Jeremy Corbyn

[Scott129]

How do people who want a second referendum actually propose to get one? There is nowhere near a majority in the house of commons for a second ref, the vast majority of mps (somet like 400+) are in leave constituencies, and only 70 labour mps have said they want one. If there was a very clear shift in public opinion towards remaining (not just like 52/48 remain or whatever) then mps would possibly back it, but there hasnt been that. 

Given that is the situation we are in, labour either pushes for a soft brexit or accepts a hard brexit/no deal as the default. I personally think Corbyns proposal is a fair(ish) compromise.

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

How do people who want a second referendum actually propose to get one? There is nowhere near a majority in the house of commons for a second ref, the vast majority of mps (somet like 400+) are in leave constituencies, and only 70 labour mps have said they want one. If there was a very clear shift in public opinion towards remaining (not just like 52/48 remain or whatever) then mps would possibly back it, but there hasnt been that. 

Given that is the situation we are in, labour either pushes for a soft brexit or accepts a hard brexit/no deal as the default. I personally think Corbyns proposal is a fair(ish) compromise.

Mostly I agree.

But for a vote on real options rather than a mean-anything-Leave there's actually a significantly stronger desire to remain.

And if MPs can't vote for any of the possible options, and can't stomach no-deal, then the only option left is to put it back to the public.

And I can still see it happening, perhaps, because part of the problem is that MPs don't want to have to take responsibility for a decision - and another vote means they wouldn't have to.

[BambooShanks]

2 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

How do people who want a second referendum actually propose to get one? There is nowhere near a majority in the house of commons for a second ref, the vast majority of mps (somet like 400+) are in leave constituencies, and only 70 labour mps have said they want one. If there was a very clear shift in public opinion towards remaining (not just like 52/48 remain or whatever) then mps would possibly back it, but there hasnt been that. 

Given that is the situation we are in, labour either pushes for a soft brexit or accepts a hard brexit/no deal as the default. I personally think Corbyns proposal is a fair(ish) compromise.

Sadly you're right. Parliamentary maths rules a 2nd ref out at the moment unless there is a massive change of direction of Parliament and the general public.

My fear is even if a 2nd ref happens, the media have done such a fantastic job at painting the EU as the villains in this and decried anything negative as project fear, that the general public won't take the threat of no deal seriously and end up going for that should it be a 3 way vote.

Either way, my feelings are at the moment is that we are going to crash out on a no deal by default / automatic operation of the law.

I can't stand this idea. Truth be told  I'm terrified of the consequences of a no deal brexit and the blase attitude of those supporting it.

At least TM's deal, or a mythical Labour brexit would stem the damage of brexit.  Though it would leave us hobbled somewhat being subject to EU rules without having the same amount of influence on creating them.

 

Great times.  

 

[Ayrshire Chris]

It’s incredible that all this mess was caused, in my humble opinion, by an internal battle that has raged in the Tory party for decades. A bunch of zealots led by boris and idiots like Rees Mogg has put the future prosperity of the country in jeopardy just to satisfy their xenophobia.  No one seems brave enough to admit that the leave campaign had overtones of racism about it and that brought out some really nasty opinions 

[Scott129]

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Mostly I agree.

But for a vote on real options rather than a mean-anything-Leave there's actually a significantly stronger desire to remain.

And if MPs can't vote for any of the possible options, and can't stomach no-deal, then the only option left is to put it back to the public.

And I can still see it happening, perhaps, because part of the problem is that MPs don't want to have to take responsibility for a decision - and another vote means they wouldn't have to.

What's the latest polling data? Last one i saw was no deal/remain and it was fairly tight. 

I agree that constitutionally speaking if parliament is deadlocked then it will have to go back to the people either via a referendum or election. 

But i don't think we're at that stage yet. A permanent customs union could probably get through the commons. 

If it comes to the stage that we are going to crash out then Labour should back a second ref, but until then it has to attempt to find a compromise imo

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

What's the latest polling data? Last one i saw was no deal/remain and it was fairly tight. 

polling on the unicorns of leave/remain is around 46/54 I think.

But for the real options of May's deal or no-deal against remain are 40-/60+.

 

11 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

A permanent customs union could probably get through the commons. 

