Government & Post Election Discussion

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

The EU has said the UK can compromise on one front : allow NI to remain in the CU / have access to the SM to avoid a hard border.

That is it.

But what then happens when Scotland & Wales decide they want the same thing?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Carth

But what then happens when Scotland & Wales decide they want the same thing?

Not their problem.
No one said Brexit was going to be easy. Apart from Banks, Davis, Fox, etc, etc.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

The EU has said the UK can compromise on one front : allow NI to remain in the CU / have access to the SM to avoid a hard border.

That is it.



Okay, but what if they don't succumb and offer anything? We've just wasted 2 to 3 years of British productivity and time for no good reason then.

There was a good article on May's ability to compromise...I can't remember where it was or I would link to it but it basically went along the lines of:

May and the EU negotiated on ECJ oversight for EU citizens and May said that there should be no oversight. In the end, both sides agreed that there would be oversight.

May and the EU negotiated on access to the SM without free movement and May said she would be willing to stay in the SM for goods but not services. In the end both sides agreed that the UK will be leaving the SM.

May and the EU negotiated on a divorce bill with many in the UK saying that the UK may not owe a cent / penny / Euro etc and the EU saying that the UK could be on the hook for 50 billion. In the end, both sides agreed to 40 million.

May and the EU negotiated on the length of the transition period. May had wanted 24 months or more and the EU said not a day over 18 months. In the end, both sides agreed to 18 months.

May and the EU negotiated the idea of concurrent trade talks while formalizing the Irish border issue. May said both could be done at the same time and the EU said the Trade agreements would come at the end of the progress on the Irish border issue. In the end, both sides agreed to discuss trade right at the end of the talks.

There were like 300 examples...the paper may have been the Guardian but to me it showed how unilateral / self executing her negotiation strategy is. In subservience, to the EU. If she didn't go through the first part of her nonsensical "negotiations" talking points, I would give her credit for at least being grounded in reality. (Though some have disputed that she needs to give the nationalists within her party some lip service from time to time, when she doesn't believe in it).

I agree that nobody should be surprised as to how long the talks are taking. I hope though that you will agree with me that nobody should be surprised as to how little the talks achieve, too. Unless May agrees to every single one of the EU's terms ; because they are setting the rules on everything through these discussions.



Ahh, so really they want to ask even more of her but she has to show that she is weak at home. Makes sense, it is the truth after all - hardly a cunning ploy of brilliant subterfuge given it's rather frank honesty and it does work to their advantage, too - never will they get so weak and pathetic a leader to take for a ride, as her. Best for them to keep her in Number 10, too I suppose.

One thing though...at the beginning of her stint of grand delusions why did she go about life with the whole "strong and stable" stuff?



Also, if she is willing to be honest with the EU about how weak she is but continues to lie through her teeth to the UK public then does she not think more of EU diplomats / bureaucrats than the UK public?

Tsk tsk tsk...



This goes back to the whole "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed" line...only junior ministers are already admitting that they have agreed to stuff. Like the divorce bill.



Correct, they want a deal entirely on their terms, let's see if they get it I suppose.

Tsk, tsk! You've really got it in for our Theresa, haven't you? It's the nature of a negotiation, and when you want something big, it is a good ploy to demand much, much more so you can get what you want in the end. Done it myself, and it works a treat.

Either we will get a decent deal, or it will be WTO rules. I am happy with either. We will have more trade as a result, which will more than make up for any reduction in trade with the EU.

Incidentally, on NI, there has been a long standing arrangement regarding trade on the border, which pre-dates the Good Friday agreement by a substantial amount. So why is this suddenly a problem now? Because Barnier says it is?

[denphone]

No one has got it in for Theresa May as stop inventing conspiracies that we all have it in for her because you could not be further from the truth as many of us have voiced our opinions of her without being biased or lacking balance in our posts as its clear as night and day she ain't up to the job.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by denphone

No one has got it in for Theresa May as stop inventing conspiracies that we all have it in for her because you could not be further from the truth as many of us have voiced our opinions of her without being biased or lacking balance in our posts as its clear as night and day she ain't up to the job.

Not true, Den. Just your opinion, based on the time it is taking to get Brexit and other stuff through the House of Commons and her own party, it seems. Anyway, Chloe has already admitted it!

This is the result of not having a majority and no-one would be able to get controversial legislation through in that situation.

Nobody else in the Conservative Party wants her job at the moment because it is just too difficult. I notice that Corbyn has been a bit quiet about pushing himself forward as the better person to lead the country at this time as well!

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Not true, Den. Just your opinion, based on the time it is taking to get Brexit and other stuff through the House of Commons and her own party, it seems. Anyway, Chloe has already admitted it!

Admitted what??

Whatever is Den's opinion (even if it was just that and nothing more) I value - I like Denphone's comments, whether I agree with them or not. Same with Mick, Ianch, Andrew, Damien, Hugh etc - they don't all agree with me but more speech is definitely the answer. So if May has a tough time in the commons then good...she needs to be made to work harder, scramble more - put more effort in, have more backbone, more dignity.

This is the result of not having a majority and no-one would be able to get controversial legislation through in that situation.

Whose wise idea was it to call a GE? Because she is so weak, she just goes along with it, no matter what - anyone with half a brain cell knew that she would get a hiding but what did she do? Listen to Hill and Timothy...who wrote the Manifesto? Davis helped and Pickles was involved. They know that she is as weak as everyone else so what do they do? Just stick their hands up her butt, pull the strings and use her like puppet. When they are done what do they do? Drag her round like a rag doll with rejected idea after another, so that the EU can tell her to go jump. In her, they have the perfect placeholder and none of them wish to see her go. She will beg just about anyone, for just about anything.

Nobody else in the Conservative Party wants her job at the moment because it is just too difficult.

