OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[swaledale]

Whilst on holiday last week, I got chatting to a bloke from Coffintree who siad exactly the bit I've "bolded". He went on to say it hasn't been implemented at all. As we were in a bar I refrained from telling him he's a plonker and changed the conversation. I must be getting old. Despite being much closer to a gallon than to my first pint I held it together. Does old age and beer = common sense?

I think one just tires of debating with people whose grasp of reality is shaky to say the least!

The problems are many, but people either don't have the intellectual capacity or simply don't invest enough time to understand the issues. Politicians know this of course, which is why we get meaningless 3 word slogans, like Stop the Boats or get Brexit done.

People keep claiming they want politicians to speak the truth and tell it how it is, but in reality most voters don't, they want simple answers to issues. IMO voters get the politicians and governments they deserve.

[Andy_Faber]

Brexit supporters want to keep up the pretence that Brexit isn't the issue

Brexit wasn't the issue, it was the weapon. You (in your life, from what Irecall) went on marches, waved placards, debated etc, they were your weapons, your means to an end whether that end was achieved or not. The Brexiteers equivalent was a cross in a box, that was their weapon, theire means to an end, too early to say if it was achieved

[SithHappens]

Was out with the family a couple of weeks ago, the subject of Brexit came up, don't recall how but my wife was trying to explain how it had had a huge (negative) effect on her business. The BIL piped up that you have to look at the bigger picture and the fact we no longer have to have rules enforced on us anymore is the biggest benefit. So I asked him to tell me what rules he found so awful, even said just tell me one. No surprise he had no clue what rules had so negatively impacted his life while we were in the EU.

I mean seriously, how can you hold that up as your argument and reason for voting for something when you cannot point to one single piece of evidence to support your reasons?

[ramAnag]

Brexit wasn't the issue, it was the weapon. You (in your life, from what Irecall) went on marches, waved placards, debated etc, they were your weapons, your means to an end whether that end was achieved or not. The Brexiteers equivalent was a cross in a box, that was their weapon, theire means to an end, too early to say if it was achieved

But the use of such a ‘weapon’ relies on the ‘box crossers’ being truthfully informed and having a genuine grasp of the issues they were voting about. Without that the Brexit vote was nothing more than a ‘weapon’ of mass destruction as has subsequently been proved.

[swaledale]

Brexit wasn't the issue, it was the weapon. You (in your life, from what Irecall) went on marches, waved placards, debated etc, they were your weapons, your means to an end whether that end was achieved or not. The Brexiteers equivalent was a cross in a box, that was their weapon, theire means to an end, too early to say if it was achieved

At least when I went on marches or signed petitions there was a clear objective, some of which were achieved either in whole or in part!

Not entirely sure that those who voted for Brexit actually knew what they were voting for or what they hoped to achieve, but the reality is most of it wasn't remotely achievable and as for its too late to say whether it was achieved, mm we haven't stopped immigration, there's no extra money for the NHS, we never lost any Sovereignty and in any case are busy doing trade deals that involves agreeing the same sort of rules as with the EU, you can't reverse time, so turning the clock back to the 1950's isn't possible, we don't have the same benefits as when we were in the EU, its ****ed the economy especially financial services and we are retaing many rules because without them we can't export to the EU our biggest market. Oh and we are agreeing trade deals that will **** UK Farmers!

[Andy_Faber]

At least when I went on marches or signed petitions there was a clear objective, some of which were achieved either in whole or in part!

Not entirely sure that those who voted for Brexit actually knew what they were voting for or what they hoped to achieve, but the reality is most of it wasn't remotely achievable and as for its too late to say whether it was achieved, mm we haven't stopped immigration, there's no extra money for the NHS, we never lost any Sovereignty and in any case are busy doing trade deals that involves agreeing the same sort of rules as with the EU, you can't reverse time, so turning the clock back to the 1950's isn't possible, we don't have the same benefits as when we were in the EU, its ****ed the economy especially financial services and we are retaing many rules because without them we can't export to the EU our biggest market. Oh and we are agreeing trade deals that will **** UK Farmers!

Not disagreeing with any of that

[SithHappens]

Well, we Cloggies got an election result to shiver yer timbers.... until you look further than which party is the largest. The PVV, which can't really be referred to as a party git just over 24% of the vote and, as we have PR, also just over 24% of the seats. Why not a party? Wilders IS the PVV. He is the one and only member. Nobody else is allowed to join. He decides policy. Nobody can argue against him as they aren't members of the party.

I'm not expecting a huge leap to the far right, as far as Government policy is concerned. He needs to form a coalition in order to form a government/cabinet. His most far right policies from the manifesto were...
1. Banning the Koran
2. Close all Mosques
3. Ban the hijab, burkha etc from being worn in public buildings (he has previously suggested a tax on them)
4. Limiting immigration

He will drop 1, 2 and 3 during coalition negotiations as no other party will agree to them. #4 has legs as just about every other party had reducing/stopping immigration in their own manifestos.

