Taking the Brexit

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38646

Nik, you might want to cut a few flaps in that banner if this wind keeps up!

Nik · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 1982

DavPaz wrote:

Nik, you might want to cut a few flaps in that banner if this wind keeps up!

I was hoping to use it to fly across the channel.

But yes, good idea, thanks.

I'm not entirely sure how these things work on marches. I keep getting emails from different groups saying "join our bloc". Not sure if I need to be in a bloc, or if there's a bloc for people who hate Brexit but like swearing. Also it sounds like each bloc has one banner and many placards, so my wife and I might be one very small bloc. Then there's the risk of being arrested for public obscenity, but that could be quite a laugh.

Kern · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 13:52

The first amendment MPs will vote on today is about a second referendum. I'm not getting my hopes up, but if the number of Tories voting for it is larger than the number of Labour opposing it, that would be a positive step.

Kern · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 13:56

Nik wrote:

I'm not entirely sure how these things work on marches. I keep getting emails from different groups saying "join our bloc". Not sure if I need to be in a bloc, or if there's a bloc for people who hate Brexit but like swearing. Also it sounds like each bloc has one banner and many placards, so my wife and I might be one very small bloc.

One of the memories from sixth-form that's stuck in my mind was my politics teacher encouraging us to go on marches but warning us to stay well away from the SWP.

Quote:

Then there's the risk of being arrested for public obscenity, but that could be quite a laugh.

Until you try to get a DBS check.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

Based on the banners I photographed at the Trump march, a "fuck" isn't going to even register.

Grim... · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 14:01

Kern wrote:

The first amendment MPs will vote on today is about a second referendum.

I'm still worried that the vote would turn out the same way.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

Grim... wrote:

Kern wrote:

The first amendment MPs will vote on today is about a second referendum.

I'm still worried that the vote would turn out the same way.

So am I. But at least that break the logjam in Parliament. We've been dealt a very painful lesson here that unless very carefully phrased, referendums are poisonous to representative democracy. We need to get the poison out.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

I think that the Spelman/Cooper amendment would mean that a second referendum would have to be remain/renegotiate deal, with No Deal not an option. That does something to the maths, I think.

Kern · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 14:10

Obviously, I meant "third referendum"' or "final say vote" ("'people's vote" irks me for some reason but apparently it's been roadtested).

Yes, it's a heck of a risk but unless a party were to win on a manifesto clearly stating "revoke and/or rejoin", going back to the populace is the only way to avoid cries of "betrayal".

The remain side would have the benefit of three years' experience of leaving, the demographic churn of the leave vote, and picking up tips from the previous campaign winners. Note how these days it's all about different groups pushing for it, not one organisation fronted by Cameron and Osborne.

In the first post in this thread I stated that I was happy with the franchise (UK General Election). Whilst it's unfair on 16-18 year olds and our friends from other EU countries, I think we have to stick to it, just to further reduce any claims of gerrymandering.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

DBSnappa wrote:

I’m doing the march on 23rd. Anybody from here going?

Well, y'know what, maybe I'm not so keen on putting in the effort now, when you put it like this:

https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1106196481172746240

So Remainer organisations are now telling Remainer MPs to abstain from supporting a People's Vote, before organising a march next weekend for a People's Vote.
— Ian Dunt (@IanDunt) March 14, 2019

Grim... · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 16:19

Kern wrote:

Yes, it's a heck of a risk but unless a party were to win on a manifesto clearly stating "revoke and/or rejoin", going back to the populace is the only way to avoid cries of "betrayal".

If there's another referendum they'll be cries of "betrayal" too, and I struggle to disagree with them.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

The same is true of any outcome other than a no deal brexit though.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

In fact a referendum is the only one that wouldn't be a betrayal, because the option would be there for every single leave voter to vote the exact same way they did before.

If they then don't win because of people changing their minds now they know what brexit will actually mean, that's not a betrayal of anything, that's just whining that they can't have their unicorns.

