Brexit...

[Chach]

19 hours ago, MikeO said:

She finally seems to be bringing the country together though if the highest rated comments on the BBC report are any judge...

What do you think they expected she could negotiate?

[MikeO]

6 minutes ago, Chach said:

What do you think they expected she could negotiate?

You'd need to ask them that.

[Chach]

1 minute ago, MikeO said:

You'd need to ask them that.

I find those kind of responses you posted embarrassing to point I wish I had less capacity for empathy, they're whatever the thing one higher than cringe inducing is.

Piers Morgan disciples.

[MikeO]

7 minutes ago, Chach said:

I find those kind of responses you posted embarrassing to point I wish I had less capacity for empathy, they're whatever the thing one higher than cringe inducing is.

Piers Morgan disciples.

Awfully sorry to offend but it's the truth. She could achieve nothing and she lived up to expectations, is that a more satisfactory answer?

 

[Chach]

3 minutes ago, MikeO said:

Awfully sorry to offend but it's the truth. She could achieve nothing and she lived up to expectations, is that a more satisfactory answer?

She achieved what could be achieved. 

[Matt]

27 minutes ago, Chach said:

She achieved what could be achieved. 

Which was nothing  

[MikeO]

Even the Torygraph wants rid of Mrs May..

Like some interminable dying scene in an opera, with the soprano shrieking on and on, flailing about madly, coughing and clutching her throat, while the audience sits there, willing it to end, saying a silent prayer: “Please let it stop. Get her off! Please…”

It was painful watching the Prime Minister in the Commons on Tuesday, it really was. And not just because that familiar voice with a hesitant scratch in it had deteriorated to the same Dalek croak that wrecked her speech to the Conservative Party Conference back in 2017. The second defeat of Theresa May’s Brexit Bill was not as bad as the first, but defeat by a 149 vote margin against would still count as a pulverising loss under normal circumstances. That charade of a last-minute dash to Strasbourg, to make it look like a major breakthrough had been achieved, failed abysmally. No one believes her anymore. Britain has had more fake climaxes than a Bangkok brothel.

What should be high drama registers merely as pantomime. Mrs May can’t even rely on close advisers. At least Tony Blair was able to twist his Attorney General’s arm to say the Iraq War was legal. Geoffrey Cox refused to compromise his integrity by giving a view on the latest amendments which would have convinced enough Brexiteers that the UK would not be trapped indefinitely in the backstop. Margaret Thatcher famously said, “Every prime minister needs a Willie.” Poor friendless Theresa only has a detumescent Cox’s codpiece.

It’s obvious the EU top brass know how appallingly weak she is, this leader without the support of her own Parliament whose own ministers are revving up to grab poll position in a leadership contest. Sitting next to her on Monday night, Jean-Claude Juncker casually revealed who was boss. This was a second chance for the UK, he said, if we didn’t take it there could be “no Brexit at all”. If looks could kill, the PM would have had a knife to the old soak’s throat. A gallant bow and a kiss for her from Michel Barnier was deceptively fond. He probably did it to pass on a virus; literally a Frog in her throat.

On Tuesday night, the PM acted once again as if this catastrophic rejection of her deal, unleashing a surreal new level of crisis, was nothing to do with her. Her detachment is inhuman. For a while, Theresa’s May’s secretiveness, her awkward, recessive manner, made us think she must have hidden depths. (Surely, there was a masterplan we weren’t privy to?) Now we know for sure she is no Machiavelli. She has no cards. The Empress is wearing no clothes, except for a statement necklace. An only child married to another only child, her interpersonal skills are non-existent. She can’t communicate, can’t build bridges, forge cross-party alliances, she can’t unite her own Cabinet let alone the country. So what is the point of her? Leadership requires a leader, and this one has been missing in action far too long. If you have suffered two of the biggest Commons defeats in a generation, just maybe people are trying to tell you something, Prime Minister?

It won’t be easy getting this self-declared “bloody difficult woman” to step aside. She continues to think she’s the answer, when actually she’s the problem. I asked one senior Tory yesterday what would happen if someone was brave enough to hand Theresa the metaphorical revolver. “She’d shoot the messenger,” he replied glumly.

The Conservative Party must take some of the blame. Foolishly, they hung onto Theresa May after a disastrous election performance and then allowed her to survive a vote of no confidence. No one wanted to be the assassin because he who strikes the queen won’t inherit the Crown. That was cowardly. Now Parliament grows ever more like a funfair train with a ghost driver at the wheel, careering round the track in mad circles.

It has to stop. We need a bold new leader who can enter 21 months of EU negotiations with guts, vision and fire in their belly, and, if necessary, lead the Conservatives into a victorious general election, which is probably what it will take to get this mess sorted out.

