O/T DDay for Brexit..well sort of...

[Exiletyke]

Whether I like it or not Frank the electorate have no appetite for left wing policies , it's no appetite for Corbyn and Abbott even if there are some left policies they would sign up to .

We've had a decade of brutal austerity and the pantomime that is brexit , we are on our third Tory PM during this period plus a Deputy PM in Clegg and still Labour trail in the polls .

The alternative is for the ERG running the show so something has to give .

The only way Labour will see power again is to reboot New Labour in my opinion .

Hopefully Starmer who despite his Blair credentials has at least shown a willingness to work with the left and can understand the problems many working class people are facing today and more importantly putting policies in play that actually help them to prosper far more than they did under Blair .

For Labour to get in to government my multi millionaire owner at work needs to vote for them , middle management , the lads on the shop floor and the lass at the snack cabin around the corner .

Currently there isn't a vote within the business heading Labour's way .

The real answer Animal is to pretend to be on the side of the working class [like the Tories do whilst at the same time picking their pockets {austerity} & lining their cronies pockets ] but I guess that is probably your point

[rolymiller]

Sounds like Labour confident they can get an amendment thru that leads to another referendum ie accept Bioris's deal or remain. Could be an interesting week next week in the h of p and meanwhile the clock ticks.

Interesting times, Who says politics is boring!

[ragingpup]

Whether I like it or not Frank the electorate have no appetite for left wing policies , it's no appetite for Corbyn and Abbott even if there are some left policies they would sign up to .

We've had a decade of brutal austerity and the pantomime that is brexit , we are on our third Tory PM during this period plus a Deputy PM in Clegg and still Labour trail in the polls .

The alternative is for the ERG running the show so something has to give .

The only way Labour will see power again is to reboot New Labour in my opinion .

Hopefully Starmer who despite his Blair credentials has at least shown a willingness to work with the left and can understand the problems many working class people are facing today and more importantly putting policies in play that actually help them to prosper far more than they did under Blair .

For Labour to get in to government my multi millionaire owner at work needs to vote for them , middle management , the lads on the shop floor and the lass at the snack cabin around the corner .

Currently there isn't a vote within the business heading Labour's way .

Not sure it has to be an either /or situation. If be perfectly happy to see Starmer or Phillips step up (although worried about Philips under media pressure) as long as they continue to work on a similar manifesto platform which I think genuinely will appeal to the majority. The problem is that with Corbyn at the helm we are seen to be more far left than we actually are. But whoever we put forward, like 'Red Ed' (for Christ's sake!) he or she will still be portrayed as 'dangerous' and 'untrustworthy'. We forget too easily.

I dont think we have to become tories to appeal to your boss and the middle classes, we just have to make the case that society will be a better, more civilised pace to walk around and live in, that people will get better services, work security and a commitment to the environment. That we all can and should pay a bit more for these.

[KerrAvon]

It seems to me that he has complied with the "law" but was not required or instructed to sign such a letter, a minor detail that the lawyers who drafted the "legislation" did not dot the I's & cross the T's so some other lawyers have come up with this idea that Johnson could send a second contradictory letter, as he has not been instructed not to do so
Lawyers eh?
Very Kerrish who should be proud of his alledged profession

Yo, Zyles! An opportunity for us to chat twice in a week. I am blessed.

Interesting post as ever.

I don’t think you needed to be a lawyer, alleged or otherwise, to see how Johnson would deal with the requirements of the Benn Act. Even I worked it out. The Act required Johnson to send a letter, which he did. There was nothing to stop him from informing the EU – as if they needed to be informed - that the letter was being sent because Parliament said that it should be and that its contents did not represent the wishes or policy of the government. I see that BoJo was being labelled as ‘childish’ by (a rather peeved) Keir this morning, whereas I would say that the blind faith that the supporters of the Benn Act had in it was more childlike.

It’s not even as though Johnson and his fellow ministers didn’t give enough warning.

I’m not sure that very much turns in law upon whether the letter was signed. There is case law that might be used to say that it is irrelevant. I suspect that it actually has a threefold political purpose:

1. To respond to Jo Swinson’s display of hubris yesterday when she asked Parliament to rise so that Johnson could send the letter;
2. To try to tempt someone into taking him to court upon the issue of whether the letter should have been signed, which would allow those bringing such an action to be portrayed as petty and childish.
3. To allow Macron to take faux offence as part of a pretext to vote against an extension.

Pont 3 is what really matters. Individual EU leaders are scared stiff of being seen as being the one who caused a no deal exit. The Johnson letters are a get out of jail free card for any European leader who wants to be the person to say no. In his interview this morning, Keir said that if we leave with no deal because of the letters then Johnson would be personally responsible. Quite... I’m sure Macron would probably have spotted that line without Keir’s help, but it will undoubtedly be a comfort that a senior British politician has given a supportive sound bite.

On one particular point from your post - it would have been fun if Parliament had tried to legislate to instruct Johnson to not send any additional letters. In theory, he could then have challenged Parliament in the courts for breaching his right to freedom of expression. That would have been a sight to behold: Johnson v UK in the ECHR.

