Pages: 1 ... 52 53 [54] 55 56 57   Go Down

Author Topic: Brexit  (Read 341597 times)

mecrox

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206
    • My Online Portfolio
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1060 on: February 02, 2017, 11:49:49 am »

I guess, Jeremy, I am still puzzled by the discrepancy of the parliament vote (80/20) vs. the popular vote (51/49). One would expect a majority to support the referendum results (ithough many hoped otherwise), but one much closer to the popular vote split.

Mostly the political party system on which a politician's hopes of preferment largely depend. Go against an order to vote one way and goodbye career. This is very corrosive. Then a mixture of motives. Some will not want to go against the popular vote, while others might want to but lack the courage. Those who voted against the motion have already been branded "traitors" in the national press. There is a very divisive and authoritarian atmosphere here mainly caused by the total absence of an effective opposition party. The current opposition if one can call it that is headed by a feeble and indecisive old man. All imho.
Logged
Mark @ Flickr

Chairman Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3352
    • flickr page
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1061 on: February 02, 2017, 12:06:21 pm »

There is a demographic split in the decision to leave. Older people tended to vote Leave, whilst younger people tended to vote Remain. Two hard winters should see off a fair few Brexiteers, and those same two years will probably produce new electors who are generally more favourable to continued EU membership. I say, let's have a confirmatory referendum when the Tories give us the best deal they can manage (don't expect too much from Mssrs. Poxy Foxy, BJ & David Davies).

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4756
    • My photography site
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1062 on: February 02, 2017, 12:10:24 pm »

I guess, Jeremy, I am still puzzled by the discrepancy of the parliament vote (80/20) vs. the popular vote (51/49). One would expect a majority to support the referendum results (ithough many hoped otherwise), but one much closer to the popular vote split.

You shouldn't expect yesterday's vote to echo the referendum - there wouldn't have been any vote in Parliament if the Cameron government had drafted the referendum bill to make it binding.

50% is government votes which were all for the bill. Labour MPs were split. The majority of Labour MPs are now terrified of losing their seats to pro-Brexit parties, so they voted to pass the bill. But those who voted against were from areas like London that want to remain. Add Scotland's SNP and you've got your 20%.
Logged

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3457
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1063 on: February 02, 2017, 12:45:14 pm »

The current opposition if one can call it that is headed by a feeble and indecisive old man. All imho.
Not a good assessment of the man. He is far from feeble, having been elected within his party by a huge majority. He's now become pretty arrogant with such a big internal party mandate. That the mandate comes from a load extreme left wingers and naive idealists won't make him electable by the general public.
He has already proved quite decisive within his party, over riding the more centrist members of the party to his own will.

He's doing a great job of making the Labour party unelectable and keeping the Tories in power for the foreseeable future.

Grim times
Logged

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9263
    • site
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1064 on: February 02, 2017, 12:54:08 pm »

Then look at France: the most popular Conservative candidat, Fillon, is currently being investigated for the million euro fraud of paying his English wife 900,000 euros over eight years for doing nothing and his two kids for legal services as they were still students - all from public funds, of course. He's also accused of making a coupe of hundred big ones for himself as advisor... Such our representatives.

I think she's Welsh, in fact. Be careful, Rob: the Celts get awfully excited about such things.

Now that the Parliament has acted, how long before Scotland and Northern Ireland leave the UK?

They're going nowhere. Sturgeon talks of virtually nothing but a second referendum, but she won't dare to call it unless she's certain to win (or as certain as anything political might be these days): a second loss would close down the issue for many, many years.

I guess, Jeremy, I am still puzzled by the discrepancy of the parliament vote (80/20) vs. the popular vote (51/49). One would expect a majority to support the referendum results (ithough many hoped otherwise), but one much closer to the popular vote split.

Whipping. I don't know whether the Tories had a whip in place: they didn't need one, really, and from their benches only Ken Clarke voted against. Labour had a three-line whip (the most powerful order there is) and even so, a fifth of Corbyn's MPs voted against the bill (his own Home Secretary, Diane Abbott, didn't vote at all).

