Brexit (Old)

Originally Posted by ianch99

But how would we "hold them to account" exactly? The current Tory party is sliding more to the right and is now, via the ERG string pulling, aligning us with a free market, low tax and deregulated future.

Elections.

I am very pro-Remain. I am not really sure about a second referendum but I would vote for Remain if another one were held. I think Brexit is a mistake and will be viewed as a mistake decades from now.

However the argument that our government is rubbish so we need the EU to control them is not a great one.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Damien

Elections.

I am very pro-Remain. I am not really sure about a second referendum but I would vote for Remain if another one were held. I think Brexit is a mistake and will be viewed as a mistake decades from now.

However the argument that our government is rubbish so we need the EU to control them is not a great one.

Its a very poor argument as let the government make a mess of Brexit which it is currently doing in spades currently and then the public will be able to be the judge and jury of it themselves when it has all played out.

[heero_yuy]

Quote from Damien:


However the argument that our government is rubbish so we need the EU to control them is not a great one.

Sounds more like desperation.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by denphone

Its a very poor argument as let the government make a mess of Brexit which it is currently doing in spades currently and then the public will be able to be the judge and jury of it themselves when it has all played out.

If only the remainers would let it all be played out. It is always possible they may have a change of mind.

Leavers like myself are fully aware there may be a rocky road ahead but believe we can get through it.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Damien

Elections.

I am very pro-Remain. I am not really sure about a second referendum but I would vote for Remain if another one were held. I think Brexit is a mistake and will be viewed as a mistake decades from now.

However the argument that our government is rubbish so we need the EU to control them is not a great one.

The current system is too tribal to allow this kind of "holding to account" you describe.

Also, the argument is not that the "government is rubbish" (which it is ), it is rather the moderating influence of common sense EU directives designed to protect the consumer as opposed to the (lack of) UK laws designed to benefit Business and their shareholders.

---------- Post added at 16:14 ---------- Previous post was at 16:11 ----------

Originally Posted by pip08456

If only the remainers would let it all be played out. It is always possible they may have a change of mind.

Leavers like myself are fully aware there may be a rocky road ahead but believe we can get through it.

A perfect contradiction: on the one hand you say, "don't worry, things will be fine you will see" and then in the same breath, you say "there may be a rocky road ahead but believe we can get through it"

You can't make it up ... no, actually, you can .. it was called the Leave campaign

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by ianch99

The current system is too tribal to allow this kind of "holding to account" you describe.

Also, the argument is not that the "government is rubbish" (which it is ), it is rather the moderating influence of common sense EU directives designed to protect the consumer as opposed to the (lack of) UK laws designed to benefit Business and their shareholders.

---------- Post added at 16:14 ---------- Previous post was at 16:11 ----------



A perfect contradiction: on the one hand you say, "don't worry, things will be fine you will see" and then in the same breath, you say "there may be a rocky road ahead but believe we can get through it"

You can't make it up ... no, actually, you can .. it was called the Leave campaign

No, I didn't say that at all, but carry on making it up as you go along.

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I think we are all being too quick to rush to judgement on Theresa May's plan.

If the plan is to enable us to make our own deals with the rest of the world, have a separate trading arrangement with the EU ensuring frictionless borders, enable us to make our own employment laws, extracate ourselves from extortionate payments from the EU and end free movement - what is left to complain about?

Let's see the detail before we rush to judgement.

You must be the only person on the planet that is in favor of leaving, and in favor of May as well. How the heck do you accommodate such a juxtaposition?

As for what is left to complain about...nevermind.

Originally Posted by ianch99

The current system is too tribal to allow this kind of "holding to account" you describe.

Also, the argument is not that the "government is rubbish" (which it is ), it is rather the moderating influence of common sense EU directives designed to protect the consumer as opposed to the (lack of) UK laws designed to benefit Business and their shareholders.

But you're effectively arguing we can't be trusted to be left to our own devices. This is not the argument I would make, you're on a hiding to nothing making that case.

The argument for setting policy at EU level is somethings are better achieved by multiple countries signing on at once and the EU makes that quicker and simpler.

A shared set of regulations cuts red tape, makes business more efficient and helps consumers by making the market wider for them and more trustworthy. The EU roaming thing works because every EU country had to sign up to it so reciprocity was enforced immediately. If we had tried to do this outside of the EU then Britain, if we wanted it, would have to work out the arrangements separately which would have been a much more arduous task. Likewise for every other thing that works across the EU automatically. I don't think people appreciate how much the single market helps things.

The best case for the EU is economic not democratic.

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by Damien

Wouldn't have changed the result but the Tories broke pairing tonight: https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/stat...03110794186753

Jo Swinson was paired with Brandon Lewis but, after she was told that, he voted anyway.

Quite a low thing to do.

TBH Pairing helps out the Government a lot. Sometimes Government ministers cannot be in the chamber, especially the PM and Foreign Secretary, so no reason now Labour can't refuse to honour in those cases. So either the PM and others need to attend every vote or risk losing it.

That was a disgrace / obviously nobody believes Lewis's nonsense of "forgetting" but one thing I thought of at the time is...okay they made a mistake so why not re-vote on that amendment with the government honoring the pairing?