He also had Nexit and dropping the Euro in order to return to the Guilder. IMO he will drop both of those policies as well.

That leaves his socio-economic policies to look at. Most of those are most definitely left wing. That will make it difficult to come to an agreement with the right of centre parties with whom he could form a majority government. His PVV has 37 of the 150 seats and needs 76 to gain a majority. NSC with 20 seats is touted as being a possible partner. However, their leader's #1 policy is a complete overhaul of how government works. He wants Ministers to be professionals in the field of whatever Ministry they lead rather than being a political beast. For instance, an economist as Finance Minster. An education specialist as Education Minister etc. There other wide ranging reforms he wants as well. If those aren't on the table he'll step away. BBB, 7 seats, will require far reaching changes to the way farmers are currently being treated and will probably get those guarantees. We are now at 61 seats, 15 short of the required number. There's a handful of other right wing parties with a few seats each but they'd all want Minister's posts and part of their agenda to be in any plans and we could well finish up with as many as 7 or 8 parties in the coalition. IMO, that's unworkable.

There is another option. The VVD, 24 seats, has already said that they consider losing 10 seats at the election a defeat and it wouldn't be honouring the voters' choice if they were to remain in Government, the last 12 years, the PM was Rutte, VVD... What the VVD has aid is they won't join the government but they will vote with the PVV on "sensible" policies. That would certainly rule out numbers 1, 2 and 3 above as being a policy they'd back. They would back reducing immigration as that was also one of the policies in their manifesto. The crunch is in socio-economic policies. As I said, on those matters, the PVV is left wing and the VVD is right wing, neo liberal, conservative on those matters.

Getting a working coalition government is going to be difficult, very much so and my expectation is that coalition negotiations will fail and we will see a new election in March or April of 2024.

Until such time as the negotiations are finalised, the outgoing cabinet remains in situ and Rutte is, against the will of the majority of people, still Prime Minister. The previous election (2021) saw coalition negotiations take 299 days...

Am currently on Holiday and was on a trip a couple of days ago and there was a Portuguese couple and a young Dutch couple and they got on to the subject of politics, I kept out of it but was a bit interested in their views so was tab hanging, was surprised that the young couple seemed reasonabily supportive of Wilders policies, they were skirting round the edges a bit but the upshot seemed to be that there is a general feeling that too many immigrants who don't work and are supported by the state (which they pay for) and that the number of muslims is an issue.

They did say it was those living in less populated areas rather than cities that seem to hold those views.

[MadAmster]

Am currently on Holiday and was on a trip a couple of days ago and there was a Portuguese couple and a young Dutch couple and they got on to the subject of politics, I kept out of it but was a bit interested in their views so was tab hanging, was surprised that the young couple seemed reasonabily supportive of Wilders policies, they were skirting round the edges a bit but the upshot seemed to be that there is a general feeling that too many immigrants who don't work and are supported by the state (which they pay for) and that the number of muslims is an issue.

They did say it was those living in less populated areas rather than cities that seem to hold those views.

Our asylum system is about as efficient as that of the UK. Due to cutbacks over the past 13 years of neo-liberalism we now have an ever growing backlog of asylum requests. It used to be that, whilst awaiting the outcome of their asylum claim, seekers weren't allowed to work. This led to them getting bored, stuck in their asylum centre and things got violent at times and they resorted to shoplifting etc so they had some money to spend. That changed to them being allowed to work up to 24 hours a week for a max of 6 months a year. Claims can take up to 3 years. That has now been changed again so that they can work full time, all year, while awaiting the outcome of their asylum claim. Far more sensible IMO. It means they are kept busy, will cause less problems, they have cash to put into the economy and they are paying tax.

Ergo, the thoughts of the "young Dutch couple" are actually bucking the facts. Asylum seekers can, do and are working and "paying their way.

The biggest problem we have is that 13 years of neo-liberal policy has led to many asylum seekers centra being closed. We now have 2. A small one in Groningen and the main one in Ter Apel. Groningen is full. Ter Apel is full to 200% of capacity. A 3rd, temporary, "tent" centre (large luxury hard sided/roofed ones so they're basically huge dorms) were put up last week to house 450 and is full. Our HMG is saying 4000 extra places are needed in the next 3 weeks. They were going to use a hotel to house some of them. Locals went to court to get it stopped because "there had been no consultation", what info they had received was insufficient and incorrect. The court agreed. The consultation is now taking place. They hope to be able to put about 500 in the hotel some time next week. In fairness to the locals, most said they weren't against asylum seekers in the hotel, they simply want more info and some guarantees that there will be sufficient "supervision" to ensure there isn't an increase in "lawlessness".

A post election survey among PVV (Wilders' party) voters showed that a mere 11% still wanted bans on the Koran, Mosques and the hijab. They still want tighter controls and a reduction in numbers of immigrants. They still want Nexit and still want to leave the Euro.