[Corbyn]'s doing a great job of making the Labour party unelectable and keeping the Tories in power for the foreseeable future.

Agreed. Ably assisted by his cronies, of course.

Jeremy
Logged

mecrox

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206
    • My Online Portfolio
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1065 on: February 02, 2017, 02:52:45 pm »

Not a good assessment of the man. He is far from feeble, having been elected within his party by a huge majority. He's now become pretty arrogant with such a big internal party mandate. That the mandate comes from a load extreme left wingers and naive idealists won't make him electable by the general public.
He has already proved quite decisive within his party, over riding the more centrist members of the party to his own will.

He's doing a great job of making the Labour party unelectable and keeping the Tories in power for the foreseeable future.

Grim times

He looks entirely feeble to me. He's been elected by a majority of activists whose political goals make his party completely unelectable but he won't stand up to them. His own MPs routinely ignore him, including sometimes his own Shadow Cabinet. He cannot get to grips with thinking on his feet in Parliament and is made to look like a dimwit by his political opponents. There is almost no occasion he won't fail to rise to by thinking small. He is indecisive, having tried to play it both ways on the Europe referendum. His managers tried to relaunch the Corbyn brand few weeks ago with much fanfare but the relaunch collapsed within a day after he started changing his mind on executive pay and immigration between morning and afternoon. Hence the present impasse which is very grim, I agree. The public see this and wrote him off a while ago now as someone fit to be a prime minister, so they won't support him. The public probably would support an opposition leader with some backbone and a clear plan even if they didn't fully agree with him or her.

Probably unlike one DJ Trump, he can be personally kind and very considerate as I can attest from a friend of mine. But this is politics as they say.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2017, 03:14:36 pm by mecrox »
Logged
Mark @ Flickr

Chairman Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3352
    • flickr page
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1066 on: February 02, 2017, 03:08:54 pm »

The press & establishment rounded on him, because he's too much of a threat to the established order. The nonsense about left-wing extremism, is laughable. Corbyn has never been 'hard-left', he is now as he's always been, a mainstream social democrat in the European tradition. Many of his policy ideas are very popular if you present them to people without reference to Corbyn. Many of them are standard practice in places like Merkel's Germany, but nobody is calling her a Marxist revolutionary.

Frankly, I'm sick of the lies, misrepresentations, 'alternative facts', and so on, spewing from the mouths of politicians, political commentators, journalists & the mainstream media.  I expect our politicians to tell the bloody truth, and our press to hold their feet over the fire when they don't. The press should be holding the executive to account & speaking truth to power, not colluding with them to help maintain the current neoliberal status quo.

The people were mislead & lied to over Brexit, following decades of lies & misrepresentations from the Tory press, with claims of straight cucumbers, British sausages being banned, and more nonsense than you could shake a stick at. We've been fed a diet of anti-European trash, and fear-mongering over immigration, all to serve the interests of a minority of politicians & press barons. It's bloody shameful.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1067 on: February 02, 2017, 03:45:05 pm »

You shouldn't expect yesterday's vote to echo the referendum - there wouldn't have been any vote in Parliament if the Cameron government had drafted the referendum bill to make it binding.

50% is government votes which were all for the bill. Labour MPs were split. The majority of Labour MPs are now terrified of losing their seats to pro-Brexit parties, so they voted to pass the bill. But those who voted against were from areas like London that want to remain. Add Scotland's SNP and you've got your 20%.

Sounds like they are placing democracy before courage.  Aren't elected officials suppose to represent the wishes of the people who vote for them?  Which brings up a question from this American.  How does the Upper House work?  Are these Lords  elected or what?  How do their votes impact Brexit?

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1068 on: February 02, 2017, 03:55:15 pm »

Now that the Parliament has acted, how long before Scotland and Northern Ireland leave the UK?

Scotland and Northern Ireland should get on with Brexit along with the rest of Britain to get into the trade deal that Trump wants to make with GB.  With his temperament, you may wind up behind Australia and get a worse deal.  The EU isn't going to last for too much longer anyway in it's present configuration.  So there's no point trying to split off now.   

