P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
Actually, I'd say that the key difference is that general elections are only binding for the next four years. Sadly Brexit comes without an expiry date.
- Status
Actually, I'd say that the key difference is that general elections are only binding for the next four years. Sadly Brexit comes without an expiry date.
And yet this argument only emerged when his original claim was shown to be garbage...
Amazer
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2008
- Messages
- 1,711
It usually isn't a good sign if you need to start interpreting statements... just saying.
Sent from my SM-J700F using Tapatalk
In rather disappointing news, parliament no longer has a meaningful say in the Brexit process. Sure there was an alleged compromise offered by the government to potential "rebels", but in true Brexit fashion it turns out to be largely illusory:
Taken at face value, there are so many holes in this "deal" that it's not funny.
It isn't reassuring when those who have been bought off by the deal immediately express their hopes that the government actually keeps to its side of the deal.
IMO parliamentary oversight will be avoided by announcing that a deal has been made (no matter how unfavourable the terms). So much for the democratic deficit of the EU - our government seems to be deliberately trying to ensure that Parliament is sidelined.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44463199
Taken at face value, there are so many holes in this "deal" that it's not funny.
It isn't reassuring when those who have been bought off by the deal immediately express their hopes that the government actually keeps to its side of the deal.
IMO parliamentary oversight will be avoided by announcing that a deal has been made (no matter how unfavourable the terms). So much for the democratic deficit of the EU - our government seems to be deliberately trying to ensure that Parliament is sidelined.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44463199
What do the rebels really want? The ability to have a veto on Brexit and force us to remain in the EU? Staying in the Customs Union? I don't know if those things are even possible: they would certainly depend on cooperation from the EU, and would be in breach of the manifesto the Conservative party, including rebels, stood on at the last General Election.
There seem to be more holes in the rebels' position than there are in the Government's - and that's saying something!
So does anyone have any concrete suggestions for what the rebels are really trying to achieve?
Conservative manifesto said:
There seem to be more holes in the rebels' position than there are in the Government's - and that's saying something!
So does anyone have any concrete suggestions for what the rebels are really trying to achieve?
Last edited:
My understanding is that they want parliamentary scrutiny of whatever Brexit deal is proposed rather than just rubber-stamping whatever the government manages to cobble together. The hope from Remoaners was that they may be able to mitigate some of the damage if the government's deal was a particularly bad one - or indeed no deal whatsoever. While they still have a verbal assurance that parliament will be consulted in the event of "no deal" (though I share Sam Goldwyn's views on the value of a verbal contract), in effect the long term future of the UK has been passed to a deeply divided Conservative Party propped up by the DUP (who, lest we forget is the Protestant Taliban).
Of course this cuts both ways because it would also give parliament the ability to reject a Brexit deal if, for example, it turned out to be a deal involving increased payments to the EU to remain in the EEA and customs union.
I'm still puzzled at the government's "Brexit at any cost" stance. They have committed the UK to a course of action, regardless of the consequences. That doesn't seem very sensible to me.
My understanding is that they want parliamentary scrutiny of whatever Brexit deal is proposed rather than just rubber-stamping whatever the government manages to cobble together. The hope from Remoaners was that they may be able to mitigate some of the damage if the government's deal was a particularly bad one - or indeed no deal whatsoever. While they still have a verbal assurance that parliament will be consulted in the event of "no deal" (though I share Sam Goldwyn's views on the value of a verbal contract), in effect the long term future of the UK has been passed to a deeply divided Conservative Party propped up by the DUP (who, lest we forget is the Protestant Taliban).
Of course this cuts both ways because it would also give parliament the ability to reject a Brexit deal if, for example, it turned out to be a deal involving increased payments to the EU to remain in the EEA and customs union.
I'm still puzzled at the government's "Brexit at any cost" stance. They have committed the UK to a course of action, regardless of the consequences. That doesn't seem very sensible to me.
Sounds like many in Parliament know it will be bad for the country, but lack the courage to stop it. Much easier to let it happen, and the blame can then be set on the Tories in power.
Not exactly reassuring for us mere mortals.
Francesca R
Girl
"Keep a Tory-led government" is rationally a higher objective than "Brexit at any cost".
However completely reneging on the latter would probably torpedo the former, meaning there does have to be some kind of exit. But so would adopting hard brexit, so the endeavour is ever more tortuous methods to keep the ship afloat.