I don't think it could. It doesn't meet anything of 'taking back control'.

[eFestivals]

2 hours ago, stuartbert two hats said:

This was the story that led me astray:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/26/juncker-may-backstop-eu-customs-union

Juncker proposing a customs union for the UK without mentioning FoM.  I freely admit I'm finding the whole thing confusing still.  I initially thought we couldn't have a customs union or membership of the single market without FoM, but this story (and lack of noticing any pushback on Labour's long standing CU position) made me think that FoM was only contingent on the Single Market, not the/a customs union.

Was I right in the first place, or is there something else I've been missing all along?

just been having a nosey at this:-
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/in/pages/17280/attachments/original/1548078482/shinealight_final3.pdf?1548078482
(it's from the people's vote, but i've seen it said it's better briefing than anything labour or the tories put out).

I've quoted below what it says.

So Ireland requires more than just a CU, it also needs "a single market in goods". And that's likely to have the EU wanting FoM too.

A customs union alone wouldn’t negate the backstop: Critically, being in the customs union alone wouldn’t resolve the backstop. The backstop also includes a single market in goods for Northern Ireland, which necessitates a sea border – this is the main reason for the DUP’s opposition. To get rid of the backstop altogether the UK would also need to have full single market membership including alignment on agriculture.[/quote}

[TheNoise]

50 minutes ago, Ayrshire Chris said:

No one seems brave enough to admit that the leave campaign had overtones of racism about it and that brought out some really nasty opinions 

I think everybody knows that, don't you ? But the leave campaign, in what appears to be a very shrewd move, decided to leave all the actual racist talk to Farage.

[Scott129]

3 hours ago, eFestivals said:

I don't think it could. It doesn't meet anything of 'taking back control'.

643 seats in Parliament (when you minus Sinn Fein) 

If all the 'remainer' parties (everyone bar Tory and DUP backed it) that would be around 310 votes. So youd only need 15-20 conservative rebels (sobry, grieves etc) 

There is zero chance a hard brexit is getting through and May knows it, so if May put country before party and backed a customs union it would sail through easy. 

I suppose Norway is another option which could probably command support but for me if you do that you may as well just remain. At least with a customs union you can portray it as a compromise (freedom of movement ending etc)

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

If all the 'remainer' parties (everyone bar Tory and DUP backed it) that would be around 310 votes. So youd only need 15-20 conservative rebels (sobry, grieves etc) 

SNP won't back it, LibDems won't back it, Ms Lucas wouldn't back it, and plenty of Labour MPs won't back it - it's a clearly worse deal than we have at the moment, without addressing anything of the motivations of those who voted leave. 

It's the one option that pisses off 100% of the population, whereas the others piss off 20%-80% (depending on the option).

4 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

There is zero chance a hard brexit is getting through and May knows it, so if May put country before party and backed a customs union it would sail through easy. 

Can't see it. 

And that that point she'd be properly on the run, giving the brexit-skeptics lesser reason to be sucked in to it. They'd know if they held out a 2nd vote would be there.

I honestly think there's more chance of May's deal getting thru than there is May accepting Labour's plans and then that being voted thru.

May would go for a 2nd ref rather than do a deal like that with Corbyn ... unless she reckons she can make Corbyn own it as a wholly-Labour-owned brexit.

Remember, May only wants a deal that holds the tory party together and which doesn't destroy the tory's brexit-voting base. Any CU deal won't do that - while no-deal does.

 

9 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

I suppose Norway is another option which could probably command support but for me if you do that you may as well just remain.

Same as the Corbyn option, because a non-EU member will not be deciding EU customs policies.

13 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

At least with a customs union you can portray it as a compromise (freedom of movement ending etc)

there's little suggestion that that option is available or ever was.

Remember, they'd rather have the UK out of the EU than give the UK all the benefits without free movement. It's how we got here.

[Scott129]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

It's the one option that pisses off 100% of the population, whereas the others piss off 20%-80% (depending on the option).

No one likes a compromise but if we're to re-unite the nation then that's what it'll have to be. Labours option respects the referendum and the primary reason for voting leave (immigration), ends freedom of movement. But maintains a close link with the EU, workers rights and standards (like remainers want)

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

Remember, May only wants a deal that holds the tory party together and which doesn't destroy the tory's brexit-voting base. Any CU deal won't do that - while no-deal does.

