Brexit - the next steps

[ProfessorDavey]

It was debated and rejected.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/01/brexit-what-are-the-indicative-votes-mps-will-vote-on

Think of it this way possible outcomes were

1. WTO
2. Free Trade
3. Norway+
4. Another referendum

The outcome now looks like (2), those supporting (1) compromised to (2), (3) was never an option as not enough supporters of (4) were prepared to compromise.

If (4) supporters had been willing to compromise they had Boris like a puppet on a string they could have got that outcome, instead they supported an election and hoped for a hung parliament which would have meant another referendum.

Presuming that Common Market 2.0 is the equivalent of Norway+ then it was rejected overwhelmingly by Tory MPs:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/ng-interactive/2019/mar/27/how-did-your-mp-vote-in-the-indicative-votes

So that hardly supports your notion that 'Many Tory MP's would have supported Norway+'

And MPs could vote for any or none of the options - so the notion that they voted against Common Market 2.0 because they couldn't compromise is nonsense - they could have vote for both second referendum AND Common Market 2.0.

But as we have discussed many times EFTA was not, and could not have been, on the table. Why - because the negotiations were between the UK and the EU and neither have the authority to grant EFTA membership. Only the EFTA countries could do that and it was pretty clear that they wouldn't grant the UK membership as it would completely unbalance their alliance of small countries.

[jakswan]

Presuming that Common Market 2.0 is the equivalent of Norway+ then it was rejected overwhelmingly by Tory MPs:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/ng-interactive/2019/mar/27/how-did-your-mp-vote-in-the-indicative-votes

So that hardly supports your notion that 'Many Tory MP's would have supported Norway+'

I rephrase to 'some Tory MPs'.

I don't think you are disagreeing, it was not an option because there was not enough support for it. At the time it was a majority remain parliament.

But as we have discussed many times EFTA was not, and could not have been, on the table. Why - because the negotiations were between the UK and the EU and neither have the authority to grant EFTA membership. Only the EFTA countries could do that and it was pretty clear that they wouldn't grant the UK membership as it would completely unbalance their alliance of small countries.

You may have asserted that EFTA could not have been possible I'm fairly sure I refuted this at the time. However...

As per https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2018/12/nick-boles-demolishing-five-myths-about-norway-plus.html
"Some have claimed that Norway is opposed to British membership of EEA/Efta. This is not true. A recent headline in Norway’s Nationen newspaper read “Solberg sier britene er velhomne i EFTA.” In the piece, Erna Solberg, the Norwegian Prime Minister, confirmed “if that is what they [UK] really want then we will find a solution in the future.” We would need to negotiate a derogation to the Efta Convention so we could be part of a customs arrangement with the EU. But this is something that could be negotiated by December 2020 as part of our Efta accession."

I'm assuming you now accept that we are leaving, as I recall you would prefer EFTA, why are you talking it down?

[jakswan]

Sorry, had overlooked the indicative vote - but in any case it was entirely academic. MPs could vote both for Norway and 2nd ref. if they felt the outcomes were acceptable - at least Parliament would have been able to legislate for a  ref. whereas for Norway+ would have had to pass the WA first. There was no guarantee that the government and whoever was PM would want and be able to arrange a N+ deal.

Valid points except they had Boris dangling on a string, so Parliament was calling the shots and could have forced things through. As well as the EFTA compromises there were other options, if the LibDems had compromised we could have had Corbyn as PM, if Corbyn had compromised we could have had a Ken Clarke as PM.

You are right it is now academic, Boris gambled on an election and won.

[ProfessorDavey]

Valid points except they had Boris dangling on a string ...

The indicative votes took place long before Boris became PM.

[ippy]

Thought I'd have a read through some of the posts on this thread and mainly noticed two things overall one was the differing ideas about democracy.

My idea about democracy is if we, the general public, were offered a referendum where all of the political parties present in The House of Commons agreed the ref would be binding whichever way it went and say the referendum was to either fix the price of a 415 gram tin baked beans at ten pence a tin for the next ten years or not, yes or no.

For the sake of argument lets say yes won this referendum there would have to be something seriously wrong with how Parliament was working if there was anything other than this fixed price of baked beans for the next ten years, regardless of anything else.

