The Brexit aftermath thread

[Jessicka]

I actually trust the EU more than Brexiters who would actually relish restarting the Troubles on the GFA.

[Dizzeeyooo]

That's the problem of Theresa May, she wouldn't change her negotiation stance, even when Parliament rejected it and told her otherwise.

Their job was to scrutinise the deal, they did, they told her what they didn't like, she ignored them.

That's the fault of the individual, not the system.

The point was, if Parliament had known her negotiation stance before triggering article 50, things would have gone differently from that point onwards.

[Jessicka]

In other news, the motion passes in first reading 329-300.

[Dizzeeyooo]

In other news, the motion passes in first reading 329-300.

Another, slightly smaller Conservative purge later then.

[Elegiac]

Another, slightly smaller Conservative purge later then.

They're trying for the record of smallest minority government in history, I see.

[Jessicka]

The point was, if Parliament had known her negotiation stance before triggering article 50, things would have gone differently from that point onwards.

It wouldn’t. They knew her stance, but until she brought something to Parliament they’re just spectators.

[Pann]

This is actually somewhat correct. The PLP didn't push for a PV/2R until their conference in 2018 (IIRC) Corbyn has only started adopting it in recent months.

The original Labour plan at the last GE was to negotiate Brexit and put it to Parliament, which was a shot at the Tories who originally wanted to pass the WA without it being in the Commons.

No, it is completely correct. Their manifesto is in it's full glory for all to see in the link I provided. And the proposal put forward in the 2018 conference was to keep all options on the table which included the possibility of a referendum if a general election could not be secured.

[Northern Goblin]

The idea that either A: They could risk public wrath by voting against A50, or B, May would have actually told them her plan (this was the same Government who was found in contempt of Parliament) is amusing.

- - - Updated - - -

No, it is completely correct. Their manifesto is in it's full glory for all to see in the link I provided. And the proposal put forward in the 2018 conference was to keep all options on the table which included the possibility of a referendum if a general election could not be secured.

I said somewhat because

"The policy that any deal would be put back to the people has only come to light in the last couple of months."

Is technically wrong, it's been policy for close to a year. The part regarding the manifesto was accurate.

[Dizzeeyooo]

It wouldn’t. They knew her stance, but until she brought something to Parliament they’re just spectators.

They had no idea what her stance was exactly, Brexit was sold by the leave side as an easily achievable EFTA plus deal, and May was for remain before the referendum. People knew she was a little bit racist from her days at the home office, but I doubt many people would have guessed that she would go for pretty much the hardest Brexit possible outside of no deal, just to end freedom of movement.

[Pann]

It came up over a year ago as a result of a decision by the national council.

That's not what you claimed. You said that the option for another referendum was in the 2017 manifesto which, as I pointed out, completely and utterly untrue and now you double on the lies by claiming that it is over a year old.

It was in July this year that Labour came out and said it would back a second referendum (with conditions, of course).

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-corbyn-brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48919695
https://www.ft.com/content/e3bd800e-...2-2df48f366f7d

[Jessicka]

They had no idea what her stance was exactly, Brexit was sold by the leave side as an easily achievable EFTA plus, and May was for remain before the referendum. People knew she was a little bit racist from her days at the home office, but I doubt many people would have guessed that she would go for pretty much the hardest Brexit possible outside of no deal, just to end freedom of movement.

No; she was always open about her red lines. There was plenty of disagreement over that, but until she brought the paper to Parliament there was nothing could be done.

Indeed the reason it came to Parliament is because they forced her to bring it because they knew what it would hold: Bad Things.

[Pann]

I said somewhat because

"The policy that any deal would be put back to the people has only come to light in the last couple of months."

Is technically wrong, it's been policy for close to a year. The part regarding the manifesto was accurate.

It is not technically wrong there was no policy on holding another referendum until July this year. Saying that they will keep all options on the table and that one of those options is the possibility of holding another referendum is not a policy to hold a referendum .

[Dizzeeyooo]

No; she was always open about her red lines. There was plenty of disagreement over that, but until she brought the paper to Parliament there was nothing could be done.

Indeed the reason it came to Parliament is because they forced her to bring it because they knew what it would hold: Bad Things.

Going to need a source on May explicitly stating her absolute priority was ending freedom of movement (and so leaving the single market) from before Article 50 was triggered.

[Pann]

That's the problem of Theresa May, she wouldn't change her negotiation stance, even when Parliament rejected it and told her otherwise.

Their job was to scrutinise the deal, they did, they told her what they didn't like, she ignored them.

That's the fault of the individual, not the system.

Why do you keep trying to rewrite history? Parliament rejected the deal as well as the possibility of a harder and softer Brexit - there was simply other deal they would accept or the EU would offer. I thought it was the leavers who were supposed to believe in unicorns!?

[Jessicka]

It is not technically wrong there was no policy on holding another referendum until July this year. Saying that they will keep all options on the table and that one of those options is the possibility of holding another referendum is not a policy to hold a referendum .

The policy was always a GE, or failing that a referendum with Remain on the table. That’s what the membership voted on, as I’ve been told frequently by a Labour Party member who I sit across from every day and voted on it and keeps reminding me.

The referendum tended to get played down in favour of a GE, but it was always there.

I may have slightly misremembered the timeline, but not the facts.

- - - Updated - - -

Why do you keep trying to rewrite history? Parliament rejected the deal as well as the possibility of a harder and softer Brexit - there was simply other deal they would accept or the EU would offer. I thought it was the leavers who were supposed to believe in unicorns!?

Other options were clearly more favourable than May’s WA however, and showed a direction she should have taken.

[Pann]

The policy was always a GE, or failing that a referendum with Remain on the table. That’s what the membership voted on, as I’ve been told frequently by a Labour Party member who I sit across from every day and voted on it and keeps reminding me.

The referendum tended to get played down in favour of a GE, but it was always there.

I may have slightly misremembered the timeline, but not the facts.

No, it wasn't. You've clearly not read the Lab manifesto or any of their subsequent press releases. And there wasn't any mention of the possible referendum - which was to be on the government's deal - having the option to remain.

- - - Updated - - -

Other options were clearly more favourable than May’s WA however, and showed a direction she should have taken.

They were rejected! Why do you have such difficulty understanding this?

The fact that the one was rejected by less votes than the other doesn't change the fact that it was still rejected by the House.

[Dizzeeyooo]

Alexander is currently briefing the 1922 committee on "his" idea for an alternative to the backstop, an all-Ireland agrifood zone (NI only backstop in all but name).

Almost feel bad for the DUP (almost )

[Flarelaine]

You really want to make a virtue of having no legal roadblocks in place to prevent the executive from unilaterally proroguing the legislature?

There is a roadblock, actually, but it has become tradition that she does not intervene.

[Pann]

The BBC are reporting that Johnson has given "a guarantee" that the rebels who had the Tory whip removed for voting against the government will not be able to return.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-49557734

[Kronik85]

Details are sketchy but apparently the Lord's has just fucked it and accidentally let one of the 100 amendments that torpedo the bill through. GGWP.