Politics, politics, politics

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

if they don't put a border up and we don't put a border up, how does that tick the box of controlling immigration?

Playing devils advocate - clearly this is entirely hypothetical - just because people can enter the country, it doesnt mean they have the right to welfare or residence, or even work. If, for example, ID was required to access these things - how would that play out?

 

[the dza]

Absolutely. We could have introduced all kinds of things to make peoples' lives better, without the constraint of being sued by big business, whose interests the EU primarily exists to protect. We could have been the first 1st world country to move to post-capitalism.

Sign TPP and NAFTA with immediate effect and dare the EU to put up a border on their side. That would be the heroic way to do it

Signing into TPP opens up our government to being sued by big business doesn't it? Wasn't that the main reason for the massive opposition to TPP?

 

[the dza]

Well its not like he is putting in anything like a fight now, is it? He is just waiting for brick to happen.

He could be having a big hand in how things unfold, and he is sitting it out.

In what way? Accepting the referendum result is the right position to take imo, whether you voted leave or remain (and I voted remain). Then, the Labour Party can try to oppose and shape things, but ultimately it's the numbers in Parliament that matter. This is a Tory Brexit, to change it in any fundamental way, we'd need to get rid of the Tory Party *edit* I mean Tory government. I believe this is Labour's plan, which is why they have set out 6 tests that May can never pass, meaning they will vote down her deal. After that is when things can get more interesting.

 

[Gutter Boy]

if they don't put a border up and we don't put a border up, how does that tick the box of controlling immigration?

If people have no right to work, to asylum (as they would be crossing from a safe country) or to benefits, presumably starvation would control it

 

[Baleforce]

Playing devils advocate - clearly this is entirely hypothetical - just because people can enter the country, it doesnt mean they have the right to welfare or residence, or even work. If, for example, ID was required to access these things - how would that play out?

I think thats a dangerous path to go down, relying on having your papers in order, we've seen how cruel the home office can be with Windrush.

 

[the dza]

That's misunderstanding the relationship between the executive and the legislature. Parliament can't do anything proactive - they can only react to the government. The government could put its fingers in its ears and go 'nah nah nah' for 4 months and hard Brexit would happen. That legislation has already passed.

Hilary Benn was saying earlier this morning that whilst that might be procedure, Parliament will not just twiddle it's thumbs for 3 or 4 months and allow us to go over the cliff edge. He is the Chair of the Brexit Select Committee, and whilst he is a remainer, I think he has a good idea of what Parliament will do. IMO, in the end, if May just sits in after her deal gets voted down and says "right then, hard brexit here we come", there will be enough MPs in Parliament to bring the government down with a no-confidence vote, and bring about a general election. They won't sit idle, not from what MPs have been saying in the past few days.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Signing into TPP opens up our government to being sued by big business doesn't it? Wasn't that the main reason for the massive opposition to TPP?

In countries less neo-liberal than the EU. It would be a step in the right direction for us (though its clearly still free trade rather than fair trade).

 

[Gutter Boy]

Hilary Benn was saying earlier this morning that whilst that might be procedure, Parliament will not just twiddle it's thumbs for 3 or 4 months and allow us to go over the cliff edge. He is the Chair of the Brexit Select Committee, and whilst he is a remainer, I think he has a good idea of what Parliament will do. IMO, in the end, if May just sits in after her deal gets voted down and says "right then, hard brexit here we come", there will be enough MPs in Parliament to bring the government down with a no-confidence vote, and bring about a general election. They won't sit idle, not from what MPs have been saying in the past few days.

The Tories will go for a leadership election instead. With the fixed term parliament act, there won't be enough of them to cause a GE

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

In what way? Accepting the referendum result is the right position to take imo, whether you voted leave or remain (and I voted remain). Then, the Labour Party can try to oppose and shape things, but ultimately it's the numbers in Parliament that matter. This is a Tory Brexit, to change it in any fundamental way, we'd need to get rid of the Tory Party. I believe this is Labour's plan, which is why they have set out 6 tests that May can never pass, meaning they will vote down her deal. After that is when things can get more interesting.

He is playing "what is best for Labour", not "what is best for the UK". Thats the fundamental issue I have with his approach.

Instead of trying to oppose the things that clearly wont work, direct things to a more sensible place, opposing things that are simply wrong - he is waiting it out until Labour can walk an election and take control.

And then what? Who knows - he has barely voiced an opinion on it. Frankly he has been conspicuous by his relative silence on it, IMHO.

I think thats a dangerous path to go down, relying on having your papers in order, we've seen how cruel the home office can be with Windrush.

Not saying its right, just pointing out how that could play out. If you are to take residence, employment or welfare, and you need to show you have the right, that would clear a lot of the immigration issues up, wouldnt it?

 

[the dza]

The Tories will go for a leadership election instead. With the fixed term parliament act, there won't be enough of them to cause a GE

Only, imo, if someone becomes leader who can get a deal through Parliament. That would be a much softer Brexit, because it would require Labour MPs to be able to vote for it, an ERG Brexit won't get through Parliament either. If the only game in town for leader is a brexiter, then the constitutional crisis is still there. It can only be solved by a General Election to either give the government a majority or put a new government (Labour) in charge.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Only, imo, if someone becomes leader who can get a deal through Parliament. That would be a much softer Brexit, because it would require Labour MPs to be able to vote for it, an ERG Brexit won't get through Parliament either. If the only game in town for leader is a brexiter, then the constitutional crisis is still there. It can only be solved by a General Election to either give the government a majority or put a new government (Labour) in charge.

I think a David Davis Canada-type deal (presented by a younger, more charismatic leader) would get through parliament with all the Tories (minus Grieve's 10), the DUP and the few hardcore Bennites.