MaliA · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 16:35

I think any chance of second referendum flew away earlier.

Grim... · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 16:37

Cras wrote:

In fact a referendum is the only one that wouldn't be a betrayal, because the option would be there for every single leave voter to vote the exact same way they did before.

If they then don't win because of people changing their minds now they know what brexit will actually mean, that's not a betrayal of anything, that's just whining that they can't have their unicorns.

Are we going to have another referendum after that?

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

I don't buy that as an argument because this isn't the same referendum. This is between actual choices of known outcomes, the last one was vague undefined principles.

Zardoz · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 17:11

The Gammons won't think that though.

TheCookie197 · **Joined:** 23rd Sep, 2010 **Posts:** 729

I struggle to understand why people would consider a second referendum a "betrayal". Surely it could be positioned as an option of "now you can choose the type of brexit you want, or just say screw it all"? That's not a betrayal, that's asking the country how they want to proceed now that the government has attempted to negotiate a withdrawal and we know how each route of Brexit could go.

It's been not far off 3 years now since the referendum. If we're going to say that the population isn't going to have changed their mind in those 3 years, and that we "must honour the results", then isn't that almost the same as asking: Why do we have elections every 4 years? Isn't that a betrayal of what/who we chose 4 years ago? Suggesting we need to stick to a result from 3 years ago when we knew pretty much nothing about what would happen just seems incredibly stupid to me.

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38646

If it's a straight choice between Deal or No Deal, then I have the perfect man to front the campaign...

myp · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 17:26

If it’s a choice of Pixies Deal or no Deal, I pick Deal. They’ve been crap ever since she left.

Kern · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 17:30

TheCookie197 wrote:

I struggle to understand why people would consider a second referendum a "betrayal". Surely it could be positioned as an option of "now you can choose the type of brexit you want, or just say screw it all"? That's not a betrayal, that's asking the country how they want to proceed now that the government has attempted to negotiate a withdrawal and we know how each route of Brexit could go.

It's been not far off 3 years now since the referendum. If we're going to say that the population isn't going to have changed their mind in those 3 years, and that we "must honour the results", then isn't that almost the same as asking: Why do we have elections every 4 years? Isn't that a betrayal of what/who we chose 4 years ago? Suggesting we need to stick to a result from 3 years ago when we knew pretty much nothing about what would happen just seems incredibly stupid to me.

Well said!

Squirt · **Joined:** 31st Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 6605

I've never been to Deal, but I've been to Canterbury, which is pretty close, and once caught a ferry from Dover. I guess that's No Deal then.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

Grim... wrote:

If there's another referendum they'll be cries of "betrayal" too, and I struggle to disagree with them.

There is substantial precedent in politics for:

(1) should we attempt to do the thing?
(2) <attempts to negotiate thing, to some degree of success>
(3) here's the deal we have negotiated, do you agree to that deal or not?

I don't buy the argument that a ratification referendum is a constitutional outrage. It's a pretty standard practice in this sort of thing. Usually, (1) and (3) are both run by Parliament, but Cameron chose to make (1) a poll of the public. It follows that it is perfectly consistent for (3) to also be up to the same public.

You could even go one stage further and argue that not holding a ratification referendum is the more substantive betrayal of the implicit promise of the first referendum. It was a very broad and ambiguous question that offered no guidance on any number of issues. In the absence of a second referendum, interpreting how to navigate all of those issues is left up to squabbling factions in Parliament. They might or might not arrive at a solution that genuinely reflects what people want... but we won't know if we don't check.

Kern · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 17:46

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

It was a very broad and ambiguous question that offered no guidance on any number of issues

My MP assured me in her last letter that it wasn't ambiguous or open at all, but that people were voting to take control of their "laws, money, and borders". I gave up at that point and decided that such a patronising and insulting line, from someone who frankly should know better, was not deserving of any more of my time.

