UK General Election 2017

[jakswan]

It will be interesting to see whether the general election shifts opinion on brexit.

Over the past year opinion has been remarkably stable, with opinion largely continuing to reflect the wafer thin majority for Leave (with maybe a tiny shift toward remain recently). This is really unusual - typically once a decision is made there is a shift toward that position, in effect the new status quo. But we haven't seen this post-referendum.

Now it is possible that opinion will carry on the same as before the election, but I have a feeling we are going to see a shift. We will see presuming that YouGov continue to poll with the same question on brexit that they have since last June.

Last I heard on Brexit was only 21% wanted to reverse the move.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/03/29/attitudes-brexit-everything-we-know-so-far/

Which is why the election wasn't about Brexit, people have moved on.

Also watch Daily Politics today Labour difference to Tory is that we should drop 'no deal is better than a bad deal' position on single market the same, leave.

[ProfessorDavey]

Last I heard on Brexit was only 21% wanted to reverse the move.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/03/29/attitudes-brexit-everything-we-know-so-far/

Which is why the election wasn't about Brexit, people have moved on.

Also watch Daily Politics today Labour difference to Tory is that we should drop 'no deal is better than a bad deal' position on single market the same, leave.

The question YouGov have asked consistently is whether voting to leave was the right or wrong decision.

And your link shows those results over the period since last summer - hardly moving.

Interesting, also in your link, that people don't support 'hard' brexit - albeit there is significant confusion as they appear to support May's version of brexit, which is, of course, hard brexit.

However these findings (from March) have been superseded by a real vote - the general election, called to give May a mandate for her version of brexit, in which the people said 'no'.

My interest is in direction of travel of opinion (hence focussing on the question asked regularly) rather than the response to one-off questions from months ago. Over the past few weeks we have seen that opinions can be really soft, changing dramatically over a very short period of time (from over 20-point lead for May to an actual result of just a couple of %). Will be interesting to see whether the see change in opinion of May (she is terminally damaged) will result in a big shift in opinion on brexit in principle, and type of brexit specifically.

[ProfessorDavey]

You copied content from that Manifesto, it doesn't need to mention the single market in order for you to deduce that their intent was to leave it.

So let's be clear, shall we.

Can you provide any actual evidence that the DUP support withdrawing from the single market, or are you relying on some kind of Jakswan hunch.

I have found nothing to indicate that the DUP support withdrawal from the single market (and nor have you). I have found their manifesto which makes no such claim. I have also provided a direct quote from Arlene Foster in which she rejected hard brexit. And if you look at the brexit priorities in their manifesto the vast majority will be delivered by remaining in the single market - by contrast most will be in serious jeopardy if we withdraw from the single market.

Worth pointing out too that the DUP aren't obsessed with immigration - indeed it is mentioned only twice in their whole manifesto - once being a positive statement about 'Effective immigration policy which meets the skills, labour and security needs of the UK'. The main reason other UK parties want to leave the single market is to restrict migration - if you aren't bothered about migration, why would you feel the need to leave the single market.

[jeremyp]

Boundary changes not favouring Tories.


http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html

Actually, that's not true. That result shows the Tories only two seats short of a majority and with nine Sinn Fein members not taking up their seats they would have a working majority even without the DUP.

[ProfessorDavey]

Actually, that's not true. That result shows the Tories only two seats short of a majority and with nine Sinn Fein members not taking up their seats they would have a working majority even without the DUP.

I think it is unlikely this will ever happen.

Firstly one of justifications is gone. You will remember that back in the 2010 parliament the justification for reducing seat number to 600 was that many powers were now devolved so there was less decision making in Westminster so less MPs were needed. That, of course, no longer holds true with brexit as there will be all sorts of powers and decisions, currently residing at EU level that will come back to Westminster.

The other reason why I don't think it will happen is simple maths - the only party really supporting this is the Tories and they won't have enough support in their party to get it through. Not necessarily because they don't have a majority (I suspect the the DUP would probably have no problem supporting), but because there will be fewer Tories and turkeys don't vote for Christmas - all it would take is a couple of Tories in seats that will be abolished to vote against and the proposals are finished.

What you are showing too is that the prime reason for bringing this in back in 2010, namely a big benefit to the Tories, is much less clear cut, so again the urgency to implement the change for political reasons is diminished.

We may see a revised proposal, where constituency size equalisation is retained, but not linked to a reduction in MPs. That, I suspect would get through.

[Nearly Sane]

One wonders if the Queen's Speech might be July 12th?

[jakswan]

Interesting, also in your link, that people don't support 'hard' brexit - albeit there is significant confusion as they appear to support May's version of brexit, which is, of course, hard brexit.

