Saturday, December 3rd & Sunday, December 4th 2016

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 8:49 am

Good morfternoon.

Post by **adam** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 9:02 am

A labour policy on Europe and the vote to leave

1. Never forget we are in this ridiculous situation because stupid worthless David Cameron and his stupid worthless government put us here. He couldn't keep his party together without promising a referendum. He set up a 'plurality' threshold - not even a majority of the votes cast when you take spoils and so on into account, just the biggest number. Other countries around the world set all sorts of enhanced criteria for groundbreaking decisions like this - the classic example is the US which needs two thirds of both houses of congress and two thirds of the states to amend the constitution. No voting level threshold, no percentage of the electorate threshold, no enhanced majority threshold to change something as fundamental as this. Ridiculous.

2. There was a straight remain/leave vote and we voted to leave. Amongst a great deal of supposition and speculation this is that rare thing, a fact, that cannot be avoided or elided.

3. The referendum was an advisory one. It is perfectly possible to pass a law for a referendum to be binding - the Act in the last parliament for the PR referendum set up a binding referendum - it passed PR into law but the enactment of the passing was dependent up a yes vote in the referendum. Parliament could have done exactly the same this time. Parliament didn't. It was an advisory referendum and Parliament is sovereign.

4. Another problem with the form of the referendum given to us by useless worthless David Cameron and his useless worthless government is that with a cross-party campaign to leave from people inside and outside of parliament and government there is no 'party' to carry forward the result. The government, as well as Parliament, have been advised and now must act on that advice as they see fit. If we are to revisit referenda in the future, and if we appoint 'official' campaign organisations for different sides, then perhaps we should demand a clear 'manifesto' from each.

5. And another problem, again particularly with worthless, useless David Cameron and his worthless, useless government, is that during the campaign he stood up for party unity over and above the national interest or the argument and side he was supposedly pursuing in the campaign. He refused to condemn the complete nonsense spouted by his cabinet colleagues and their fellow travelers in the leave campaign. Cameron is good at assertive and disgusted contempt - look at how has always responded to the Labour party. Leave deserved assertive and disgusted contempt for the complete nonsense (at best) of their campaign but Cameron wouldn't get involved.

6. Now we are here, with the fact of a vote to leave, some things are exactly as the Remain campaign, and particularly Labour within the Remain campaign, said they would be. There is no membership of the single market without the four freedoms. The rest of the EU do not need us economically more than we need them. The rest of the EU also are committed to the European project and will do everything in the manner of our leaving to dissuade any other country from trying to leave. Our new government of worthless useless liars either know this and don't care, and are pretending that things are not as they are, or are astonishingly stupid. Their policy and plan appears to still be 'we are going to get absolutely everything we want and we aren't going to give anything away that we don't want to'. We will eat our cake but still have it.

7. It is worth adding here, as people argue about what leave actually means, that if we knew anything at all about the situation during the campaign we knew exactly what leave would mean, it would mean what I've said about the rest of the EU's position in the last paragraph. Speculation about what people might have been voting for really doesn't matter at all - there was a binary question, we voted to leave and leave was always going to mean no single market without four freedoms and no help making things easy.

8. Just as we argued through the referendum campaign, leaving will be economically socially and politically disastrous and we shouldn't do it. But we have to accept the fact that there has been a vote to leave.

9. So, firstly, we will work inside and outside of parliament to continue to argue in favour of EU membership and we will do our duty, even in opposition with a minority vote in Parliament, to stand up for the country's best interests as the matter goes through parliament.

10. And secondly, nothing is forever, and everybody should be clear that we will seek a mandate in the next general election to abandon this destructive movement and remain in the EU. If necessary - although it seems hugely unlikely to be resolved by 2020 - we will seek a mandate to rejoin.

Post by **adam** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 9:13 am

TL:DR?

We should not leave the EU. We will campaign in the next GE for a mandate to stay or rejoin.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 9:40 am

In a speech to the Party of European Socialists, the Labour leader said:

“It can be hard to make clear that our public services are being run down because of years of austerity and predatory privatisation, rather than overspending and government waste, but it is vital that we do. (Guardian)

It can't be that hard, surely? It's a fairly simple message with plenty of evidence to back it up. So keep it simple.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... rn-top-mps

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 9:43 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:From the BBC
Utterly and completely pitiful.

So Labour will propose an amendment but vote for the Bill anyway once it is defeated.
He didn't say they'd vote for it to be fair.

Read it again.

The one and only issue is tbe vote.

Will the Labour party vote against triggering Art 50, or will it give the government a blank chequ That is all that matters.

So after the amendment inevitably fails, will Labour vote against?

No. It will vote for.

All the rest is just handwaving rubbish.

It deserves nothing but contempt.