Stage 1 of the coalition forming is now complete. This week they will start negotiating on the "red lines". If the 4 parties (all varying degrees right of centre) concerned can't come to some kind of agreement then Groen Links/Partij van de Arbeid (GL/PvdA) might be asked to join in place of one of the 4 but they are very left wing and I don't see that happening. A second possibility is they form a minority government looking for support from the right for right wing policy and from the left for left wing policy. #3 is one of the VVD or NSC don't join the government but will support what they consider to be fair policies. That would cover the majority of middle ground policies but exclude any ultra right or left wing dogma. #4 is new elections.

The old Cabinet is still in situ until such time as a new government is formed. The previous coalition negotiations in 2021 took 299 days. Should no coalition be reached then we will have new elections followed by a new set of coalition negotiations. It could be 18 months or more before we have a new cabinet in place... meanwhile, the old cabinet trundles on a) managing ongoing business and b) putting forward new legislation that it deems necessary and urgent. Any new proposals from the old "regime" will have to be voted on by the new Parliament. Nothing extreme will be going into Law. Business as usual with a cabinet of one flavour and a "Commons" of a different flavour. On top of that, the new "Commons" is allowed to put forward legislation and vote on it. Anything they get through will have to be implemented by the old cabinet. Not a lame duck but not the right wing fest many, both here and abroad, thought we'd get.

Even with a new cabinet, the more extreme thoughts of Wilders won't get through.

[Andy_Faber]

Our asylum system is about as efficient as that of the UK. Due to cutbacks over the past 13 years of neo-liberalism we now have an ever growing backlog of asylum requests. It used to be that, whilst awaiting the outcome of their asylum claim, seekers weren't allowed to work. This led to them getting bored, stuck in their asylum centre and things got violent at times and they resorted to shoplifting etc so they had some money to spend. That changed to them being allowed to work up to 24 hours a week for a max of 6 months a year. Claims can take up to 3 years. That has now been changed again so that they can work full time, all year, while awaiting the outcome of their asylum claim. Far more sensible IMO. It means they are kept busy, will cause less problems, they have cash to put into the economy and they are paying tax.

Ergo, the thoughts of the "young Dutch couple" are actually bucking the facts. Asylum seekers can, do and are working and "paying their way.

The biggest problem we have is that 13 years of neo-liberal policy has led to many asylum seekers centra being closed. We now have 2. A small one in Groningen and the main one in Ter Apel. Groningen is full. Ter Apel is full to 200% of capacity. A 3rd, temporary, "tent" centre (large luxury hard sided/roofed ones so they're basically huge dorms) were put up last week to house 450 and is full. Our HMG is saying 4000 extra places are needed in the next 3 weeks. They were going to use a hotel to house some of them. Locals went to court to get it stopped because "there had been no consultation", what info they had received was insufficient and incorrect. The court agreed. The consultation is now taking place. They hope to be able to put about 500 in the hotel some time next week. In fairness to the locals, most said they weren't against asylum seekers in the hotel, they simply want more info and some guarantees that there will be sufficient "supervision" to ensure there isn't an increase in "lawlessness".

A post election survey among PVV (Wilders' party) voters showed that a mere 11% still wanted bans on the Koran, Mosques and the hijab. They still want tighter controls and a reduction in numbers of immigrants. They still want Nexit and still want to leave the Euro.

Stage 1 of the coalition forming is now complete. This week they will start negotiating on the "red lines". If the 4 parties (all varying degrees right of centre) concerned can't come to some kind of agreement then Groen Links/Partij van de Arbeid (GL/PvdA) might be asked to join in place of one of the 4 but they are very left wing and I don't see that happening. A second possibility is they form a minority government looking for support from the right for right wing policy and from the left for left wing policy. #3 is one of the VVD or NSC don't join the government but will support what they consider to be fair policies. That would cover the majority of middle ground policies but exclude any ultra right or left wing dogma. #4 is new elections.

The old Cabinet is still in situ until such time as a new government is formed. The previous coalition negotiations in 2021 took 299 days. Should no coalition be reached then we will have new elections followed by a new set of coalition negotiations. It could be 18 months or more before we have a new cabinet in place... meanwhile, the old cabinet trundles on a) managing ongoing business and b) putting forward new legislation that it deems necessary and urgent. Any new proposals from the old "regime" will have to be voted on by the new Parliament. Nothing extreme will be going into Law. Business as usual with a cabinet of one flavour and a "Commons" of a different flavour. On top of that, the new "Commons" is allowed to put forward legislation and vote on it. Anything they get through will have to be implemented by the old cabinet. Not a lame duck but not the right wing fest many, both here and abroad, thought we'd get.

Even with a new cabinet, the more extreme thoughts of Wilders won't get through.

Thanks, always interesting to get a fairly unbiased report on the machinations of other jurisdictions

[swaledale]

Ah a Brexit benefit, we may, possibly but highly unlikely to (because nobody will manufacture them) a PINT of wine and this is being hailed by HM Government as a Brexit freedom!!!!!!!!