This is what happens when you believe your own spin, you get confused.

However these findings (from March) have been superseded by a real vote - the general election, called to give May a mandate for her version of brexit, in which the people said 'no'.

My interest is in direction of travel of opinion (hence focussing on the question asked regularly) rather than the response to one-off questions from months ago. Over the past few weeks we have seen that opinions can be really soft, changing dramatically over a very short period of time (from over 20-point lead for May to an actual result of just a couple of %). Will be interesting to see whether the see change in opinion of May (she is terminally damaged) will result in a big shift in opinion on brexit in principle, and type of brexit specifically.

Maybe, as I said I think much of the electorate has moved on, Tories tried to get people talking about Brexit but since there wasn't much difference between Labour / Tories not much to debate.

I know the centrists in Labour are going off on it at the moment they will have to get in line behind the leaders who are for leaving the single market.

[ProfessorDavey]

This is what happens when you believe your own spin, you get confused.

Not really - no-one seriously denies that May's brexit view is a hard brexit view.

So it is surprising, or perhaps an example of cognitive dissonance, that when people were asked whether they supported hard brexit they said 'no', but when asked whether they supported May's brexit (a form of hard brexit) they said 'yes'. presumably 'hard' was seen as a negative term back in March, while 'May' was perceived positively.

However polling from March is another world - we have had our political certainties turned on their head in the last few weeks. I suspect the public reaction in positive vs negative terms to anything linked to May will now have reversed itself.

[ProfessorDavey]

I know the centrists in Labour are going off on it at the moment they will have to get in line behind the leaders who are for leaving the single market.

The people leading on brexit in the Labour shadow cabinet (Starmer and Gardiner) are the ones making clear soundings about a shift to a soft brexit.

I suspect what is happening here is a case of 'run it up the flag-pole and see who salutes it' - in other words throw out a range of options with a view to taking soundings about the support from the public. Perfectly reasonable when you have just failed to win a general election as that is the time when you can legitimately change tack and not be beholden to a manifesto that didn't succeed.

But, of course, it isn't just in the Labour party that there are rumblings of disquiet about a hard brexit - woman of the moment Ruth Davidson is making increasingly clear statements that the previous Tory approach to brexit needs to be dumped in favour of soft brexit. And again that isn't unreasonable as the tory's manifesto was also rejected by the public as they failed to gain a majority and lost seats.

[jakswan]

So let's be clear, shall we.

Can you provide any actual evidence that the DUP support withdrawing from the single market, or are you relying on some kind of Jakswan hunch.

I have and clearly we have drawn different conclusions. I could be right and you could be right, worth noting you were wrong on Brexit, Art50 getting through Parliament and another election, so I know who I would have my money on.

I have found nothing to indicate that the DUP support withdrawal from the single market (and nor have you). I have found their manifesto which makes no such claim. I have also provided a direct quote from Arlene Foster in which she rejected hard brexit. And if you look at the brexit priorities in their manifesto the vast majority will be delivered by remaining in the single market - by contrast most will be in serious jeopardy if we withdraw from the single market.

There you go again believing in your own spin again.

Worth pointing out too that the DUP aren't obsessed with immigration - indeed it is mentioned only twice in their whole manifesto - once being a positive statement about 'Effective immigration policy which meets the skills, labour and security needs of the UK'. The main reason other UK parties want to leave the single market is to restrict migration - if you aren't bothered about migration, why would you feel the need to leave the single market.

What motivates the DUP is staying in the UK union, Labour, Conservatives, LibDems are unionists but they are no where near as driven by it as the DUP.

I also think its worth restating my position on Brexit, I'm comfortable with a Norway type deal, whilst I disagree with the LibDems on Brexit good/bad thought their position on a referendum on the deal was pretty coherent.

More broadly, I desperately want politics to be motivated by centrist principles, this election could have ruined Corbyn and the Labour party have returned to the middle.

I was hoping the LibDems could deal themselves back in but they have bottled it and been reduced to an irrelevance.

Yes we are leaving the single market that is my opinion, there was a play available but that ship has now sailed. I think the centrists in the Labour Party have put their careers ahead of their principles. Corbyn mania might have a run for a year or two but he is a socialist, his economics are a fantasy, he will ruin the Labour Party.

Just my opinion, hopefully I'm wrong.

[jakswan]

The people leading on brexit in the Labour shadow cabinet (Starmer and Gardiner) are the ones making clear soundings about a shift to a soft brexit.

I suspect what is happening here is a case of 'run it up the flag-pole and see who salutes it' - in other words throw out a range of options with a view to taking soundings about the support from the public. Perfectly reasonable when you have just failed to win a general election as that is the time when you can legitimately change tack and not be beholden to a manifesto that didn't succeed.