[KerrAvon]

Must admit Boris has tried to do a good job FOR the ERG and Cummings. The ERG and Cummings- the real gang leader-remind me of a gang of naughty schoolboys who needed someone stupid and gullible to carry out the dirty work for them (a sort of Bernard Bresslaw buffoon type). Its a bit like them asking Boris to go and rob a sweet shop promising him an extra packet of polos if he does it only to bugger off fast when the coppers turn up as he is carrying out the robbery then denying all knowledge of knowing him when the coppers catch up with them.

Perhaps the 17 million people who voted to leave might see it as him trying to do a good job for them? I think that a lot of them will.

[KerrAvon]

The original question was:

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

So my question is why was a deal sought to be negotiated then in the first place once the leave vote won? Who's idea was that?

If it had to be negotiated surely that should have been one of the options. The reason why I say this is because I think this choice would have had the most votes.

So the original question should have been:Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union without a deal or with a deal?

The original question was flawed and too simplistic and has created a lot of aggro since It was never a binary option. I blame Cameron and the ERG.

By your argument exile the remainers also lost because they could argue that they are not wholly remaining in the EU if we come out with a negotiated deal.

In fact the only conclusion we can come to in this sorry tale is no fecker has won.

Roly, darling, the question was set by Parliament when they enacted the European Union Referendum Act 2015. Cameron and the ERG were part of that Parliament, but so were the Labour Party MPs, who overwhelmingly voted for the Act (not sure if they were whipped).

Leave or Remain is a binary choice. The best or, more accurately, the politically acceptable way of doing so became the issue after Leave won.

I don’t see how you could have a vote for ‘leaving with a deal’, given the huge range of deals on offer. On this thread, you have Raging arguing for accepting the jurisdiction of the EU to continue to set laws for us after we have left and Exile who sounds like he will accept nothing short of breaking off diplomatic relations with the EU 27 and annexing Calais and all historic English possessions in France.

How would you approach outcomes that ran something like 40% remain, 30% leave with a deal and 30% leave without a deal such that remain was the most popular option, but was easily outnumber by the two leave options.

[KerrAvon]

Surely it is up to Labour to get their left wing message across by being seen to be out supporting disputes, strikes and campaigns animal. Workers need to know that Labour mps are truly on their side by their actions and not just with what they say. How can working class people identify with blairites who wouldn't know what a strike was let alone support it.

Sweetness, I don’t think you have the hang of politics. I’m not sure that supporting disputes, strikes and campaigns is quite the image that Labour wants to present. It didn’t help them in 1979 or 1987, did it?

Extinction Rebellion have some important messages, but the kicking that some of their activists got at Canning Town the other day will probably be the first of many if their campaigning continues to have an immediate adverse impact upon people’s lives.

[KerrAvon]

Sounds like Labour confident they can get an amendment thru that leads to another referendum ie accept Bioris's deal or remain. Could be an interesting week next week in the h of p and meanwhile the clock ticks.

Interesting times, Who says politics is boring!

There are going to be a lot of printers breaching the Working Hours Directive to get all those voting papers printed by the 31st.

[Exiletyke]

Yo, Zyles! An opportunity for us to chat twice in a week. I am blessed.

Interesting post as ever.

I don’t think you needed to be a lawyer, alleged or otherwise, to see how Johnson would deal with the requirements of the Benn Act. Even I worked it out. The Act required Johnson to send a letter, which he did. There was nothing to stop him from informing the EU – as if they needed to be informed - that the letter was being sent because Parliament said that it should be and that its contents did not represent the wishes or policy of the government. I see that BoJo was being labelled as ‘childish’ by (a rather peeved) Keir this morning, whereas I would say that the blind faith that the supporters of the Benn Act had in it was more childlike.

It’s not even as though Johnson and his fellow ministers didn’t give enough warning.

I’m not sure that very much turns in law upon whether the letter was signed. There is case law that might be used to say that it is irrelevant. I suspect that it actually has a threefold political purpose:

1. To respond to Jo Swinson’s display of hubris yesterday when she asked Parliament to rise so that Johnson could send the letter;
2. To try to tempt someone into taking him to court upon the issue of whether the letter should have been signed, which would allow those bringing such an action to be portrayed as petty and childish.
3. To allow Macron to take faux offence as part of a pretext to vote against an extension.

Pont 3 is what really matters. Individual EU leaders are scared stiff of being seen as being the one who caused a no deal exit. The Johnson letters are a get out of jail free card for any European leader who wants to be the person to say no. In his interview this morning, Keir said that if we leave with no deal because of the letters then Johnson would be personally responsible. Quite... I’m sure Macron would probably have spotted that line without Keir’s help, but it will undoubtedly be a comfort that a senior British politician has given a supportive sound bite.

On one particular point from your post - it would have been fun if Parliament had tried to legislate to instruct Johnson to not send any additional letters. In theory, he could then have challenged Parliament in the courts for breaching his right to freedom of expression. That would have been a sight to behold: Johnson v UK in the ECHR.

I'm sure if the lawyers who undoubtedly advised on the way the Benn Act was couched had been as clever as you they would have been able to spot the loophole that Johnson used,& made provision to prevent such a circumvention seeing as even you spotted it on post 689 on "Democracy"
Where there's a will so to speak
But they are obviously aren't that clever
As I said before lawyers eh?
don't you agree?

[rolymiller]

There are going to be a lot of printers breaching the Working Hours Directive to get all those voting papers printed by the 31st.

Bingo....!!