I expect the likes of Ed Miliband to vote against Art 50, even while Corbyn votes for.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 9:52 am

Jim Pickard
‏@PickardJE

Apparently Nuttall planning to stand in Leigh by-election after Burnham steps down: that will be a big test of Corbyn's Labour vs Ukip.

As has been pointed out, Leigh has been Labour for 94 years and UKIP managed 20% in 2015. Nuttall himself only managed 11% as a high in Bootle where he grew up.

Risky to say the least - embarrassing if he lost badly.

Apparently there's some question about Nuttall falsely claiming for a PhD...

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 10:34 am

I think he believes his own hype tbh, but with so many hacks cynically blowing smoke up his posterior is that a surprise?

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 11:12 am

Proof positive we now live in a "post truth" world.

The political editor of the Sun (yes the Sun) has just accused the BBC of misreporting on the Andrew Neil show.

Oh the irony!

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 11:31 am

adam wrote:TL:DR?

We should not leave the EU. We will campaign in the next GE for a mandate to stay or rejoin.

This is the Libdem position and the Greens. Both have said so clearly since the referendum. If you support remaining in the EU, voting for either the Libdems or Greens is easy, as you know their position will always be aligned with your own. With the Libdems it's their position on other things that's a problem and with the Greens the issue is the probability of a wasted vote.

Meanwhile Labour are sending out a plethora of mixed signals and are in a really bad place. A parliamentary party of mostly remainers is led by a longstanding Eurosceptic. Labour voting constituencies are either firmly remain city regions or firmly leave ex-industrial regions, with little chance of ploughing a path to the satisfaction of both.

Strategically taking a pro-Brexit stance would be difficult for Labour because they campaigned for remain, so Brexit supporters are unlikely to trust them to achieve an acceptable Brexit as much as they trust the Tories (hence the Tories high polling currently, , one suspects). Embracing a strong pro-remain stance is also not going to happen with Corbyn constantly pointing out all the things he dislikes about the EU and single market, pushing the debate towards a hard Brexit.

As such, the only chance for a Labour revival seems to be a long way in the future when Brexit is complete or Corbyn is no longer leader. If Labour can maintain local support and make inroads at council level, where the EU is less relevant, this is possible, but it also seems possible that Labour may never recover. Once loyal voters go elsewhere on an issue such as this they break a habit and having done so, may never come back as they adjust to the idea of being a floating voter. One can only hope this also happens with remain supporting Tory voters but there's not much sign of this yet.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 12:01 pm

And it is easy for the LibDems and Greens to say that, less so for Labour. People should at least appreciate this.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 12:29 pm

Good-afternoon, everyone.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 12:34 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:And it is easy for the LibDems and Greens to say that, less so for Labour. People should at least appreciate this.

It's easy because their MPs and voters pre-dominantly believe it. What I appreciate is that the leader of Labour believes in Lexit and some Labour voters believe in Brexit. That's fair enough, but then that leaves me questioning if I'm in the right party as those leading it and some of the voters who are necessary to make voting Labour not a wasted vote believe in significantly different things to me. As Labour can't bridge the divide between their urban remain voters and their provincial leave voters and therefore do not currently represent a viable alternative government in our FPTP system, my vote for them becomes wasted as they neither represent a genuine chance to gain power or represent clear and unequivocal opposition to a government intent on a hard Brexit that I personally oppose. Understanding why Labour are in an impossible position doesn't change the fact they are in an impossible position. Labour members voted for Corbyn because they wanted to oppose austerity, but austerity is yesterday's battle. Todays battle is the UK's position in Europe and Corbyn is not a good leader on this issue. How can I put my trust in someone who has long supported Brexit when I'm pro-EU? I can't.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 12:46 pm

Fidel Castro...kept his name off public sites during his time in office because he said he wanted to avoid the development of a cult of personality.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... other-raul" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think this is probably true. Outside Cuba, I'd have never known it given how promiscuously his name and image got thrown into my face by mainstream media.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 12:48 pm

Willow904 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:And it is easy for the LibDems and Greens to say that, less so for Labour. People should at least appreciate this.
It's easy because their MPs and voters pre-dominantly believe it. What I appreciate is that the leader of Labour believes in Lexit and some Labour voters believe in Brexit. That's fair enough, but then that leaves me questioning if I'm in the right party as those leading it and some of the voters who are necessary to make voting Labour not a wasted vote believe in significantly different things to me. As Labour can't bridge the divide between their urban remain voters and their provincial leave voters and therefore do not currently represent a viable alternative government in our FPTP system, my vote for them becomes wasted as they neither represent a genuine chance to gain power or represent clear and unequivocal opposition to a government intent on a hard Brexit that I personally oppose. Understanding why Labour are in an impossible position doesn't change the fact they are in an impossible position. Labour members voted for Corbyn because they wanted to oppose austerity, but austerity is yesterday's battle. Todays battle is the UK's position in Europe and Corbyn is not a good leader on this issue. How can I put my trust in someone who has long supported Brexit when I'm pro-EU? I can't.