At the time that happened I figured that you would be the only one who brought this up and I haven't read the rest of the replies but I commend you for bringing it up - the behavior was disgraceful.

If you don't agree with pairing (some don't) then fine...on the merits oppose it. If you agree with it, honor it. However this cockamamie garbage of "I forgot" is disgraceful from the Tories.

I suppose it is a little insensitive on my part in some ways ; May was baron so I suppose the maternity leave of other women is rather a sore point / the last thing she spends time focusing on but that is no excuse for the party chair / chief whip etc.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by pip08456

No, I didn't say that at all, but carry on making it up as you go along.

Oh, so you said:

If only the remainers would let it all be played out. It is always possible they may have a change of mind.

This is saying if the Remainers keep quiet and wait they might have a change of mind, correct? So, by inference (and I am not showing my working), Remainers will only "change their minds" if things are indeed fine. If they are not fine, they will not change their minds .. i.e. the obvious.

So, you really did say "don't worry, things will be fine you will see" ...

.. or are you now saying that things will not be fine?

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Brandon Lewis later apologised and said it was a Whips' error. In this Coalition of Chaos, it is unfortunately quite possible.

Yeah we both know that he is talking out of his ass but unfortunately with this circus act of a government you never can quite tell where the barometer swings for the level of incompetence. (Or even impotence).

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Damien

But you're effectively arguing we can't be trusted to be left to our own devices. This is not the argument I would make, you're on a hiding to nothing making that case.

The argument for setting policy at EU level is somethings are better achieved by multiple countries signing on at once and the EU makes that quicker and simpler.

A shared set of regulations cuts red tape, makes business more efficient and helps consumers by making the market wider for them and more trustworthy. The EU roaming thing works because every EU country had to sign up to it so reciprocity was enforced immediately. If we had tried to do this outside of the EU then Britain, if we wanted it, would have to work out the arrangements separately which would have been a much more arduous task. Likewise for every other thing that works across the EU automatically. I don't think people appreciate how much the single market helps things.

The best case for the EU is economic not democratic.

That is not what I am saying at all. What I am saying is that this Government cannot be trusted to carry forward the degree of Consumer protection that the EU currently underwrites. In fact, the future that the Hard Brexit supporters want for us demands such standards be diluted and/or removed.

As to your point that we only do it because it's part of the SM package, this is true to a degree. When we leave, we could just as easily mirror new EU consumer protection legislation as our own, autonomous, UK laws if we wanted to. The key phrase here is if we wanted to. If our Government wanted to get a better trade deal with the US, they could choose to lower or remove import standards for food for example and, by definition, no one could stop them.

One of the big Cons of the EU debate is that the EU always impose unnecessary and restrictive legislation on the member states with no or little upside when, in reality, the exact opposite is true.

The EU has a website where you can look up your favorite anti-EU myth:

Euromyths A-Z index

There are some classics here:

Butchers cannot give a dog a bone

Corgis to be banned by EU

EU workers immune from law

Yoghurt to be renamed

and so many more ..

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by pip08456

Don't fret Mick, he obvously had no clue as to the thrust of my post.

Oh dear...

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

Yeah we both know that he is talking out of his ass but unfortunately with this circus act of a government you never can quite tell where the barometer swings for the level of incompetence. (Or even impotence).

Yes, the ass was involved for the talking thereof:

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Brandon_Lewis

Breaking of pairing agreement
On 17 July 2018, Lewis was paired with Liberal Democrat Jo Swinson (who was on maternity leave) during "key House of Commons votes" on the Trade Bill. Despite this, Lewis voted with the government on two votes. Lewis initially claimed that this had been an honest mistake, but it was revealed that while Lewis had in fact abstained on some votes during the day's proceedings, he had broken the agreement to vote on these two "crunch" issues[34]. In response to suggestions that this was just a mistake, fellow Conservative Andrew Bridgen said that the careful selection of the important votes allowed people to deduce what was happening. Breaking House of Commons voting conventions has “appalling consequences for the management of government” warned Michael Heseltine. [35]

Tory MP Andrew Bridgen casts doubt on claims broken pair incident was honest mistake

This is what Andrew Bridgen, the Conservative MP, told the Daily Politics a few minutes ago when asked what he thought actually happened in the broken pair incident. (See 12.37pm.) He said:

I think the fact that Brandon Lewis abstained on six votes and then just mysteriously voted on the vital two - I think it tells you all you need to know.

[Chloé Palmas]

Yeah, even Damien pointed it out, later: (good on you both for homing in this despicable behavior btw)

Originally Posted by Damien

The Times is reporting that the Tory Chief Whip ordered his MPs to break the pairing and the Tories aren't denying that. Seems to be generating a lot of anger in the commons.

This kind of behavior is appalling - the whips forced an MP to vote bringing her sick bucket in on the labor side etc.

Damien you are a lot more familiar with parliamentary protocol, why is it not possible to have a new vote on this with Swinson's pairing honored?

May and the whips would buckle to it IMO - she caves on every other thing as it is...(to everyone).