 2016 that they'd have beaten remain (frankly I doubt it). Are you sure that any of those three would beat remain now? If not then you are foisting the most significant decision on the UK in generations without being clear that it is the 'will of the people' - how can that be democratic?

I wonder if any part of the reason the Labour lot are reluctant to go for an election has anything to do with when they look at how the voting went that produced the result of the European parliamentary election?

Regards, ippy.

[bluehillside Retd.]

ippy,

I wonder if any part of the reason the Labour lot are reluctant to go for an election has anything to do with when they look at how the voting went that produced the result of the European parliamentary election?

Some part of it might be, though that would still be the case if a GE was held shortly after the no deal Brexit was taken off the table. The more pressing reason though is that Johnson can't be trusted not to game the system if a GE is called and a no deal exit is still possible.

Oh, and using your reasoning re Brexit do I get to keep the £1k then having sold the pile of rust to you on the false prospectus that it was a Ferrari?   

[Gordon]

I wonder if any part of the reason the Labour lot are reluctant to go for an election has anything to do with when they look at how the voting went that produced the result of the European parliamentary election?

Regards, ippy.

Nope - it is because they (and the other opposition parties) don't trust Johnson, since they know he is a serial liar. Once the possibility of a no-deal EU exit on Oct 31st is legally removed they will then consider supporting a GE.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Gordon,

Nope - it is because they (and the other opposition parties) don't trust Johnson, since they know he is a serial liar. Once the possibility of a no-deal EU exit on Oct 31st is legally removed they will then consider supporting a GE.

I hear he even lies about having cornflakes for breakfast when he actually has rice krispies...

...yep, clearly the man's a cereal liar too.

I'll get me jacket   

[ProfessorDavey]

I wonder if any part of the reason the Labour lot are reluctant to go for an election has anything to do with when they look at how the voting went that produced the result of the European parliamentary election?

Regards, ippy.

How would a referendum produce 'the result of the European parliamentary election' and why would that frighten Labour?

Actually were a referendum to mirror the EU election then it would result in a remain vote as the parties broadly favouring remaining gained more votes than those broadly favouring leave.

Also Labour beat the Tories in the EU election and as it is pretty well impossible that one or other of those parties wont be the largest after a general election I suspect they'd take an election where they gained 50% more votes than the Tories.

But, of course the EU election is an irrelevance to either a general election or a referendum, because the turnout in the latter two will likely be north of 70% or so, while the turnout in the former was just 37%.

[wigginhall]

Guardian reporting that a deal is imminent, looks like May's deal, but with border down Irish sea.  Cummings probably calculating on some Labour votes, plus ERG, DUP under the bus? 

[Spud]

Just had LBC on where James O'Brien was talking about why Leavers are still getting angry with the people who told them they were being lied to, rather than with the people who lied to them.

A caller rang in and said his problem with the EU is, it is toxic.

James asked him for an example. He said a farmer had told him years ago that they had had restrictions placed on them by the EU on the size of cattle herds, also milk quotas, which hadn't helped that farmer.

James told the caller that quotas for farming are no longer there. The caller said: still, that is one of many ways in which the EU has been toxic.

James asked for another example. The caller said, what about the large number of nurses coming to work for the NHS from the EU, when there are a million unemployed people here? He said the nursing vacancies should be being filled by UK-trained nurses, but successive governments have been bringing in EU nurses instead of investing more in training them here.

This caller only just managed to make his point, as James kept on talking over him, saying for example that the exact number of nursing vacancies is 43,000 so it's essential to be able to hire EU nurses.

It struck me that the caller had a valid point though. James eventually cut him off, as he often does (as well as talking over them) when a caller is in the process of winning an argument.

So, what do you think? Could investing more in things like nursing training (rather than filling the vacancies with EU workers) result in UK unemployment going down? Did this caller have a point, or was James correct to say after the call finished, "there is another example of how people have been misled" (ie, rather than admit the caller had made a logical point, he stuck to his position of, "so many vacancies means we need access to EU labour")

The way he kept interrupting the guy made him look quite rude; this is one of the reasons why, back in 2016, I decided not to take his advice.

[Aruntraveller]

So you based your entire decision on his advice?

[Spud]

So you based your entire decision on his advice?

No, he was one of many people.

[Harrowby Hall]

Spud

If you are concerned about the supply of nurses to the NHS, have a look at Project 2000 and consider the effect it may have had on nurse recruitment. Then ask yourself whether the importation of nurses trained in other places than the UK (not just the EU but places like the Philippines) may not have been necessary.

[jeremyp]

Do you think that might be just wishful thinking?

To put it bluntly, three years of old people have died and three years of new voters have arrived.

There are about 45,000,000 people in the electorate. There are about 2,000,000 people aged 15-17, so assume that amount has been added to the electorate and there are about 1.8 million deaths in three years - that's a bit high for our purposes as it includes deaths amongst people not in the electorate. That means that the electorate has somewhere between 5 and 10% different people in it which is substantially larger than the margin of victory for leave.

Plus those people who were eligible to vote last time and are still alive have much better information on the likely consequences of Brexit. I'd say Britain has changed.

