monkeybarry
Jack Jull
Theresa May just called - challenge accepted
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Politics, politics, politics
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
Theresa May just called - challenge accepted
Decent on the whole, step 3 is remarkably naive though for someone with even a passing knowledge of UK politics.
milo
Jack L. Jones
I think that his argument on this elsewhere is that the government hasn't even tried to build a consensus. May interpreted the referendum result in the hardest possible terms, this has tied the hands of the government and made it impossible to build support. As the government needs the support of the devolved administrations, this was short sighted at best.
How can there be a consensus when the opposition party's raison d'etre is to destabilise your party and remove your majority?
The Conservatives (and the British people) are sandwiched between two socialist groups intent on their demise. I don't think May or those in her cabinet are doing much of a job but it's being made far more difficult by the Labour Party.
milo
Jack L. Jones
Labour have supported the government's line on Brexit throughout. If only we had an effective opposition, the government might've raised their game.
The consensus needed to be built across the country and with the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish governments.
There's already a load of noise coming from Labour about putting their socialist agenda into the Brexit arrangements. They're going to use the opportunity to play politics, despite agreeing on the principle that Brexit should happen.
The Scottish and Welsh governments really aren't any more relevant than any other region except they're opposing everything that comes from the Conservatives because it comes from the Conservatives. They're no more or less valid than all the Northern brickholes that do the same.
milo
Jack L. Jones
Labour has consistently whipped it's MPs to vote with the government on Brexit. Based on actions, I don't see how anyone can accuse Labour of jeopardising the government's approach to Brexit.
I do find it funny though that long standing right wing libertarian Brexiteers start casting doubt on leaving the EU when they fear that the outcome will be shaped by Corbyn rather than them. One of the ideas of the EU is to help protect member countries against extremist governments and then we have one at one end of the spectrum paranoid about the prospect of one from the other.
The devolved administrations are relevant because their support is needed to finalise the deal. Also, as David Allen Green points out, there is a risk of support across the country falling away before the two years are up. If there is substantial support for remain during that period then MPs may feel emboldened to defy the whip and there is a chance that it will never happen. I am assuming that is not what the government is trying to achieve.
Keir Starmer has already started poking his nose into the details and trying to insert all kinds of socialist demands that leaving the EU is supposed to rid us of. If he's briefing publicly I think it's safe to assume the party is leaning that way too.
To my knowledge, as long as the Tories stay in line (a big if) only one half of one devolved administration matters.
Just to be clear workers rights (holidays etc) are socialist demands?
milo
Jack L. Jones
That is Keir Starmer's job.
The government had options for trying to build a consensus, if it had wanted to. It could have given parliament a role and allowed MPs to choose who sat on the committee formulating policy. It could have also used the Privy Council to consult at a senior level across party lines, this would have also had the benefit of the discussions being confidential. It could have published position papers early and been open about its objectives. I am sure that the government could have built support for its position if it could have shown that it was in the national interest and would benefit the economy. It hasn't done these things because they know that it will not benefit the economy, is not in the national interest and the cost will be huge. We are following the current course for the same reason that the referendum was held in the first place, to try and hold the Conservative Party together.
Workers rights as interpreted by the Labour party, yes.
Yet Labour are making it clear that these demands are not negotiable.
So we would have wasted time trying to get Labour to agree to something they clearly won't agree to.
current workers rights? not sure you could accurately argue this is what brexit was meant to get rid of - unless you have the brexit is all things to all people.
milo
Jack L. Jones
The Labour policy position is largely status quo, I do not see that as a big concession during a properly managed, staged, exit. The government position is an uncosted, hard Brexit.
Seeking consensus would have meant that we would never have had May's red lines, which we will abandon anyway but only after damaging the government/country at home and abroad. The referendum result was a narrow leave win and the government's approach should have reflected this. We could have also saved ourselves a lot of ball ache if they had acknowledged the difficulty of the task from the outset and spared us bar stool diplomacy.
milo
Jack L. Jones
Correct me if I am wrong but they are suggesting protecting current rights, many of which we signed up to by Conservative governments.
It was meant to leave us free to change them as and when we wish.
The Labour position is to tie us inextricably into EU workplace laws. That's one if the very best reasons to be leaving the EU.