The other thing I was more reminded of was Baron Niel Kinnock and his misses Baroness Glenys Kinnockn can anyone tell me if they're going to loose their cushy little numbers somewhere or somehow connected with the Brussels gasworks building or have they now retired with some sort of meagre pension, if anyone knows the answer only I've been so worried about these two poor souls. 

ippy.   

[Udayana]

...
My idea about democracy is if we, the general public, were offered a referendum where all of the political parties present in The House of Commons agreed the ref would be binding whichever way it went and say the referendum was to either fix the price of a 415 gram tin baked beans at ten pence a tin for the next ten years or not, yes or no.
...

The Commons cannot (and did not) agree that a referendum be binding unless they legislate that it is. And that is not possible unless there is a precise and exact definition of the action to be taken: "leave" does not cut it as there was no fixed interpretation - unlike your beans example.

They informally agreed that it would be binding - but there were also plenty of assurances that we would not leave if a suitable trading agreement, avoiding damage to the UK, could not be put in place.

[ippy]

The Commons cannot (and did not) agree that a referendum be binding unless they legislate that it is. And that is not possible unless there is a precise and exact definition of the action to be taken: "leave" does not cut it as there was no fixed interpretation - unlike your beans example.

They informally agreed that it would be binding - but there were also plenty of assurances that we would not leave if a suitable trading agreement, avoiding damage to the UK, could not be put in place.

You must need to visit 'Specsavers', I'm not going to go through all of it with you Udayana, save just to say we got there in the end in spite of.

ippy. 

[Udayana]

You must need to visit 'Specsavers', I'm not going to go through all of it with you Udayana, save just to say we got there in the end in spite of.

ippy.

If you can show me where it says "binding" I'll happily take my specs back to be fixed.

Anyway, happy that you are satisfied that the withdrawal agreement is enough to be seen as leaving.

[ippy]

If you can show me where it says "binding" I'll happily take my specs back to be fixed.

Anyway, happy that you are satisfied that the withdrawal agreement is enough to be seen as leaving.

I can't imagine for one moment that you haven't had or still have exactly similar access to the media that most of us here on the forum have.

Therefore unless we're going into a splitting hairs or some obscure form of semantics Udayana, 'Specsavers'!

ippy.

[Gordon]

My idea about democracy is if we, the general public, were offered a referendum where all of the political parties present in The House of Commons agreed the ref would be binding whichever way it went and say the referendum was to either fix the price of a 415 gram tin baked beans at ten pence a tin for the next ten years or not, yes or no.

Nope - the referendum was advisory only, so it was not mandatory that the result be enacted. It might have been politically difficult for some, but not all, to ignore the result but it would not be legislatively difficult to ignore the result. Moreover it was not the case that all parties in the HoC agreed that the referendum was binding: the SNP (who are the dominant party in Scotland) didn't, they still don't, and the Scottish Parliament voted just yesterday to reject the Brexit legislation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-51026014

[Nearly Sane]

And of course there was Farage and unfinished business

https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nigel-farage-eu-referendum_uk_576e6585e4b08d2c56393f12

[SteveH]

Thought I'd have a read through some of the posts on this thread and mainly noticed two things overall one was the differing ideas about democracy.

My idea about democracy is if we, the general public, were offered a referendum where all of the political parties present in The House of Commons agreed the ref would be binding whichever way it went and say the referendum was to either fix the price of a 415 gram tin baked beans at ten pence a tin for the next ten years or not, yes or no.

For the sake of argument lets say yes won this referendum there would have to be something seriously wrong with how Parliament was working if there was anything other than this fixed price of baked beans for the next ten years, regardless of anything else.

The other thing I was more reminded of was Baron Niel Kinnock and his misses Baroness Glenys Kinnockn can anyone tell me if they're going to loose their cushy little numbers somewhere or somehow connected with the Brussels gasworks building or have they now retired with some sort of meagre pension, if anyone knows the answer only I've been so worried about these two poor souls. 

ippy.

Bad spelling and laboured, leaden sarcasm are a poor substitute for reasoned arguments.