Besides, "peace, land, and bread" was always the better slogan.

MaliA · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 17:49

Check out @elliotttimes’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/elliotttimes/status ... 1643341825

Read out from political cabinet:

May "went batshit" at Remain rebels
Clark's effort to defend himself "ended badly"
Rudd "bashful".
— Francis Elliott (@elliotttimes) March 14, 2019

?

Check out @Steven_Swinford’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/sta ... 8608965632

Latest from Cabinet

Theresa May raised concerns about frequency & scale of leaks from Cabinet

She said there are too many and they are happening too often

She also suggested some ministers are being self-serving and are posturing

Cox made a 'unifying' intervention at end
— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) March 14, 2019

?

Lolz

DBSnappa · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 17:58

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

Grim... wrote:

If there's another referendum they'll be cries of "betrayal" too, and I struggle to disagree with them.

There is substantial precedent in politics for:

(1) should we attempt to do the thing?
(2) <attempts to negotiate thing, to some degree of success>
(3) here's the deal we have negotiated, do you agree to that deal or not?

I don't buy the argument that a ratification referendum is a constitutional outrage. It's a pretty standard practice in this sort of thing. Usually, (1) and (3) are both run by Parliament, but Cameron chose to make (1) a poll of the public. It follows that it is perfectly consistent for (3) to also be up to the same public.

You could even go one stage further and argue that not holding a ratification referendum is the more substantive betrayal of the implicit promise of the first referendum. It was a very broad and ambiguous question that offered no guidance on any number of issues. In the absence of a second referendum, interpreting how to navigate all of those issues is left up to squabbling factions in Parliament. They might or might not arrive at a solution that genuinely reflects what people want... but we won't know if we don't check.

Let’s not overlook the fact that the Leave campaign was found, by the courts, of acting illegally during the campaign and the only reason the results weren’t negated is because the result isn’t legally binding

Warhead · Noob as of 6/8/10

Cras wrote:

In fact a referendum is the only one that wouldn't be a betrayal, because the option would be there for every single leave voter to vote the exact same way they did before.

If they then don't win because of people changing their minds now they know what brexit will actually mean, that's not a betrayal of anything, that's just whining that they can't have their unicorns.

Warhead · Noob as of 6/8/10

DBSnappa wrote:

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

Grim... wrote:

If there's another referendum they'll be cries of "betrayal" too, and I struggle to disagree with them.

There is substantial precedent in politics for:

(1) should we attempt to do the thing?
(2) <attempts to negotiate thing, to some degree of success>
(3) here's the deal we have negotiated, do you agree to that deal or not?

I don't buy the argument that a ratification referendum is a constitutional outrage. It's a pretty standard practice in this sort of thing. Usually, (1) and (3) are both run by Parliament, but Cameron chose to make (1) a poll of the public. It follows that it is perfectly consistent for (3) to also be up to the same public.

You could even go one stage further and argue that not holding a ratification referendum is the more substantive betrayal of the implicit promise of the first referendum. It was a very broad and ambiguous question that offered no guidance on any number of issues. In the absence of a second referendum, interpreting how to navigate all of those issues is left up to squabbling factions in Parliament. They might or might not arrive at a solution that genuinely reflects what people want... but we won't know if we don't check.

Let’s not overlook the fact that the Leave campaign was found, by the courts, of acting illegally during the campaign and the only reason the results weren’t negated is because the result isn’t legally binding

Also

Kern · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 18:17

Well, the Wollaston amendment lost 85 - 334.

That suggests that were Labour to have backed it, it probably wouldn't pass. But circumstances might change between now and whenever it comes back to the floor (if it does).

MaliA · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 18:20

Kern wrote:

Well, the Wollaston amendment lost 85 - 334.

That suggests that were Labour to have backed it, it probably wouldn't pass. But circumstances might change between now and whenever it comes back to the floor (if it does).

I don't think it will.