[jeremyp]

This caller only just managed to make his point, as James kept on talking over him, saying for example that the exact number of nursing vacancies is 43,000 so it's essential to be able to hire EU nurses.

The caller essentially lost the argument right there. If there are 43,000 nursing vacancies, it's not people from the EU preventing British people from becoming nurses. Not to mention the fact that the arrangement is reciprocal: British nurses can go and work in other EU countries, at least until 31 October.

[Nearly Sane]

Some interesting stuff in the confusions in the parties.



https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/brexit/2019/10/labour-believes-its-best-chance-win-election-have-reached-brexit-settlement

[Udayana]

Some interesting stuff in the confusions in the parties.



https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/brexit/2019/10/labour-believes-its-best-chance-win-election-have-reached-brexit-settlement

Certainly very confusing.

Still, we can be reasonably confident that JC will grab defeat from the jaws of victory: whip against a Tory deal then go into an election with a promise to negotiate another deal that he will campaign against.

[Nearly Sane]

Certainly very confusing.

Still, we can be reasonably confident that JC will grab defeat from the jaws of victory: whip against a Tory deal then go into an election with a promise to negotiate another deal that he will campaign against.

Unconvinced that this is what will happen. There is now considerable support for a referendum before any election in Labour, and at the same time the idea of a deal of not one in place by 31at October, impossible and might with DUP support and some of the 'Spartans' might pass.

[ippy]

Just had LBC on where James O'Brien was talking about why Leavers are still getting angry with the people who told them they were being lied to, rather than with the people who lied to them.

A caller rang in and said his problem with the EU is, it is toxic.

James asked him for an example. He said a farmer had told him years ago that they had had restrictions placed on them by the EU on the size of cattle herds, also milk quotas, which hadn't helped that farmer.

James told the caller that quotas for farming are no longer there. The caller said: still, that is one of many ways in which the EU has been toxic.

James asked for another example. The caller said, what about the large number of nurses coming to work for the NHS from the EU, when there are a million unemployed people here? He said the nursing vacancies should be being filled by UK-trained nurses, but successive governments have been bringing in EU nurses instead of investing more in training them here.

This caller only just managed to make his point, as James kept on talking over him, saying for example that the exact number of nursing vacancies is 43,000 so it's essential to be able to hire EU nurses.

It struck me that the caller had a valid point though. James eventually cut him off, as he often does (as well as talking over them) when a caller is in the process of winning an argument.

So, what do you think? Could investing more in things like nursing training (rather than filling the vacancies with EU workers) result in UK unemployment going down? Did this caller have a point, or was James correct to say after the call finished, "there is another example of how people have been misled" (ie, rather than admit the caller had made a logical point, he stuck to his position of, "so many vacancies means we need access to EU labour")

The way he kept interrupting the guy made him look quite rude; this is one of the reasons why, back in 2016, I decided not to take his advice.

Most of the phone in talk shows do that old trick O'Brien's using it on leavers that phone in at the moment; if he gets someone that's particularly articulate phoning in about leaving  he doesn't agree with they get cut off as soon as poss, but then if he gets a leaver that's not quite quick enough on the phone challenging his remain agenda he'll hang on to them for a lot longer.

The only thing I would say in O'Brien's defence is that this approach is common place in most phone in programmes, whatever the subject, mind you that O'Brien's a pretty obnoxious example of a phone in host.

Regards, ippy.

[Spud]

Harrowby and Jeremy,

If tuition fees hadn't been introduced for UK trainee nurses, there would be more of them. It appears that this is why there are so many unfilled nursing jobs.
The caller seemed to be saying that rather than focussing on importing foreign nurses (although in the short term they would be needed) more should be done to enable training in the UK (which at first glance would logically mean cutting tuition fees) so as to reduce our reliance upon foreign ones.

[jeremyp]

Harrowby and Jeremy,

If tuition fees hadn't been introduced for UK trainee nurses, there would be more of them.

Sorry, I missed the bit where it was the EU that mandated those fees. It may surprise you to know that, when we leave the EU, tuition fees won't go away.

The caller seemed to be saying that rather than focussing on importing foreign nurses (although in the short term they would be needed) more should be done to enable training in the UK (which at first glance would logically mean cutting tuition fees) so as to reduce our reliance upon foreign ones.

We could cut tuition fees now while we are still in the EU.

Sorry, but the caller lost the argument horribly.

[Spud]

Sorry, I missed the bit where it was the EU that mandated those fees. It may surprise you to know that, when we leave the EU, tuition fees won't go away.
We could cut tuition fees now while we are still in the EU.

Sorry, but the caller lost the argument horribly.

Maybe, but the bragging is still out of order, I don't like it.

[Nearly Sane]

Philip Hammond indicating he may vote for whatever the 'deal' is.

[Harrowby Hall]

Philip Hammond indicating he may vote for whatever the 'deal' is.

Perhaps he wants to get back into Dominic Cummings' good books.

[Nearly Sane]

Perhaps he wants to get back into Dominic Cummings' good books.

I think he is already marked down for the bad fire.