[Aruntraveller]

The other thing I was more reminded of was Baron Niel Kinnock and his misses Baroness Glenys Kinnockn can anyone tell me if they're going to loose their cushy little numbers somewhere or somehow connected with the Brussels gasworks building or have they now retired with some sort of meagre pension, if anyone knows the answer only I've been so worried about these two poor souls.

That's a really poor argument when you consider the lengths Farage has gone to get money out of the EU. Not to mention getting his kids to hang on to those all important EU passports.

[ippy]

That's a really poor argument when you consider the lengths Farage has gone to get money out of the EU. Not to mention getting his kids to hang on to those all important EU passports.

Why would I in particular be bothered about Farage, other than he was actually successful with his political aim?

What exactly have the Kinnocks been particularly successful about politically.

ippy.   

[Aruntraveller]

Why would I in particular be bothered about Farage, other than he was actually successful with his political aim?

What exactly have the Kinnocks been particularly successful about politically.

ippy.

Clearly you are quite happy to treat those agree with you more favourably than those that don't.

[Roses]

Why would I in particular be bothered about Farage, other than he was actually successful with his political aim?

What exactly have the Kinnocks been particularly successful about politically.

ippy.

The Kinnocks are decent people, Farage is a racist sewer rat.

[ippy]

The Kinnocks are decent people, Farage is a racist sewer rat.

I feel more or less neutral about Mr Farage but you have to admit he did however achieve his aim, I don't think whatever anyone might feel about him, sewer rat or not,  I can't see he could be justifiably accused of being a hanger on, such as those two virtually useless nonentities the Kinnocks, even if they are as you say very decent people.

Regards, ippy.

[Aruntraveller]

I have just read about Glenys Kinnock. Interesting, if only all our politicians were so rational and thought along the same lines as you. I refer of course to her membership of Humanist UK and the National Secular Society.

I suspect everybody who hold those views and affiliations of being useless nonentities.

[SteveH]

I have just read about Glenys Kinnock. Interesting, if only all our politicians were so rational and thought along the same lines as you. I refer of course to her membership of Humanist UK and the National Secular Society.

I've been thinking of joining 'Humanists UK', even though I'm a practising Anglican*, and I read 'New Humanist' magazine. Th NSS, though, is rather extreme, the atheistical equivalent of extreme fundy Christians. HUK and NH are nice, reasonable types, equivalent to the moderate, rational wing of Christianity, as represented by Rowan Williams.

*I hope to get the hang of it one day.

[ippy]

I have just read about Glenys Kinnock. Interesting, if only all our politicians were so rational and thought along the same lines as you. I refer of course to her membership of Humanist UK and the National Secular Society.

I suspect everybody who hold those views and affiliations of being useless nonentities.

Yes I dare say we also breathe in a similar way too.

ippy.

[ippy]

I've been thinking of joining 'Humanists UK', even though I'm a practising Anglican*, and I read 'New Humanist' magazine. Th NSS, though, is rather extreme, the atheistical equivalent of extreme fundy Christians. HUK and NH are nice, reasonable types, equivalent to the moderate, rational wing of Christianity, as represented by Rowan Williams.

*I hope to get the hang of it one day.

There's quite a few believers of various religions that are Humanists as well so I doubt very much that you would find yourself alone within the Humanist organisation.

ippy.

[wigginhall]

Just reading estimates that the UK economy will be 3% smaller because of Brexit, or roughly £200 billion by next year.  But note, these are remainer lies.

[ippy]

Just reading estimates that the UK economy will be 3% smaller because of Brexit, or roughly £200 billion by next year.  But note, these are remainer lies.

Not one remainer has ever told a lie about anything connected with brexit?

ippy

[wigginhall]

Not one remainer has ever told a lie about anything connected with brexit?

ippy

No, I am saying that the idea that the economy is shrinking because of Brexit is obviously fake news.

[ippy]

No, I am saying that the idea that the economy is shrinking because of Brexit is obviously fake news.

Does that in some way mean that this obviously fake news about the UK's shrinking economy due to brexit, you mention, effect the not so fake news that the UK will be regaining its sovereignty.

ippy.