Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

[scaramanga]

I'm amazed at how the press in Euroland are reading all this:

What does the European media say about the parliamentary drama?

BBC Monitoring

The world through its media

Developments in Westminster are being closely followed by Europe’s media, with both France’s Le Monde and Germany's Sueddeutsche Zeitung running live pages to cover the story.

Centre-left daily Le Monde summed up Tuesday as “another crazy day live from Brexitland”.

"Mr Johnson needs two-thirds of the votes in the House of Commons to dissolve Parliament,” it said. “Impossible without Labour. Will Jeremy Corbyn pick up the gauntlet?”

Noting the “tempestuous atmosphere” in Westminster, France’s Le Figaro newspaper focused on the “skilfully orchestrated” moment when one of his own MPs defected to the Liberal Democrats while Boris Johnson was making a statement.

In Spain, the headline in centre-left daily El Pais read: “Parliament has struck a lethal blow to Johnson’s Brexit strategy.” It added that “parliament was neither impressed by the popularity of Boris Johnson nor intimidated by his bravado”.

ABC daily’s headline was: “Parliament defeats Johnson in the first battle against no-deal Brexit,” while Barcelona-based La Vanguardia said: “Boris Johnson loses control over Brexit.”

Germany’s popular tabloid Bild ran with “Boris has lost control” and centre-right daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung noted a "momentous defeat" for Boris Johnson and described the atmosphere in Westminster as "poisoned".

Poland’s influential daily Gazeta Wyborcza said: “Effectively, Johnson’s sole option can be tendering his resignation with his tail between his legs.”

It appears as if nobody has explained the number of (legally viable) options still available to the government - filibustering, election, not recommending assent, simply ignoring a bill raised in an unconstitutional manner, etc.

 

[SpurMeUp]

They have prevented the EU offering any kind of deal at all.

Please don't make me yet again repeat what I went through only a couple of pages ago. The only possible result of blocking No Deal is remaining - just step the logic through yourself and see what you come up with.

Remember the EU don't mind the UK falling on its face with no deal. That only makes leaving the EU look bad. So the EU is not beating down our door to offer a deal, as leave campaigners said they would (another myth busted). But that was obvious from the start. Blaming others for this obvious truth is simply trying to shift responsibility.

Can you give an example of what the EU would offer had remainers not existed? As I outlined a couple of pages back there are broadly 3 brexit exit options. None of which 'work' for the UK that well. That is the real issue. Brexit was not blocked by remainers - plenty of remain MPs backed Mays bill to leave the EU - it was the ERG and Brexiteers who were not happy and who stopped it ultimately! The likes of Boris who voted it down.

From these options, which would work or would the EU have offered do you think?


1. Soft Brexit (Norway). Like being in the EU with FoM and less control for the UK.

2. Harder Brexit - no FoM into the UK, which means no autoatic free access into the EU single market to trade. Our trade is less optimal/free than now with the EU. We have to negotiate a free trade agreement with the EU, and other nations, which takes time. We create tension/violence in Ireland as there has to be some kind of border. Also gives Scotland a good reason to split from the UK.

3. No Deal - Same problems as #2 harder brexit, but without a planned transition period, or mechanism to allow goods to move freely from the EU-UK which could impact food supply, medicines, parts for manufacturing etc instant tarrifs and would put a lot of jobs at risk.


There is nothing anyone - people working for or 'against' Brexit - could do to change these broad options. If the options don't stack up in the UKs favour that is not someone's fault (apart from those who lied and said it would all stack up and stackup easily). To blame people who warned it would be difficult to get a benificial setup for the UK post brexit is ironic. If remainers had not said anything brexit would have worked? That is a nonsense. What exit option would have worked, baring in mind leavers rejected Mays option?

 

[SpurMeUp]

If people care enough then they won't buy from polluting businesses/countries.

If they don't care or don't know, then it is okay to pollute and there should be no regulation or action from government to regulate the pollution? Your logic is not sound sadly.

