Brexit - general discussion thread

Great Debates
582

The first sentence here gets to the heart of why a second referendum is very far from being a surefire way to stop Brexit. It’s not a Right v Left issue, so what does a successful Remain campaign look like?

In broad terms, it’s very simple. They need to hold on to as many Remain voters as possible, and win over as many wavering Leave voters as possible. So what’s the Remain message? True, they can point to a lot of potential negative outcomes, and the evident dog’s breakfast of our current position. But we’ve seen that solely negative campaigns don’t get the job done. It would be very easy to fall into the trap of being (painted as) patronising or elitist. So they need a positive message that will enthuse Remainers to revote and win over Leavers. What does this look like?

For the Tory element of Remain, it’s got to be about how once we get rid of the millstone of Brexit, we can concentrate on governing the UK properly and getting on with the job we were elected to do - Universal Credit, NHS reform, reducing the deficit, low taxes. For Labour, with their mass of Leave-voting constituencies, the message will be different: 1) The EU needs reform and we would lead that from within Europe. 2) We know you’ve been let down and left behind by the elites, we get why you voted Leave to send us a message. Message received: the status quo is bad and need’s radical change. 3) But leaving the EU won’t fix your very real problems. For that, you need a radical Labour government that will come in, nationalise the railways and energy companies, fund the NHS, spend more on benefits, tax the rich, and let Corbynism flourish across the land.

You can’t have a unified campaign that is trying to push the message that Remain means both more *and *less Tory government. It’s fundamentally incoherent. So do you you have two campaigns (Continuity Remain and Labour Remain) who are arguing with each other about what Remain means while Leave run “Leave means Leave”? That doesn’t sound any better. But neither side of Remain can agree on any kind of vision beyond “Let’s not Leave” which is not a hearts and mind proposition.

583

Excellent 2 min video from Lord Heseltine on Brexit

584

So Corbyn has now tabled a vote of no confidence in May personally!

This is different from a vote of no confidence in the government. It may make it easier for Tories to vote for the motion, but it may also make it more difficult to have it quickly debated and put to the vote.

585

Given that it’s not a vote of confidence in the government - which must be acted upon immediately under the terms of the Fixed Term Parliament Act - the government is free to ignore it, and not give it any time in the order of business. It could be done by Labour alone the next time there’s an Opposition Day, but there’s not one of those scheduled until after the likely Deal vote. Bit pointless, really.

586

It looks like Labour wants to give the appearance of doing something… while in fact just continuing to dither.

587

Opposition parties have tabled an amendment to the motion to make it addressing Her Majesty’s Government; can they do that?

Regardless, the DUP aren’t interested, so unless something completely unexpected happens (what am I saying, it’s 2018…) it’ll fail.

588

Plans for no deal gathering apace.

589

The optics of this are terrible. Write to six million businesses warning them to prepare for no-deal, and then fuck off on their Christmas holidays. :dubious:

There’s 101 days left…

590

And soon it will be 2019. We must expect the unexpected…

What do we think is actually going to happen now? I think Labour’s I Can’t Believe It’s Not A Confidence Motion wheeze is going to distract people for a couple of days and then fizzle out. The real meat is still the vote on May’s deal, which is now due for w/c 14th Jan.

There are, of course, basically only two possible outcomes - it passes or it doesn’t. it’s exceptionally unlikely to pass - even if all Tory MPs vote for it, the DUP won’t. (They’ve said they will no-confidence the Government (not May) if it does, so they’re not kidding around.) So May would have to win over opposition MPs as well as get all of her party in line. If, somehow, it does pass, however, Labour will call a no-confidence vote, the DUP will back them, and we’ll be on track for a general election having already agreed a deal.

But let’s say it doesn’t pass. The government needs to make a statement saying what they’ll do. Given that they’re ramping up no-deal planning, and ministers are already beginning to talk bollocks about a “managed descent” and “planned no-deal” it seems likely that they’ll try to pretend No Deal is a viable option. At that point, do Labour push a no-confidence vote? They’ve said they’ll only do it if they’ve got the numbers; the DUP won’t join them over No Deal, so they’d have to be sure they’d pick up rebel Tories. There won’t be many Tories voting for an election; they’d have to both really fear No Deal and be really sure that the outcome of a general election would be to prevent it: i.e. that Tory policy would change, or that Labour (or a Labour-led coalition) would win.

Given the timing - we’re looking at an election day around the end of February - the chances for even a motivated, competent government with a clear mandate and an actual plan to put the brakes on No Deal in a scant month are pretty slim. Given that we’re unlikely to have such a government, you’d have to be desperate to vote your own party out of office to stop No Deal.