Well, yeah...shouldn't she have thought of that before she volunteered and took the job? Seriously you can convince just about anyone of nothing here, but even I would find it rather sporting if you were to try attempt to convince folks that it is not her fault that she is the PM (because nobody else is up to the job).

We all get that this is a poison chalice of a job but there is no way that you are going to convince anyone that it is not her fault for hanging on to the position like her life depended on it. Her political life of course, does.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

Admitted what??

Admitted that you dislike and do not respect Theresa May. What did you think I was saying?

I respect your view that you do not see how these negotiations are going to result in a good deal for Britain, but I think you are being unfair on her. Yes, she made a bad call on the election, but she has been in there, trying to get a good deal from the EU in relation to Brexit.

She may not be successful of course if Barnier & co are determined to teach Britain a lesson even though this will hurt them more than us. So then we go to the 'no deal' option.
Not so good for us in the short term owing to the disruption that would cause, but after a short time, we would make up for lost time and the EU will suffer at their leisure.

It seems to me that what Theresa May is trying to do is explore all options, including the weaker ones, to show to the world that the EU won't budge on anything, and that 'no deal' is the best for us in those circumstances. Those who would seek to criticise would be in a quandary, because she would have shown that the only remaining alternative was capitulation.

I still think that common sense will prevail, but as I said before, if we have to, we should just walk away.

There are now reports on the third option to be considered on Friday. I won't comment on what has been published as it is speculation, except to say that if that is it, we will still not get an agreement within the Cabinet. If that is the case, and the EU is already ruling it out anyway, then surely the Cabinet will be united in the view that a 'no deal' is the only option left. Fantastic!

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by Carth

But what then happens when Scotland & Wales decide they want the same thing?

Andrew answered that perfectly in his post below and I would have said exactly that - differential agreements and the whining of Sturgeon and co is not the problem of Barnier and co.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

Andrew answered that perfectly in his post below and I would have said exactly that - differential agreements and the whining of Sturgeon and co is not the problem of Barnier and co.

On that, we agree.

[ianch99]

Cabinet collective responsibility

Cabinet collective responsibility, also known as collective ministerial responsibility, is a constitutional convention in Parliamentary systems that members of the cabinet must publicly support all governmental decisions made in Cabinet, even if they do not privately agree with them

It seems that there is now just a free for all in Cabinet. I am trying to think when this broke down but my memory is failing me. This current behaviour of Cabinet members (Gove, Johnson, Mogg, etc.) openly fermenting dissent against their PM is remarkable or has it always been this way?

[Chloé Palmas]

I know that sometimes I use initials but when I say "CR" in regards to any of this, I mean collective responsibility in regards to the cabinet.

CU / SM are pretty self explanatory - if anyone else gets irritated by my abbreviating of words please let me know.

The current crop of secretaries btw is closer to a zoo than a cabinet. It is a disgrace to a nation that founded the Westminster style of government.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Cabinet collective responsibility

It seems that there is now just a free for all in Cabinet. I am trying to think when this broke down but my memory is failing me. This current behaviour of Cabinet members (Gove, Johnson, Mogg, etc.) openly fermenting dissent against their PM is remarkable or has it always been this way?

If Theresa May was the strong and successful Prime Minister that Old Boy believes her to be, she would have grounded Boris Johnson (literally ) and insist that he either votes with the Cabinet or resigns. Instead, she allowed him to evade collective responsibility and set an appalling precedent.

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Now, now, Chloé, and I was beginning to like you!

Firstly, thank you - I have a bunch of back dated replies to make here so sorry if they are delayed. I hope that you can like me, most people usually do even when they disagree with me and I usually like most people though I do tend to frown upon women some. (Not very fond of my own gender, much - we all tend to whine and complain a lot). I do like strong women but the weak ones irritate the shit out of me - especially the ones who claim to be strong but then go crying off when someone calls them out on it. I live around them in the droves and short of moving I am stuck with them until their natural death. (Though they are breeding a new generation of kids to be equally weak and bratty while pretending to be strong, so you are not that). I think you might like me or other reasons, too.

I never did welcome you to the forum, but belatedly, welcome! Your views are appreciated, although I'm not sure how often we will have a meeting of minds!

No, I have a bit of a hang up about you but it is not entirely your own fault - I used to (and still technically do) admin a couple of other sites to do with politics and one of the guys that I got to help me out with it also had the name "old" in his title. He and I butted heads on so much and he literally had the same views on trade / jobs etc as you.

The only thing was, he was a card carrying TP member and turned into a Trump apologist overnight...I would ask him, over and over again the same questions and he would never give me a straight answer. About any of the things that he used to stand for but now hates (free trade / corporate growth etc etc) and like you always had a "because Trump said so" mentality.

You seem to keep saying "we're going to get a deal" - because...?

You seem like a pleasant guy and so did he but it is not conducive to debating someone when you don't agree and I can't see a way in which me and you will do anything but differ on almost every political issue. Sorry.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

If Theresa May was the strong and successful Prime Minister that Old Boy believes her to be, she would have grounded Boris Johnson (literally ) and insist that he either votes with the Cabinet or resigns. Instead, she allowed him to evade collective responsibility and set an appalling precedent.

So, and this is the essential question, is Mrs May trying to construct a deal to keep the Tory Party together or is her priority the country at large?

I feel that she has lost sight of the bigger picture. She should sack the Cabinet members that publicly rebel against her and run with the consequences. She will be judged by history more favourably as having stuck to the tenets of Cabinet Responsibility and principled Government rather that bending over to be rogered by Gove et al.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by ianch99

So, and this is the essential question, is Mrs May trying to construct a deal to keep the Tory Party together or is her priority the country at large?

I'm not sure even Theresa May knows the answer to that question. And therein lies the problem.