 

[SpurMeUp]

How can a right wing government be spending more? The very definition of right wing is using the state to promote inequality (or equality of opportunity, but not result). Surely the Thatcherite Europhiles who were culled last night are the more right wing ones?

That is precisely it. This Boris-Cummings setup is breaking convention. It will seek to steal the thunder of Corbyn while also destroying Farage by appearing staunchly pro-brexit. Of course the position is a sham and tight-rope walk. Can Boris pull it off? Maybe. The hard part will be delivery. Easier to promise all things to all men. Much harder to deliver them. Which is Breixt's issue too.

 

[SpurMeUp]

He can't/won't do that, because he knows full well that he'll arrive at a position that clashes with his entrenched view on the matter.

I can easily step through a scenerio where we remain. I've thought it is inevitable for some time becaue the other options all leave the UK in a worse situation than we are in now. Who would want that?

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Tory MP bemoans rushed reading of bill

Consternation from Conservative MP Bill Cash - a long-standing Eurosceptic - ahead of the debate. He's deeply unhappy about the bill which could force the prime minister to ask the EU for a delay to Brexit.

He fears the "incredibly rushed procedure is a travesty in itself" and worries about the speed required of parliamentarians to assess the bill which has "not even been seen yet".

The House is expected to get through three readings in one day, and pass it on to the House of Lords tomorrow (Thursday).

The bill, Mr Cash says, is "only literally being made available in the vote office".

Speaker of the House John Bercow admits it's unusual to proceed so quickly but there is precedent.


Brexit delay bill is 'very simple'

Mr Benn says the purpose of the bill is "very simple" - it is to ensure the UK does not leave the EU without a deal on 31 October.

There is "no mandate" for a no-deal Brexit, Mr Benn adds - and anyone supporting the bill recognises the negative impacts of such a withdrawal from the bloc.


Where is the mandate for crippling our ability to try and negotiate?

 

[scaramanga]

If they don't care or don't know, then it is okay to pollute and there should be no regulation or action from government to regulate the pollution? Your logic is not sound sadly.

If they don't care enough to know they don't care enough. It's not for the government (especially not a supranational one) to form the will of the people - that mechanism is supposed to work the other way around.

 

[scaramanga]

Remember the EU don't mind the UK falling on its face with no deal. That only makes leaving the EU look bad. So the EU is not beating down our door to offer a deal, as leave campaigners said they would (another myth busted). But that was obvious from the start. Blaming others for this obvious truth is simply trying to shift responsibility.

Can you give an example of what the EU would offer had remainers not existed? As I outlined a couple of pages back there are broadly 3 brexit exit options. None of which 'work' for the UK that well. That is the real issue. Brexit was not blocked by remainers - plenty of remain MPs backed Mays bill to leave the EU - it was the ERG and Brexiteers who were not happy and who stopped it ultimately! The likes of Boris who voted it down.

From these options, which would work or would the EU have offered do you think?


1. Soft Brexit (Norway). Like being in the EU with FoM and less control for the UK.

2. Harder Brexit - no FoM into the UK, which means no autoatic free access into the EU single market to trade. Our trade is less optimal/free than now with the EU. We have to negotiate a free trade agreement with the EU, and other nations, which takes time. We create tension/violence in Ireland as there has to be some kind of border. Also gives Scotland a good reason to split from the UK.

3. No Deal - Same problems as #2 harder brexit, but without a planned transition period, or mechanism to allow goods to move freely from the EU-UK which could impact food supply, medicines, parts for manufacturing etc instant tarrifs and would put a lot of jobs at risk.


There is nothing anyone - people working for or 'against' Brexit - could do to change these broad options. If the options don't stack up in the UKs favour that is not someone's fault (apart from those who lied and said it would all stack up and stackup easily). To blame people who warned it would be difficult to get a benificial setup for the UK post brexit is ironic. If remainers had not said anything brexit would have worked? That is a nonsense. What exit option would have worked, baring in mind leavers rejected Mays option?