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4756
    • My photography site
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1069 on: February 02, 2017, 04:01:56 pm »

Sounds like they are placing democracy before courage. Aren't elected officials suppose to represent the wishes of the people who vote for them?   

But this vote was more procedural , agreeing that the referendum result was as binding as everyone thought.

Which brings up a question from this American.  How does the Upper House work?  Are these Lords  elected or what?  How do their votes impact Brexit?

Lords are not generally elected and can attend and vote, and claim a daily allowance, until they die.
  • Most have been nominated by the major party leaders over the years. They can be anyone like former MPs, union leaders, people who have funded the political parties (no scope for corruption there!), business people, religious leaders, artists etc etc.
  • Two small blocks get there by virtue of being bishops in the Church of England, or as very senior lawyers - the "Law Lords".
  • Finally there is a group there on the hereditary principle. This is smaller than in the past, and is elected by other members of the hereditary "nobility".
Incredible, eh? And people have the gall to complain about the EU's lack of democracy.

They can propose amendments to law and sometimes block a bill, but if the government wishes it can always overrule the Lords by creating hundreds of new ones to outvote them. Not sure if that has ever happened.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2017, 04:08:19 pm by john beardsworth »
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1070 on: February 02, 2017, 04:10:21 pm »

So what did the Lords have to do with the Brexit vote and results?

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4756
    • My photography site
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1071 on: February 02, 2017, 04:24:12 pm »

Almost nothing. They'll just pass it.

They can sometimes act as a sort of moral conscience. Imagine the referendum result had been unclear and the government had tried to force through Brexit on a dubious interpretation of it. In that case the Lords might decide to reject the bill to make the government think again. In those cases MPs then discover more courage to stand up to their own government, cabinet arguments might swing against the measure, and the government might then decide to change direction. But this only really happens when the government is doing something particularly contentious, and doesn't justify the House of Lords existence. It's only countries like Bhutan that allow hereditary "nobility" to have seats in Parliament.
Logged

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3457
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1072 on: February 02, 2017, 05:24:44 pm »

He looks entirely feeble to me. He's been elected by a majority of activists whose political goals make his party completely unelectable but he won't stand up to them.
He doesn't need to stand up to them, their his key to leadership. He likes what they think and visa versa.
Quote
He cannot get to grips with thinking on his feet in Parliament
A part of that is wanting to be different and non-combative, not that this strategy is working well.
I doubt that he's had, or has refused, any serious training and coaching in how to look good in the media either.
Quote
He is indecisive, having tried to play it both ways on the Europe referendum.
Not really indecisive. He's on record as being anti-EU for very many years. Having to comply with the party's pro-EU stance was difficult for him and explains why he was so hopeless in the run up to the referendum. Now he's happy to command his party to go with the dubious result.

I think we both agree he's a liability, but don't underestimate him.
Logged

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4756
    • My photography site
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1073 on: February 02, 2017, 05:47:53 pm »

I think we both agree he's a liability, but don't underestimate him.

Not sure of that second point. He has little crossover appeal to the middle class and barely appeals to traditional Labour voters outside London.

I met him once 4-5 years ago at an event with Tony Benn. Nice enough bloke, but if I'd had any inkling he was a future Labour leader I would have tried to get pictures of him with the Sealed Knot. As it was, I got some lovely pictures of Benn chatting with pikemen and musketeers - now, he had charisma.
Logged

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3457
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1074 on: February 02, 2017, 06:17:00 pm »

Not sure of that second point. He has little crossover appeal to the middle class and barely appeals to traditional Labour voters outside London.
Maybe, but he's been elected to lead the second biggest political party (at the moment) in the UK by a very substantial majority. That in itself is significant.
A lot of his policies do have wide appeal and merit, but his personal presentation and some of his more radical views will ensure he'll make the Labour party unelectable whilst he's in charge.
Logged

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2355
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1075 on: February 02, 2017, 06:50:58 pm »

Scotland and Northern Ireland should get on with Brexit along with the rest of Britain to get into the trade deal that Trump wants to make with GB..   