They say that Philip May will tell his wife when it’s time to go. She trusts him like she trusts no one else. On Tuesday night, I very much hope that the exhausted PM had a hot bath and a hot toddy. Nobody would begrudge her that. Her sense of duty is exemplary, but she is the wrong person for the job – and if she stays, she may destroy the party she loves.

If Philip could have a gentle word in her ear, he should tell her the moment is now. 

[Palfy]

Back to the people for me 4 options in out Mays deal and give Olga citizenship problem over. 

[MikeO]

6 hours ago, Chach said:

I find those kind of responses you posted embarrassing to point I wish I had less capacity for empathy, they're whatever the thing one higher than cringe inducing is.

Piers Morgan disciples.

Missed the Piers Morgan reference because I was sat in the dentist's waiting room when I replied so not sure it was directed at me. No matter, but just to clarify (if it was directed at me) that you couldn't be more wrong; I spend no time watching gameshows or breakfast TV so I have no interest in his opinions or his methods of putting them across. Plainly you'd need to be blind not to have noted his fame/notoriety/opprobrium come to your attention if you have any interest in current affairs but I've spent 7/8 hours watching the live feed from from parliament over the last couple of days and absolutely zero time watching TVAM or whatever they're now called.

Hope you don't find this embarrassing, perhaps you watch him a lot; each to their own.

[MikeO]

On another note, the amount of members playing with their mobiles is a disgrace whatever they're doing, future of the country at stake and half of them are on whatssap or whatever.

[rubecula]

30 minutes ago, MikeO said:

On another note, the amount of members playing with their mobiles is a disgrace whatever they're doing, future of the country at stake and half of them are on whatssap or whatever.

fully agree mike  they need a bloody good clearout imo

 

[Chach]

13 hours ago, Matt said:

Which was nothing  

Yep, so you can't blame her for not achieving what couldn't be achieved which is why I find the armchair analysis from the peanut gallery so cringe inducing.

Regardless of party politics/bias, I think its hard to make a case that she hasn't done her best to try and minimize the harm that will come from Brexit. 

The day after day humiliation of going back to the EU, cap in hand, I don't think a blokes ego would let him do it which is why Cameron fucked off, and she kept the Brexiteers at bay.

[Chach]

7 hours ago, MikeO said:

Missed the Piers Morgan reference because I was sat in the dentist's waiting room when I replied so not sure it was directed at me. No matter, but just to clarify (if it was directed at me) that you couldn't be more wrong; I spend no time watching gameshows or breakfast TV so I have no interest in his opinions or his methods of putting them across. Plainly you'd need to be blind not to have noted his fame/notoriety/opprobrium come to your attention if you have any interest in current affairs but I've spent 7/8 hours watching the live feed from from parliament over the last couple of days and absolutely zero time watching TVAM or whatever they're now called.

Hope you don't find this embarrassing, perhaps you watch him a lot; each to their own.

I follow people on twitter I find reprehensible to make sure I don't live in an echo chamber of my own making.

I'd be more embarrassed if I'd spent all day reading the live feed and my analysis was "its all the woman's fault"

Like you say though, each to their own

[MikeO]

4 hours ago, Chach said:

Yep, so you can't blame her for not achieving what couldn't be achieved which is why I find the armchair analysis from the peanut gallery so cringe inducing.

Regardless of party politics/bias, I think its hard to make a case that she hasn't done her best to try and minimize the harm that will come from Brexit. 

The day after day humiliation of going back to the EU, cap in hand, I don't think a blokes ego would let him do it which is why Cameron fucked off, and she kept the Brexiteers at bay.

 

4 hours ago, Chach said:

I follow people on twitter I find reprehensible to make sure I don't live in an echo chamber of my own making.

I'd be more embarrassed if I'd spent all day reading the live feed and my analysis was "its all the woman's fault"

Like you say though, each to their own

Can you point out to me where I said anything was her fault? She was left, after Cameron jumped ship (as you say) and all the leading Brexiteers scuttled for cover because they never expected to win and knew they couldn't deliver what they promised, with an impossible task. She had to attempt to achieve something she campaigned against and didn't believe in (actually she didn't have to put herself forward but she chose to for whatever reason).

I agree that she's tried to minimise the harm of this whole fiasco but she's failed, as anyone would have done, because her party is so entrenched in opposing camps. The fault lies solely with Cameron for promising the referendum in the first place.

[Matt]

I’m trying to enjoy the irony of parliament being allowed multiple votes on a difficult topic with hindsight and much more information of the consequences, but the people who they keep saying chose this (no one did) don’t deserve another say. 

Honestly, we need a revolution in terms of politics 

[Cornish Steve]

4 hours ago, MikeO said:

 

Can you point out to me where I said anything was her fault? She was left, after Cameron jumped ship (as you say) and all the leading Brexiteers scuttled for cover because they never expected to win and knew they couldn't deliver what they promised, with an impossible task. She had to attempt to achieve something she campaigned against and didn't believe in (actually she didn't have to put herself forward but she chose to for whatever reason).