You don't know that at all. All you know is that the opening stance of the EU is as above, and that May and her lot did literally nothing to attempt to bend or break that will.

If the traitor's bill is broken, then we will know what the EU's bargaining position is and then we can choose whether we want that or not. As it stands, all we have is the outcome of a negotiation that didn't even start.

 

[SpurMeUp]

You don't know that at all. All you know is that the opening stance of the EU is as above, and that May and her lot did literally nothing to attempt to bend or break that will.

If the traitor's bill is broken, then we will know what the EU's bargaining position is and then we can choose whether we want that or not. As it stands, all we have is the outcome of a negotiation that didn't even start.

Delusion I am afraid. May negotiated for years. Boris has been PM for months. What are they all waiting for? Have to admire your belief. But look at the article in the Telegraph, showing that Boris hasn't even been negotiating with the EU. He has done nothing. Do you seriously think the EU will be knocking on the door of number 10 giving us deal that is better than their members get?

Don't forget, does the EU want brexit to be a massive success? Just use some common sense and you see Brexit and the negotiation position, does not stackup.

 

[SpurMeUp]

If they don't care enough to know they don't care enough. It's not for the government (especially not a supranational one) to form the will of the people - that mechanism is supposed to work the other way around.

So your anti-regulation proposal doesn't work. You need some government regulation to ensure we don't pollute, and to ensure companies can compete fairly.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

The government's modest band of supporters in the Lords are mounting a formidable filibuster operation to prevent the Benn Bill getting to third reading before a possible prorogation of Parliament on Monday.

Labour and the Lib Dems had put down a business of the house motion which lays down a timetable for consideration of the bill.

The government side then unleashed hoards of amendments, to change every possible aspect of the motion and suggest all kinds of measures that should be debated instead (my favourite is the Bat Habitat (regulation) Bill).

Unlike the Commons, where such amendments might be grouped or voted on in a job lot at a set time, the Lords has to debate each amendment.

So the bill's supporters will have to move a closure motion to end the debate on each amendment, and then vote on each amendment.

That will mean two divisions, each probably taking a quarter of an hour, will be forced on each of around 90 amendments.

This morning, many were arriving with suitcases full of overnight gear and supplies.


Its a bloody pantomime. Would be funny if the stakes werent so high.

 

[scaramanga]

Delusion I am afraid. May negotiated for years. Boris has been PM for months. What are they all waiting for? Have to admire your belief. But look at the article in the Telegraph, showing that Boris hasn't even been negotiating with the EU. He has done nothing. Do you seriously think the EU will be knocking on the door of number 10 giving us deal that is better than their members get?

Don't forget, does the EU want brexit to be a massive success? Just use some common sense and you see Brexit and the negotiation position, does not stackup.

May didn't negotiate at all - both the EU side and her own team have admitted that since Johnson became PM. We don't have a single idea what the EU's real position is, because we haven't even begun to negotiate.

If the remainers weren't all being such treacherous clams, then maybe we'd have some time to actually sit down and negotiate properly. It will have to be rushed now as they've left us no alternative.

 

[scaramanga]

So your anti-regulation proposal doesn't work. You need some government regulation to ensure we don't pollute, and to ensure companies can compete fairly.

There's nothing fairer than a lack of intervention. I'm not sure what kind of communist paradise you're imagining where all companies are equal but that's not how anything works and it's certainly not how we progress.

Again, it is not for the government to form the will of the people, it is for the will of the people to form the government. If people care (and everyone says they do) then nobody will buy from companies that pollute and your point is pointless. If people don't care about pollution then it is not for the government (especially not a supranational one) to tell them they should care.

 

[SpurMeUp]

May didn't negotiate at all - both the EU side and her own team have admitted that since Johnson became PM. We don't have a single idea what the EU's real position is, because we haven't even begun to negotiate.