The brexiteers (who are not the ones being called rebels in the current scenario) could force a leadership crisis / change at any time if they want to, and the most likely outcome of that will be more of a hard brexit leader. That they do not is ongoing indication that they also believe it would upset the primary objective, IE it is still the case that nobody can see a viable way though to a Tory led hard brexit (or no deal)
However completely reneging on the latter would probably torpedo the former, meaning there does have to be some kind of exit. But so would adopting hard brexit, so the endeavour is ever more tortuous methods to keep the ship afloat.
The brexiteers (who are not the ones being called rebels in the current scenario) could force a leadership crisis / change at any time if they want to, and the most likely outcome of that will be more of a hard brexit leader. That they do not is ongoing indication that they also believe it would upset the primary objective, IE it is still the case that nobody can see a viable way though to a Tory led hard brexit (or no deal)
Francesca R
Girl
Maximum likelihood of soft version of exit (customs union) while not toppling PM May
In breach of the manifesto they stood on then. If you're right then rebels show once more that they have no respect for democracy.
Except, of course, that the government's negotiations since that election have shown that their manifesto pledge is actually unachievable.
How so? Please explain why their manifesto pledge is unachievable.
Individual MPs often deviate from party policy, even one in the manifesto. Some do it out of a sense of conviction, some do it to represent the interests of their constituents and some do it simply because they are awkward.
IMO slavish adherence to a manifesto pledge IMO is more of an issue w.r.t. democracy IF it puts party above country. That's not to say that rebels shouldn't be criticised by their parliamentary colleagues but then again they shouldn't necessarily be damned especially if the manifesto pledge is a poor one - either because it's bad for the country or because, in the cold light of day, it's unachievable.
Information Analyst
Penultimate Amazing
The self-evident inability to come up with a workable "special partnership including a free trade and customs agreement."
Oh noes, no more champagne in Wetherspoons (possibly a bit of a niche)!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44465657
Ah, but will the quality be as good ?
I know that the best UK-made sparkling wine is as good as mainstream champagnes but it's also pretty pricey. I can easily pick up decent champagne at around £15 a bottle, you'd be hard-pressed to find a British sparkler at that price. If you're more flexible, there's an excellent range of new and old world sparklers available at under half that price.
Likewise with the beers. In my experience UK-made facsimiles of foreign beers are almost always inferior. Whether it's UK-made versions of the original or similar-but-different products, IMO they're nowhere near as good. I don't know whether it's different ingredients (especially water), changes to the process, altering the recipe to suit local tastes, other factors or a combination of all of them but they're not as good*.
At least it's an indication as to our future. Instead of having a range of products from a number of countries, we'll have fewer products made here in the UK. If a better product was already available at a lower price here, surely it would already have a presence in the market.
* - case in point. My local brewery, BaaBrewing, makes a range of excellent bitters and a really nice IPA - I wouldn't drink their pilsner again on a bet. The same is true of the Kingstone Brewery, great beers, really lousy lager. In both cases, they're also a lot more expensive than some pretty decent imported stuff.
*** edited to add ***
Less choice and a reliance on locally-made products feels like a return to the 1970s to me. At the time I was living in a small town in the North East of England. Consumer choice at the time was limited to say the least.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44465657
Ah, but will the quality be as good ?
I know that the best UK-made sparkling wine is as good as mainstream champagnes but it's also pretty pricey. I can easily pick up decent champagne at around £15 a bottle, you'd be hard-pressed to find a British sparkler at that price. If you're more flexible, there's an excellent range of new and old world sparklers available at under half that price.
Likewise with the beers. In my experience UK-made facsimiles of foreign beers are almost always inferior. Whether it's UK-made versions of the original or similar-but-different products, IMO they're nowhere near as good. I don't know whether it's different ingredients (especially water), changes to the process, altering the recipe to suit local tastes, other factors or a combination of all of them but they're not as good*.
At least it's an indication as to our future. Instead of having a range of products from a number of countries, we'll have fewer products made here in the UK. If a better product was already available at a lower price here, surely it would already have a presence in the market.
* - case in point. My local brewery, BaaBrewing, makes a range of excellent bitters and a really nice IPA - I wouldn't drink their pilsner again on a bet. The same is true of the Kingstone Brewery, great beers, really lousy lager. In both cases, they're also a lot more expensive than some pretty decent imported stuff.
*** edited to add ***
Less choice and a reliance on locally-made products feels like a return to the 1970s to me. At the time I was living in a small town in the North East of England. Consumer choice at the time was limited to say the least.
Last edited:
- Status