I agree that she's tried to minimise the harm of this whole fiasco but she's failed, as anyone would have done, because her party is so entrenched in opposing camps. The fault lies solely with Cameron for promising the referendum in the first place.

I can't find fault with asking the general population for their opinion and vote. The fault really lies with how fickle and easily swayed the general population has become. (And I admit that I would have voted for Brexit but, as I mentioned at the time, as a way to gain some leverage against the flood of non-financial rules being imposed on the country. I never thought the country would actually leave - and it still may not.)

[Louis]

Quote

 

John Bercow, the speaker, says he is calling four amendments, plus an amendment to an amendment.

They are:

1) Sarah Wollaston’s - calling for an extension to article 50 to allow for time for a referendum on Brexit.

2) Hilary Benn’s - saying next Wednesday should be set aside for a debate that would start the process of allowing MPs to hold indicative votes on Brexit alternatives. There is also an amendment to this amendment, from Labour’s Lucy Powell, changing the timing.

3) Labour’s - saying article 50 should be extended to allow time for MPs to find a majority for a different approach to Brexit.

4) Chris Bryant’s - saying Theresa May should not be allowed to put her deal to the Commons again.

 

 

[MikeO]

33 minutes ago, Cornish Steve said:

I can't find fault with asking the general population for their opinion and vote. The fault really lies with how fickle and easily swayed the general population has become. (And I admit that I would have voted for Brexit but, as I mentioned at the time, as a way to gain some leverage against the flood of non-financial rules being imposed on the country. I never thought the country would actually leave - and it still may not.)

It's a view but where do you draw the line? Who decides what the public get asked about by the people they elected to make decisions for them? Also fair enough asking for opinion (which is actually what they did) but then insisting on acting on that opinion when it's almost certainly going to be a disaster and the majority of elected members don't want to do it at all, never did and probably never will. If the "will of the people" at a given moment in time is sacrosanct then why to we have an election every five years? Because people change their minds when promises, pledges and policy become reality.

[Formby]

5 hours ago, MikeO said:

 The fault lies solely with Cameron for promising the referendum in the first place.

For what reason, though? There have been eleven other referenda since 1973 and none have come close to creating such a mess. Should he have been prescient enough to realise this? If so, are there questions that politicians should never put to the general population as we are likely to get it wrong (if there is such a thing)? I think that's a dangerous way of thinking and, seeing how parliament has dealt with Brexit, voting on tribal party lines and treating us all with considerable disdain, I don't think a vote by plebiscite could do any worse. Cameron may very well have offered the referendum on party political grounds (trying to silence the Eurosceptics), but he was definitely a Remainer and warned against leaving. It would have been impossible to leave without offering the public a say. I think Parliament shoulders the blame. It has utterly failed us, and probably the civil servants, too. I have no time for May - she should have resigned, or been forced out, months ago - absolutely inept and made worse by her arrogant intransigence. From the day after the referendum vote, all parties should have sat around the table and worked out what they wanted. They should have agreed amongst themselves before approaching the EU. They still haven't now and they probably won't even after an extension. It's an absolute farce and the joke's on us.     

[MikeO]

30 minutes ago, Formby said:

For what reason, though? There have been eleven other referenda since 1973 and none have come close to creating such a mess. Should he have been prescient enough to realise this? If so, are there questions that politicians should never put to the general population as we are likely to get it wrong (if there is such a thing)? I think that's a dangerous way of thinking and, seeing how parliament has dealt with Brexit, voting on tribal party lines and treating us all with considerable disdain, I don't think a vote by plebiscite could do any worse. Cameron may very well have offered the referendum on party political grounds (trying to silence the Eurosceptics), but he was definitely a Remainer and warned against leaving. It would have been impossible to leave without offering the public a say. I think Parliament shoulders the blame. It has utterly failed us, and probably the civil servants, too. I have no time for May - she should have resigned, or been forced out, months ago - absolutely inept and made worse by her arrogant intransigence. From the day after the referendum vote, all parties should have sat around the table and worked out what they wanted. They should have agreed amongst themselves before approaching the EU. They still haven't now and they probably won't even after an extension. It's an absolute farce and the joke's on us.     

There has only been one UK wide referendum since 1973, the rest were regional (Wales, Scotland, NI & London) and that was on electoral reform. Both the main parties opposed it (turkeys don't vote for Christmas) and unsurprisingly it lost 68/32%.

Worth noting that if we had reformed the way we vote we might have had the sort of government (all parties sat around the table) that you suggest might have handled this mess more adeptly. 

Cameron? Maybe I'm being harsh to blame him personally but I need someone to get angry with, can only spend so much time shouting at people on the radio.

 

[MikeO]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47614074

Oh the irony.