Don't worry about Trump ..

Quote
Legally I can kill him, Queen confirms
31-01-17


THE QUEEN has confirmed that if President Trump makes a state visit, she can kill him with a sword and nobody can touch her.

Palace staff have assured the Queen that, according to English law, Trump is a subject of the Crown and can, if judged to be damaging the monarchy, be dispatched without repercussion.

She said: “I haven’t made up my mind yet. I might.

“It’s been an awful lot of years hefting the old sword without using it, and who better to christen it on? Just imagine the look on his satsuma face.

“And the colonies would be so grateful they’d have me straight back as their reigning monarch, which solves this Brexit thing literally at a stroke.

“I should do one useful thing before I abdicate, really. And imagine how furious it’d make the May woman.”

Her Majesty added: “I genuinely can’t think of a reason not to. Anyone?”

Source
Logged

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4756
    • My photography site
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1076 on: February 02, 2017, 06:54:00 pm »

Maybe, but he's been elected to lead the second biggest political party (at the moment) in the UK by a very substantial majority. That in itself is significant.
A lot of his policies do have wide appeal and merit, but his personal presentation and some of his more radical views will ensure he'll make the Labour party unelectable whilst he's in charge.

I don't think we're disagreeing much. Compare him with Benn. Each inspired the same part of the electorate, but Benn was an inspiring figure, a wonderful speaker (I heard him a few times in the mid 80s) with an ability to break out and - maybe - be electable.

A big part of Britain's problem is the screwy political system with a first-past-the-post system that turned a 37% popular vote into a Cameron government and a referendum intended to unify his party rather than take us out of the EU. On the left it lumps together Corbyn's unelectable socialist party with the wider social democrat to liberal centre. If only Blair hadn't prayed with Bush, he'd still be in power.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2017, 07:51:38 pm by john beardsworth »
Logged

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4756
    • My photography site
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1077 on: February 02, 2017, 06:56:54 pm »

THE QUEEN has confirmed that if President Trump makes a state visit, she can kill him with a sword and nobody can touch her.

She might have a problem with Philip von Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg who's probably going to be Trump's best buddy. 
Logged

Farmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2848
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1078 on: February 02, 2017, 11:23:42 pm »

Are you kidding, Philip has been waiting for someone to lose their head!
Logged
Phil Brown

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9263
    • site
Re: Brexit
« Reply #1079 on: February 03, 2017, 04:06:12 am »

But this vote was more procedural , agreeing that the referendum result was as binding as everyone thought.

Lords are not generally elected and can attend and vote, and claim a daily allowance, until they die.
  • Most have been nominated by the major party leaders over the years. They can be anyone like former MPs, union leaders, people who have funded the political parties (no scope for corruption there!), business people, religious leaders, artists etc etc.
  • Two small blocks get there by virtue of being bishops in the Church of England, or as very senior lawyers - the "Law Lords".
  • Finally there is a group there on the hereditary principle. This is smaller than in the past, and is elected by other members of the hereditary "nobility".
Incredible, eh? And people have the gall to complain about the EU's lack of democracy.

They can propose amendments to law and sometimes block a bill, but if the government wishes it can always overrule the Lords by creating hundreds of new ones to outvote them. Not sure if that has ever happened.

That's not quite right any more. No new Lords of Appeal in ordinary (Law Lords) have been appointed since the Supreme Court was established in 2009. Although justices of the Supreme Court are given the life-long courtesy title of Lord, they are not members of the House of Lords. From memory, Lord Dyson was the first to be in this position when he was appointed to the SC in 2010.

The bishops are there solely by virtue of their office; when one retires or otherwise relinquishes his office, he is replaced by the new holder of that office.

Of about 800 members of the House of Lords, 93 sit by virtue of their hereditary title.

Jeremy
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 52 53 [54] 55 56 57   Go Up