But, of course, it isn't just in the Labour party that there are rumblings of disquiet about a hard brexit - woman of the moment Ruth Davidson is making increasingly clear statements that the previous Tory approach to brexit needs to be dumped in favour of soft brexit. And again that isn't unreasonable as the tory's manifesto was also rejected by the public as they failed to gain a majority and lost seats.

Who are trying to convince, me or yourself?

[ProfessorDavey]

There you go again believing in your own spin again.

For heaven's sake - I'm not spinning anything. I am using the statements from the DUP leader and the actual wording in their manifesto - none of which indicate that the DUP are committed to withdrawal from the single market.

On the other hard you are ignoring the actual evidence (what the DUP say and what the DUP write) and coming up with some alternative facts dreamed up in your own head to support your own conclusion. You could call that spin, but perhaps it is better called delusion.

So challenge to you - show me anywhere where the DUP have committed to leaving the single market.

I'll counter with the joint statement from the NI executive, signed by Arlene Foster in August which never once suggested leaving the single market and is a model of the softest of soft brexits.

[ProfessorDavey]

Who are trying to convince, me or yourself?

Neither - I'm just reflecting and reporting what is currently going on in both the Labour and Tory parties. In both there is strong pressure to rethink brexit approach and in both cases it is all one way - a move towards a softening of the brexit approach.

[ProfessorDavey]

I have ...

No you haven't - you have provided not one iota of evidence to support your assertion that the DUP support withdrawal from the single market. Somehow you seem to think you know their motives better than they do themselves - if they support withdrawal from the single market why would Arlene Foster have clearly rejected hard brexit in the last couple of days and why would they have clearly stated priorities for brexit that are largely inconsistent with withdrawal from the single market.

Come back when you can actual provide some evidence rather than Jakswan fantasy.

[ProfessorDavey]

Yes we are leaving the single market that is my opinion, there was a play available but that ship has now sailed.

The good ship May's hard brexit set out from port hit a rock called the general election and has sunk without trace.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I have and clearly we have drawn different conclusions. I could be right and you could be right, worth noting you were wrong on Brexit, Art50 getting through Parliament and another election, so I know who I would have my money on.

There you go again believing in your own spin again.

What motivates the DUP is staying in the UK union, Labour, Conservatives, LibDems are unionists but they are no where near as driven by it as the DUP.

I also think its worth restating my position on Brexit, I'm comfortable with a Norway type deal, whilst I disagree with the LibDems on Brexit good/bad thought their position on a referendum on the deal was pretty coherent.

More broadly, I desperately want politics to be motivated by centrist principles, this election could have ruined Corbyn and the Labour party have returned to the middle.

I was hoping the LibDems could deal themselves back in but they have bottled it and been reduced to an irrelevance.

Yes we are leaving the single market that is my opinion, there was a play available but that ship has now sailed. I think the centrists in the Labour Party have put their careers ahead of their principles. Corbyn mania might have a run for a year or two but he is a socialist, his economics are a fantasy, he will ruin the Labour Party.

Just my opinion, hopefully I'm wrong.

I think the party was ruined on 23rd June 2017 and the subsequent Blairite coup attempt. But Corbyn has managed to get it on it's feet again with none of the bloodletting i'd expect from ''Leftie'' politics. The man is a political genius and can now get away with a bit of political hedge.

The only way back to the centre is to go left. The British Electorate could be counted on to be a f*cked thermostat....every lurch to the right bringing on an even bigger lurch to the right. That is the potential economic disaster, that would have been the fantasy, that would have been against natural law. Hopefully that's fixed now.

Brexit is a necessity for a low wage low tax economy. It is economic Armageddon and scrapheap to be picked over by people who revel in a squalor they don't have to be part of i.e. very fucking few,

I think even Brexiteers will soon realise this and get rid of it.

Labour are right to concentrate on how things should be with or without Brexit.

 

[jakswan]

No you haven't - you have provided not one iota of evidence to support your assertion that the DUP support withdrawal from the single market. Somehow you seem to think you know their motives better than they do themselves - if they support withdrawal from the single market why would Arlene Foster have clearly rejected hard brexit in the last couple of days and why would they have clearly stated priorities for brexit that are largely inconsistent with withdrawal from the single market.

Come back when you can actual provide some evidence rather than Jakswan fantasy.

We will see who is right in the next few days I'm sure they will be asked that question directly, Davey so far wrong on Brexit, wrong on art50 getting through Parliament, wrong on there being an early election, a proven liar and hypocrite, blimey your reputation could do with you being right for once!

Wrong on DUP manifesto policy with regards single market? We will see.

[jeremyp]

I think it is unlikely this will ever happen.