 

[the dza]

He is playing "what is best for Labour", not "what is best for the UK". Thats the fundamental issue I have with his approach.

Instead of trying to oppose the things that clearly wont work, direct things to a more sensible place, opposing things that are simply wrong - he is waiting it out until Labour can walk an election and take control.

And then what? Who knows - he has barely voiced an opinion on it. Frankly he has been conspicuous by his relative silence on it, IMHO.




Not saying its right, just pointing out how that could play out. If you are to take residence, employment or welfare, and you need to show you have the right, that would clear a lot of the immigration issues up, wouldnt it?

He's done plenty at PMQs on brexit, I've seen it with my own eyes. If you accept that it's right to respect the referendum result, in what way then do you want Corbyn to oppose the government position? Perhaps a Customs Union? Yes, that's the Labour position. Perhaps enshrining the worker and environmental protections from the EU in primary legislation? Yes, that is Corbyn and Labour's position as well. Maybe vote down the government deal and try to force a General Election, and failing that, a 2nd referendum? That is also Labour's position. And that is also (imo) the most effective way to oppose a Tory Brexit (get rid of the Tory government).

Don't mistake the lack of reporting by the media on what Labour actually want to do with a lack of difference in Labour's position and that of the government. The difference is there and has been stated again and again.

 

[Baleforce]

He is playing "what is best for Labour", not "what is best for the UK". Thats the fundamental issue I have with his approach.

Instead of trying to oppose the things that clearly wont work, direct things to a more sensible place, opposing things that are simply wrong - he is waiting it out until Labour can walk an election and take control.

And then what? Who knows - he has barely voiced an opinion on it. Frankly he has been conspicuous by his relative silence on it, IMHO.




Not saying its right, just pointing out how that could play out. If you are to take residence, employment or welfare, and you need to show you have the right, that would clear a lot of the immigration issues up, wouldnt it?

I guess, my point was more, what does this deliver for leave voters who's primary issue was stopping immigration?

You can try to build a system to work after immigrants have arrived but surely that's not the most efficient way of handling things or a decent a reasonable way to treat people at a low point in their lives.

Edit: and I agree on Corbyn, he's not doing his job.

 

[the dza]

I think a David Davis type deal (presented by a younger, more charismatic leader) would get through parliament with all the Tories (minus Grieve's 10), the DUP and the few hardcore Bennites.

David Davis wants Canada (or Canada plus plus or whatever he calls it). There's no majority for that either because of Northern Ireland (also, Raab's new discovery of the English Channel might complicate things).

 

[Baleforce]

I think a David Davis Canada-type deal (presented by a younger, more charismatic leader) would get through parliament with all the Tories (minus Grieve's 10), the DUP and the few hardcore Bennites.

any deal the EU will agree to will have an Irish border so the DUP won't go for it

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Only, imo, if someone becomes leader who can get a deal through Parliament. That would be a much softer Brexit, because it would require Labour MPs to be able to vote for it, an ERG Brexit won't get through Parliament either. If the only game in town for leader is a brexiter, then the constitutional crisis is still there. It can only be solved by a General Election to either give the government a majority or put a new government (Labour) in charge.

I havent ignored your other post, its just that it kind of rolls into this one.

What exactly do you think will happen if Labour get in in an election in the coming weeks?

I assume the EU will grant an extension to the negotiations to allow for the hand over etc. But then what?

Negotiations start from scratch? We go back to the divorce bill? The EU are suddenly really amenable to the anti EU leader? What do you suppose Corbyn will achieve that May cant?

I see very little difference to be achieved at all. The only thing that gets a deal done is further concession to the EUs will. Chances are May is getting shafted on it right now, and that Corbyn will be no different.

More and more Im convinced the outcome will be a referendum, not an exit. As I said, its the get out of jail free card. The government offer it, cross their fingers, and with a little luck (for them) it all goes away - just like that.

I guess, my point was more, what does this deliver for leave voters who's primary issue was stopping immigration?

You can try to build a system to work after immigrants have arrived but surely that's not the most efficient way of handling things or a decent a reasonable way to treat people at a low point in their lives.

Edit: and I agree on Corbyn, he's not doing his job.

Completely open to correction - but IMHO the main issue people have with "immigration" is the dependence on welfare, the taking of homes and jobs, and the ease with which it happens for immigrants. Especially in more deprived areas*. That there are immigrants isnt really the issue.

And Im not making a moral case here, just talking practicalities.

*Immigration is, IMO, a regional/geographic issue. There are areas unaffected by it that simply dont understand the issues. There are areas of relatively high foreign population, city centres etc, that just dont see an issue with a foreign face - as thats as basic as the argument is to them. And then there are areas where large numbers of immigrants are dumped into towns, full warefare and a headstart on struggling people there, to whom it is a major issue. I have seen first hand the difference in culture etc as well when large numbers are put in small areas.

Its a complex issue, and I think it does people a disservice when they vote leave based on something like immigration and get tarred as racist, stupid or xenophobic etc. And now Ive gone ranting off on a tangent, absolutely not directed as you, I dont think youve said things like that.

 

[Gutter Boy]

any deal the EU will agree to will have an Irish border so the DUP won't go for it

Revisit the technical solutions if we're stopping just being weak

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

any deal the EU will agree to will have an Irish border so the DUP won't go for it

The EU dont want a border, do they?

 

[Baleforce]

The EU dont want a border, do they?

as I understand it, their position is that it can be avoided if we are inline with the four freedoms

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

as I understand it, their position is that it can be avoided if we are inline with the four freedoms

I thought they were opposed to it on the basis of the state of relations between NI and ROI, more than the four freedoms.

And also as a pretty handy negotiating tool, of course.