So, failing a general election, there should be a second referendum, right? Well, May won’t call for it. Labour should - all options are on the table - but the leadership aren’t really interested. Parliament could - a cross-party coalition could form - but to do it against the leadership of both parties will take a level of courage and principle we haven’t seen yet. Even then, there are no guarantees that Remain/May’s Deal would actually win.

…

…

It’s going to be No Deal, isn’t it? We’re going over this cliff because it’s too difficult no to.

Somebody, talk me down.

591

I’m not here to talk you down. I just want to you to budge up a bit to make more room on the ledge - we’re going to have a lot of company.

592

No unfortunately you’re right, May seems to be virtually indestructable to all forms of opposition.

This is going to destroy the United Kingdom in its current form.

593

So is there any realistic truth to the rumors about shortages of drugs, and food rationing?

America has some crazy “preppers” who keep their guns loaded in their bomb shelters.
But surely no proper British gentleman would do such things. Am I right?

I have no connection to England, so for me Brexit seems like a minor issue, a little bit of fun to watch when there’s nothing else on the telly.
But what is actually happening on the ground right now? Is it time to get scared?
for example: Suppose a supermarket chain wants to sign a new contract to receive a 6 months supply of frozen brussel sprouts from, well,Brussels.
Are they now paying in advance? Do they know how it will be delivered? Which trucking company will carry it? etc.

On the personal level…If someone is,say, planning their wedding for May, and want to have, say, fancy imported French wine or Dutch tulips,–are they worried that they may not get their supplies on the important day?
Or is everyone just dancing on the Titanic, and hoping for the best?

594

nobody is in charge - we’re all just staring at the iceberg while a group of rich Tories shout “faster!”

595

The medicine things is aboslutely real - the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care recently gave an interview where he claimed he was now the biggest purchaser of fridges in the UK. Why? Because they’re desperately trying to get enough capacity to stockpile medicine. Given that even a temporary lack of access to, say, insulin will cause deaths, this is kind of a big deal.

As for food, this article from Nov 30th gives as much insight as anyone can get into what supermarkets are doing. Basically - it’s bad, they’re trying to prepare, but ultimately they really can’t.

So the basic picture is that we can’t stockpile food, we can’t get it through the ports fast enough, and best-case scenario is higher food bills and shortages of particular foods.

I won’t be getting a gun or digging a bomb shelter, but as of basically today, thanks to the exercise of writing that post above and finding the article I’ve just cited, I intend to reach the end of March with a couple of week’s worth of tinned food in the garage.

596

Jesus fucking christ. Isn’t this supposed to be the first world? This kind of thing shouldn’t happen!

Hey Quartz, would love to hear your thoughts on that. Are you prepping? Do you think it’s a good idea? Inquiring minds wish to know.

597

There’s a big argument going on about the best way to rearrange the deck chairs, but nobody can agree about that.

598

In a good article, Labour Party MP and Remainer Lisa Nandy explains why a second referendum is NOT a good idea, and suggests a Citizens’ Assembly:

Let the People Take Back Control of Brexit

Sounds like a reasonable idea.

599

One glimmer of hope from, of all people, Iain Duncan Smith:

A very strong suggestion there that the recent emphasis on No Deal planning is at least partly for the benefit of the EU, in the hope of wringing some more concessions from them, rather than an actual plan for the desired outcome. But these things have a tendency to take on their own momentum - it’s surprisingly easy to go from “We need to make them believe we’ve got a serious alternative” to “I believe we’ve got a serious alternative”.

The other difficulty is that even if the EU are minded to concede something to make the deal more palatable, what exactly will they concede? They’re not budging on the backstop, and what else is there?

600

I like the idea in theory - that kind of deliberative democracy is much better than a simplistic referendum - but in practice I don’t see how we can get backing for what is a completely novel idea in the time available. If we’d started talking about it last year, then maybe we’d be in a place where it would fly now, but I don’t see how you get it up and running with credibility and acceptance in the next 3 months.

601

I think that believing that the EU will budge if the UK appears adamant in its decision to run off the cliff is … a rather dangerous thing to believe. I have the feeling that Mr. Duncan-Smith is having a bit of a wish-fulfillment fantasy.

Right now the UE has the upper hand, and they know it very well. They also know very well that the UK has much more to lose from all this mess than the UE does… And I think that they are perfectly willing to let the UK crash and burn, because in things like the backstop the UE is not going to move.

They have already crafted a deal; there is literally no time left to craft another one, and whatever cosmetic changes might be accepted by the EU are not going to touch the really basic stuff like the backstop.

The mood around here seems to be “if the UK is so hell-bent into commiting suicide, let them”.

Comment heard the other day around the corridors of my office: “Man, at the end DeGaulle was right… Should have never let the British into the (then) Common Market; they only make a mess out of things”.