Firstly one of justifications is gone.

Your political analysis may be correct in the it may be hard to push through, but the justification hasn't gone away. The constituencies need rebalancing to make them more or less of even size (except in some exceptional circumstances).

[jeremyp]

I think the party was ruined on 23rd June 2017 and the subsequent Blairite coup attempt.

I think you mean 2016. And I agree, The coup was disastrous and any fool could see it wasn't going to work.

But Corbyn has managed to get it on it's feet again with none of the bloodletting i'd expect from ''Leftie'' politics. The man is a political genius and can now get away with a bit of political hedge.

Yes, he must be a genius. He's managed to spin Labour's third consecutive defeat as a glorious triumph.

Brexit is a necessity for a low wage low tax economy. It is economic Armageddon and scrapheap to be picked over by people who revel in a squalor they don't have to be part of i.e. very fucking few,

And it's quite surprising that so many British people haven't realised this yet.

Labour are right to concentrate on how things should be with or without Brexit.

I tend to think, if Labour and Corbyn in particular had been a bit more committed to the Remain campaign, we might not be in this mess. Unfortunately, Corbyn was privately a Brexiteer. It clearly hasn't occurred to him that many of the workers' protections come from European law and will be rolled back once the Tories (who tend to be more on the ownership side) get their Brexit

[ProfessorDavey]

Your political analysis may be correct in the it may be hard to push through, but the justification hasn't gone away. The constituencies need rebalancing to make them more or less of even size (except in some exceptional circumstances).

Yes of course - sorry that wasn't the part of the proposals I was talking about. I was talking about the proposal to reduce the number of seats from 650 to 600. The main justification for this was that the UK parliament did less since devolution. That will now be balanced by doing more because of brexit.

It is much simpler to do a limited tweak of seats to balance size while retaining 650 seats rather than effectively change every seat in order to both rebalance and reduce number to 600.

There is another issue - the electoral commission proposals are now 5 years out of date, and would be 12 years out of date by the time of their first use (if this got through). There have been significant changes in population size in that time, particularly in some urban areas. So if the proposals were brought in in their original form they would be instantly out of date and potentially just as bad as we have now in some areas.

[ProfessorDavey]

Wrong on DUP manifesto policy with regards single market?

Indeed you are - I note you have still failed to provide one iota of evidence that the DUP manifesto committed them to withdrawal from the single market.

We will see.

We will see what? Anything that happens in the future wouldn't prove or disprove whether the DUP committed to withdraw from the single market on the basis that the DUP stood on their manifesto in the election and that election is over.

Just so you might understand a little better - in 2010 the LibDems had a manifesto commitment to abolish tuition fees. When they went into coalition they made a U-turn and agreed to increase fees massively as part of the coalition deal. Does that mean there was never a manifesto commitment to abolish tuition fees - of course not.

What the DUP might, or might not agree to support (or even abstain on) in a deal with the Tories tells you nothing about the manifesto they ran on in the general election - which clearly did not include a commitment to withdraw from the single market.

[Bubbles]

I'm fed up with how the press seem intent of deposing Theresa May. How some MPs are saying " dead woman walking"

The conservative voter , that voted for them, voted for her not some other random power hungry person.

All it means to replace her is that she will be replaced by someone no one actually voted for 

[Gordon]

I'm fed up with how the press seem intent of deposing Theresa May. How some MPs are saying " dead woman walking"

The conservative voter , that voted for them, voted for her not some other random power hungry person.

All it means to replace her is that she will be replaced by someone no one actually voted for 

The only people who for voted specifically for Mother Theresa were the voters in her constituency: it is unfortunate for the rest of us that they did.

[Bubbles]

The only people who for voted specifically for Mother Theresa were the voters in her constituency: it is unfortunate for the rest of us that they did.

I didn't vote conservative, but if I had, I would have been voting for her and her apparent strong will, thinking she had what it took to negotiate for this country.

Somehow getting the vote and then sneaking a relative unknown person in to be PM isn't a good move, imo.

Not exactly going to make people feel the country is stable.

At least with Theresa May, you know what you are getting.

People do vote according who is in charge, I've heard an awful lot of people in the past say they would have voted for labour, had the other milliband brother got in.

It's all about perceptions I suppose.

[Aruntraveller]

At least with Theresa May, you know what you are getting.

But that's the point. We don't know what we are getting. Other than useless mantras that are supposed to sound meaningful 'Brexit means Brexit', 'Strong & Stable', Enough is enough' but that are actually empty and meaningless. And now she has tied her sinking ship to the life belt that is the DUP goodness knows what calamities will ensue.

Never has the saying that 'empty vessels make the most noise' been more apt than in her case.