Kern · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 18:57

The Benn amendment giving control over the process to the House, failed 312-314.

Guess MPs didn't really like taking back control after all.

Trooper · **Joined:** 4th Mar, 2010 **Posts:** 22389

This is fun isn't it?

I suspect if someone put forward an amendment to give all MPs a 50% raise and a free handjob it would get voted down by 310-308 (or close to that) at the moment...

Kern · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 19:20

I've just discovered the official Commons app, giving all the results, all the time. Genius.

Kern · **Posted:** Thu Mar 14, 2019 19:31

After tonight's entertainment, I'm now fearing that the Prime Minister will win on the third attempt. Several tiles switched to the pessimism pile.

Wales are probably going to win on Saturday too now.

Trooper · **Joined:** 4th Mar, 2010 **Posts:** 22389

They have passed a vote with a significant majority!

To ask the EU for an extension, to which I expect their response will be "for what?"

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

To not ask until they know whether another go at voting on the deal will pass on the 20th...

Trooper · **Joined:** 4th Mar, 2010 **Posts:** 22389

Asking the same question 3 times? Surely that goes against the will of the people?

Findus Fop · **Joined:** 14th May, 2009 **Posts:** 4349

A rather excellent reminder of how the Irish border is much more than a Brexit bargaining chip:

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2019-irish-border/

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14514

https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/stat ... 5518574592

Today in Brexit. It's all perfectly simplehttps://t.co/jyhLGLz92P pic.twitter.com/787jp3k9r7
— Michael Deacon (@MichaelPDeacon) March 14, 2019

Findus Fop · **Joined:** 14th May, 2009 **Posts:** 4349

Spotted by one of my team mates in Hong Kong

MaliA · **Posted:** Sun Mar 17, 2019 12:40

This March for Leave is hilarious

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

Indeed.

https://twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/11 ... 0532947968

Day two of the #MarchToLeave. 77 people including photographers. @Nigel_farage should apologise to those marchers for this farce. But of course heâ€™s disappeared. Shameful. pic.twitter.com/I2MRNsAOR1
— Led By Donkeys (@ByDonkeys) March 17, 2019

JBR · **Joined:** 2nd Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 3302

Crazy. £50 to join in - that would include your accommodation along the route. So, a bargain (paid for by shady figures, presumably). And still, bugger all people.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

Holy shit, Bercow is telling May to go piss up a rope

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/11 ... 7638757376

Bercow â€˜if the govt wishes to bring forward a new proposition that is not same or substantially the sameâ€™ as deal last week - but he says govt â€˜cannot legitimatelyâ€™ put substantially the same deal back to the House
— Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) March 18, 2019

MrChris · **Joined:** 1st Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 30498

I'm not entirely sure he can do that

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

MrChris wrote:

I'm not entirely sure he can do that

Erskine and May is quite clear that he can.

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/ ... 4844721154

Hereâ€™s the relevant extract - page 397 of Erskine May: pic.twitter.com/Foi3ZIGQCi
— Faisal Islam (@faisalislam) March 18, 2019

(edit to change to a better quality image)

Squirt · **Joined:** 31st Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 6605

Giphy "shit just got real":
https://media3.giphy.com/media/elxy6ZsuLHjCE/giphy-loop.mp4

Trooper · **Joined:** 4th Mar, 2010 **Posts:** 22389

What defines a "session"?

Malc · **Posted:** Mon Mar 18, 2019 17:18

A queens speech I think

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

Trooper wrote:

What defines a "session"?

https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/occasions/calendar/

In other news
https://twitter.com/jeremydcape/status/ ... 8965698560

You should have been paying attention in episode 4 of Season 2 of Brexit, when the camera dwelt on the Speaker as he mentioned the discourtesy to the House, because it was destined to be relevant in episode 12 of Season 3.
— Jeremy Cape (@jeremydcape) March 18, 2019

Be Excellent To Each Other

Taking the Brexit

Who is online