'Conservative MP James Gray, who plans to vote for the deal after rejecting it twice, said he was "absolutely furious"'

[Matt]

44 minutes ago, MikeO said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47614074

Oh the irony.

'Conservative MP James Gray, who plans to vote for the deal after rejecting it twice, said he was "absolutely furious"'

Wouldn’t be surprised if they try and rush a law through to revoke the old one so they can have this third vote on the same thing and lose it. 

[johnh]

14 hours ago, Matt said:

Wouldn’t be surprised if they try and rush a law through to revoke the old one so they can have this third vote on the same thing and lose it. 

Matt, I see the dictatorial jackboot of the EU is on the throat of Switzerland.

[Matt]

2 hours ago, johnh said:

Matt, I see the dictatorial jackboot of the EU is on the throat of Switzerland.

Oh? I’ve not heard anything. You mean this?

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-eu-relations_parliament-sets-conditions-on-further-eu-payments/44833094

think you’ll find that’s Switzerland with the upper hand of the negotiations, trying for something that benefits of both sides. Hardly a boot on the throat  

it seems the Swiss recognises that making the EU stronger means their biggest trading partner becomes more wealthy, meaning more trade possibilities and more money for the Swiss... if only the UK had some foresight past their own party issues...

[holystove]

4 hours ago, johnh said:

Matt, I see the dictatorial jackboot of the EU is on the throat of Switzerland.

Shouldn't you be marching?  Near Wetherby today.

[Matt]

https://thehill.com/policy/international/434548-frances-eu-minister-names-her-cat-brexit-because-when-she-opens-the-door

[Palfy]

On 18/03/2019 at 18:27, MikeO said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47614074

Oh the irony.

'Conservative MP James Gray, who plans to vote for the deal after rejecting it twice, said he was "absolutely furious"'

He's my MP I hope you feel sympathetic towards me, now you know the sort of area I live in full of horsey okay yah's Tory heart land.

[Palfy]

As I was saying a few weeks back the extension is coming which as I said then will increase the chances of a 2nd referendum, and us remaining which will fuck Macron right off can't stand what he stands for like a big percentage of his own people the man is a snake.

[johnh]

22 hours ago, Matt said:

Oh? I’ve not heard anything. You mean this?

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-eu-relations_parliament-sets-conditions-on-further-eu-payments/44833094

think you’ll find that’s Switzerland with the upper hand of the negotiations, trying for something that benefits of both sides. Hardly a boot on the throat  

it seems the Swiss recognises that making the EU stronger means their biggest trading partner becomes more wealthy, meaning more trade possibilities and more money for the Swiss... if only the UK had some foresight past their own party issues...

The headline in the Telegraph Business said  'Switzerland holding out against EU ultimatum'.  The article states:   Switzerland is facing an excruciating squeeze.  Its old bilateral accords with the EU are no longer deemed acceptable.  Brussels wants to shut down the idiosyncratic 'Swiss  model' once and for all.  The country has until the end of June to submit to the EU's new framework agreement, or see its trading and financial access progressively cut off.  "They were given a six-month ultimatum in December said Peter Cleppe (who he?) from Open Europe in Brussels.  If the EU carries out its threat, Switzerland will see its market access revoked"   The Swiss must accept the sweeping jurisdiction of the ECJ and 'dynamic alignment' of EU legislation over migration, social security rules, and other key areas of policy.

All sounds very democratic to me.

Incidentally Matt, I remember reading some time ago about the multiple times the Swiss have rejected joining the EU in referendums.  Can't remember how many, 5 or 6 from memory. The EU never get the message, do they.

 

[holystove]

1 hour ago, johnh said:

The headline in the Telegraph Business said  'Switzerland holding out against EU ultimatum'.  The article states:   Switzerland is facing an excruciating squeeze.  Its old bilateral accords with the EU are no longer deemed acceptable.  Brussels wants to shut down the idiosyncratic 'Swiss  model' once and for all.  The country has until the end of June to submit to the EU's new framework agreement, or see its trading and financial access progressively cut off.  "They were given a six-month ultimatum in December said Peter Cleppe (who he?) from Open Europe in Brussels.  If the EU carries out its threat, Switzerland will see its market access revoked"   The Swiss must accept the sweeping jurisdiction of the ECJ and 'dynamic alignment' of EU legislation over migration, social security rules, and other key areas of policy.

All sounds very democratic to me.

Incidentally Matt, I remember reading some time ago about the multiple times the Swiss have rejected joining the EU in referendums.  Can't remember how many, 5 or 6 from memory. The EU never get the message, do they.

 

Pieter Cleppe is a Belgian eurosceptic.  One of those guys you go to if you want a negative EU-quote from a non-English person.

I think you are holding the EU very strange and oddly high standards.  If a country chooses not to be an EU member, it is undemocratic of the EU to deny them the benefits of membership?