Agreed. She should be country ahead of party, although i agree that it is unlikely. 

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

there's little suggestion that that option is available or ever was.

Remember, they'd rather have the UK out of the EU than give the UK all the benefits without free movement. It's how we got here.

Why do you think a customs union is unavailable? After Mays vote was defeated in thr Commons both Tusk and Barnier (among other prominent EU politicians) called on May to drop her red lines and negotiate a customs union. So the EU are clearly amiable to that. 

You don't need free movement with a customs union (Turkey doesnt have it). 

As to whether the UK could have a say on trade deals admittedly it would be difficult to negotiate. But we are the 5th biggest economy in the world and the EU will want us in a customs union so it is certainly plausible.

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

why do you think a customs union is unavailable? After Mays vote was defeated in thr Commons both Tusk and Barnier (among other prominent EU politicians) called on May to drop her red lines and negotiate a customs union. So the EU are clearly amiable to that. 

You don't need free movement with a customs union (Turkey doesnt have it). 

As to whether the UK could have a say on trade deals admittedly it would be difficult to negotiate. But we are the 5th biggest economy in the world and the EU will want us in a customs union so it is certainly plausible.

The CU that turkey has is limited, has customs posts, and isn't the sort of CU anyone is talking about for the UK. 

And when Juncker offered one he also said May would have to drop her red lines.

We're already in a CU/SM arrangement and they won't let us have it without FoM. They don't want a CU with us at any price to them.

[DeanoL]

On 2/7/2019 at 10:59 AM, eFestivals said:

I'm with you here, but only up to a point.

What leavers voted for was never on offer. A deal where they needed us more than we needed them, that would be the easiest ever, and with countless upsides.

And when it comes to the real possibilities of how brexit might be done, none of them seem to be more popular than remaining.

Given that brexit was mis-sold, and the politicians can't even agree on which option we might take, the only sensible answer is more democracy by letting the people vote on those real options (via an ATV vote so there's a majority for the winner).

It's worse than that. What people voted for has very little to do with Europe. Brexit doesn't actually fix it. Any of it. Immigration? People coming over here, leeching off our benefits system? Except we already have the right to stop paying benefits and even deport EU citizens if they're here for three months without finding work. We just don't. Then you have the fact that people were complaining about immigration from places not even in the EU.

Then there's the whole sovereignty thing, which is again a nonsense. You can tell it is because we're leaving the EU. If we had the right to leave the EU and stop following their rules all along, then how did we ever lose our sovereignty?

There's no way to have a Brexit that addresses the issues of people who voted Leave because those issues are not addressed by leaving the EU. And on some level, I think they know this, because...

On 2/7/2019 at 11:28 AM, eFestivals said:

what made you think the EU was offering the cake Corbyn was claiming, anyway?

The EU have made clear the whole way thru that there is no cake, and why would they give the UK a better deal than EU members get (they'd refused that to us as a member don't forget!)?

We already get a better deal than other EU members anyway. The EU have always bent over backwards and treated us a special unique snowflake before. Maybe people thought it would continue. But it sort of doesn't matter. Because for anything different to happen, people would have to admit they were wrong. Leave voters are doubling down on crashing out no matter what the impact, because that's how they voted dammit. So we have to do it, otherwise that makes them wrong. Even though they know they are wrong.

I'm pretty sure the EU could offer us an opt out on free movement if we chose to remain and not even that would get through parliament, or have mass support from the public. "It's not what we voted for".

22 hours ago, Kinkyinuit said:

Sadly you're right. Parliamentary maths rules a 2nd ref out at the moment unless there is a massive change of direction of Parliament and the general public.

Parliamentary maths rule out everything. The telling thing will be what happens when the deadline looms and the only way to stop no deal (which everyone wants to do) is actively vote to revoke Article 50. Though I think it's likely we will seem some sort of fudge deal before then.

Most likely May will reject Corbyn's deal, go away for a week, come back with a deal that looks a lot like Corbyn's deal, and go "how about this?" and it'll get fudged through.

I don't think it will annoy 100% of the people, as long as they dress it up right.