If the remainers weren't all being such treacherous clams, then maybe we'd have some time to actually sit down and negotiate properly. It will have to be rushed now as they've left us no alternative.

Ah yes. May didn't negotiate. We didn't have a deadline previously. And Brexit was always going to be simple.

 

[scaramanga]

Ah yes. May didn't negotiate. We didn't have a deadline previously. And Brexit was always going to be simple.

I'm sure (at the risk of sounding like a stuck record) someone posted the link in this thread where it was admitted that May's team didn't negotiate at all.

 

[SpurMeUp]

Emotional Soames will not stand again

House of Commons

Parliament


BBCCopyright: BBC
Sir Nicholas Soames MP - Winston Churchill's grandson and one of the 21 MPs who had the Tory whip withdrawn yesterday - is clearly emotional as he makes his contribution to the debate.

He says he has always believed that the 2016 referendum result "must be respected" but that must not be done without a deal.

"This bill before the House today is modest, it's ambitious, and it's powerful in its mandate.

"It merely seeks to avert the risk of the disaster of a no-deal Brexit exit on 31 October and it thereby seeks to give the government and this House to achieve a resolution on this profoundly difficult issue."

Sir Nicholas then confirms he will not be standing at the next general election.

"I am thus approaching the end of 37 years service to this House, of which I have been proud and honoured beyond words to be a member."

He adds: "I am truly sad that it should end in this way."

 

[scaramanga]

Emotional Soames will not stand again

House of Commons

Parliament

View attachment 7179
BBCCopyright: BBC
Sir Nicholas Soames MP - Winston Churchill's grandson and one of the 21 MPs who had the Tory whip withdrawn yesterday - is clearly emotional as he makes his contribution to the debate.

He says he has always believed that the 2016 referendum result "must be respected" but that must not be done without a deal.

"This bill before the House today is modest, it's ambitious, and it's powerful in its mandate.

"It merely seeks to avert the risk of the disaster of a no-deal Brexit exit on 31 October and it thereby seeks to give the government and this House to achieve a resolution on this profoundly difficult issue."

Sir Nicholas then confirms he will not be standing at the next general election.

"I am thus approaching the end of 37 years service to this House, of which I have been proud and honoured beyond words to be a member."

He adds: "I am truly sad that it should end in this way."

Good riddance to him and that other wet Clarke.

 

[Gutter Boy]

The government's modest band of supporters in the Lords are mounting a formidable filibuster operation to prevent the Benn Bill getting to third reading before a possible prorogation of Parliament on Monday.

Labour and the Lib Dems had put down a business of the house motion which lays down a timetable for consideration of the bill.

The government side then unleashed hoards of amendments, to change every possible aspect of the motion and suggest all kinds of measures that should be debated instead (my favourite is the Bat Habitat (regulation) Bill).

Unlike the Commons, where such amendments might be grouped or voted on in a job lot at a set time, the Lords has to debate each amendment.

So the bill's supporters will have to move a closure motion to end the debate on each amendment, and then vote on each amendment.

That will mean two divisions, each probably taking a quarter of an hour, will be forced on each of around 90 amendments.

This morning, many were arriving with suitcases full of overnight gear and supplies.


Its a bloody pantomime. Would be funny if the stakes werent so high.

It does work: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4492688.stm

 

[Gutter Boy]

Good riddance to him and that other wet Clarke.

Letwin, Clarke, Major, Hessletine.

The 1992-93 cabinet that bent over for Kohl, passed Maastricht, and spawned the whole EU monster in the first place.

 

[SpurMeUp]

The net contribution the UK paid to the EU in 2016 was £8.6b

We - tax payers - are paying £40b a year in interest on government borrowing. Today a Tory government announced it will be borrowing more.

If the Brexit vote had not happened the economy would have powered out of this debt. We saw a few gdp % points less growth primarily because of the brexit vote result.