[reflekting]

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/02/08/corbyns-ipsos-mori-ratings-take-a-huge-tumble-with-72-saying-they-are-dissatisfied-with-him/

No surprises here then, when will we ever get a quality opposition to this disaster of a Tory gov!?

[Homer]

Labour choosing the perfect time to implode. How are they managing to be more divided than the Tories?!

[uscore]

Whilst I, to some extent, understand their motives, it has just made Brexit even more likely.  

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, uscore said:

Whilst I, to some extent, understand their motives, it has just made Brexit even more likely.  

You're probably right.  

May could risk an election now, and probably get a bigger majority.

[uscore]

Given his Brexit position (or non-position) is Corbyn still the darling of the Labour Membership?  Is his position still solid, if there was a leadership bid?

 

I voted for him in the last 2 leadership elections.  Assuming someone half-decent stood against him, I wouldn't vote for him again.

[Keithy]

8 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

You're probably right.  

May could risk an election now, and probably get a bigger majority.

I'm not sure the party would let her be so foolish again (I know strictly there's nowt they can do) but she made a guarantee not to lead them into the next election.

I can see her standing down in the summer once Brexit has been delivered which will allow for a summer leadership campaign and the new person to be in charge for the autumn conference, who can then make their pitch for Britain's post Brexit future. That gives them 2 and a bit years to establish their leadership and vision before going to the county.

It's still too much of a risk for an election now.

[BambooShanks]

23 minutes ago, Keithy said:

I'm not sure the party would let her be so foolish again (I know strictly there's nowt they can do) but she made a guarantee not to lead them into the next election.

I can see her standing down in the summer once Brexit has been delivered which will allow for a summer leadership campaign and the new person to be in charge for the autumn conference, who can then make their pitch for Britain's post Brexit future. That gives them 2 and a bit years to establish their leadership and vision before going to the county.

It's still too much of a risk for an election now.

IIRC, The EU would allow an extension to Art. 50 in the case of a GE or referendum, so there's a (slim) chance that The Cons may go for it, if only to kick the can further down the road.

It would still be a risk but given the perception of the labour party at the moment, it looks like a risk worth taking

[Keithy]

Just now, Kinkyinuit said:

IIRC, The EU would allow an extension to Art. 50 in the case of a GE or referendum, so there's a (slim) chance that The Cons may go for it, if only to kick the can further down the road.

It would still be a risk but given the perception of the labour party at the moment, it looks like a risk worth taking

The issue with delaying A50 is the European elections in May. Any delay will be a matter of weeks not months. The EU nor the UK will want us to have to field candidates. The main parties could no stand but you can guarantee Farage would lead a Brexit Party in the euro elections and the publicity would just make Brexit even more toxic and divisive.

For May to call election will mean she goes back on all her promises at the 1922 committee in December to not lead them into the next election. She'd become even more toxic. And there's not enough time for the Tories to have their internal post May leadership debate.

The Tories would rather risk No Deal than risk a Corbyn government. No Deal means they are still in power until 2022.

[BambooShanks]

2 minutes ago, Keithy said:

The issue with delaying A50 is the European elections in May. Any delay will be a matter of weeks not months. The EU nor the UK will want us to have to field candidates. The main parties could no stand but you can guarantee Farage would lead a Brexit Party in the euro elections and the publicity would just make Brexit even more toxic and divisive.

For May to call election will mean she goes back on all her promises at the 1922 committee in December to not lead them into the next election. She'd become even more toxic. And there's not enough time for the Tories to have their internal post May leadership debate.

The Tories would rather risk No Deal than risk a Corbyn government. No Deal means they are still in power until 2022.

That's a good analysis, though makes you realise just how poor the UK's options are at the moment!

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, Keithy said:

The issue with delaying A50 is the European elections in May. Any delay will be a matter of weeks not months.

its not an issue until 4th july when the new parliament sits for the first time. 

[bombfrog]

3 hours ago, Homer said:

Labour choosing the perfect time to implode. How are they managing to be more divided than the Tories?!

 

How?

Jeremy sodding Corbyn, that's how. 

He needs to go. Yesterday.

[Homer]

Leave-voting Swindon's Honda car plant to close losing 3,500 jobs (and many more in the supply chain). Breaking news from Sky.