Hear hear

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 12:50 pm

adam wrote:TL:DR?

We should not leave the EU. We will campaign in the next GE for a mandate to stay or rejoin.

Yes, agreed.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 1:03 pm

citizenJA wrote:
Fidel Castro...kept his name off public sites during his time in office because he said he wanted to avoid the development of a cult of personality.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... other-raul" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I think this is probably true. Outside Cuba, I'd have never known it given how promiscuously his name and image got thrown into my face by mainstream media.

I grew up around people telling me he nothing but a fiendish dictator. I had to find out for myself years later his leadership
coincided with Cubans living longer, healthier lives instead of dying before their first birthday. I detest being lied to.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 1:08 pm

The Tory party could lose the next general election if Theresa May alienates its core of moderate supporters
by imitating Ukip and pushing through a hard Brexit, a group of former Conservative ministers and MPs says.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... rn-top-mps" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Destabilising the UK economy by bailing out of social and economic trade agreements in place for decades could make people decidedly peevish, yes.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 1:12 pm

@Willow904

Although I don't think that austerity is yesterday's argument. Just that many Labour "Out" voters think that coming out of the EU will somehow end it. Which it won't, since the Conservatives are wedded to it.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 1:13 pm

Isles of Scilly’s only secondary school placed in special measures – what now?

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/isles-of-scill ... ign=buffer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 1:19 pm

PorFavor wrote:@Willow904

Although I don't think that austerity is yesterday's argument. Just that many Labour "Out" voters think that coming out of the EU will somehow end it. Which it won't, since the Conservatives are wedded to it.

But Tories said they'd stop austerity now, PorFavor. Came right out and said so. And people trust Tories they do, they do,
people trust Tories, they do. We're told all the time that people trust Tories because people trust Tories, they do.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 1:20 pm

Willow904 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:And it is easy for the LibDems and Greens to say that, less so for Labour. People should at least appreciate this.
It's easy because their MPs and voters pre-dominantly believe it. What I appreciate is that the leader of Labour believes in Lexit and some Labour voters believe in Brexit. That's fair enough, but then that leaves me questioning if I'm in the right party as those leading it and some of the voters who are necessary to make voting Labour not a wasted vote believe in significantly different things to me. As Labour can't bridge the divide between their urban remain voters and their provincial leave voters and therefore do not currently represent a viable alternative government in our FPTP system, my vote for them becomes wasted as they neither represent a genuine chance to gain power or represent clear and unequivocal opposition to a government intent on a hard Brexit that I personally oppose. Understanding why Labour are in an impossible position doesn't change the fact they are in an impossible position. Labour members voted for Corbyn because they wanted to oppose austerity, but austerity is yesterday's battle. Todays battle is the UK's position in Europe and Corbyn is not a good leader on this issue. How can I put my trust in someone who has long supported Brexit when I'm pro-EU? I can't.

Vote Green.

Easy.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 1:21 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Isles of Scilly’s only secondary school placed in special measures – what now?

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/isles-of-scill ... ign=buffer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Put them youngins in work
that's the only education they need

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 1:23 pm

My spell-checker wanted to change 'youngins' into 'scroungers'.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 1:24 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:And it is easy for the LibDems and Greens to say that, less so for Labour. People should at least appreciate this.
It's easy because their MPs and voters pre-dominantly believe it. What I appreciate is that the leader of Labour believes in Lexit and some Labour voters believe in Brexit. That's fair enough, but then that leaves me questioning if I'm in the right party as those leading it and some of the voters who are necessary to make voting Labour not a wasted vote believe in significantly different things to me. As Labour can't bridge the divide between their urban remain voters and their provincial leave voters and therefore do not currently represent a viable alternative government in our FPTP system, my vote for them becomes wasted as they neither represent a genuine chance to gain power or represent clear and unequivocal opposition to a government intent on a hard Brexit that I personally oppose. Understanding why Labour are in an impossible position doesn't change the fact they are in an impossible position. Labour members voted for Corbyn because they wanted to oppose austerity, but austerity is yesterday's battle. Todays battle is the UK's position in Europe and Corbyn is not a good leader on this issue. How can I put my trust in someone who has long supported Brexit when I'm pro-EU? I can't.

Vote Green.

Easy.

Easiest way to get Tories in government, after the don't vote at all option.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 1:28 pm

citizenJA wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
Willow904 wrote: It's easy because their MPs and voters pre-dominantly believe it. What I appreciate is that the leader of Labour believes in Lexit and some Labour voters believe in Brexit. That's fair enough, but then that leaves me questioning if I'm in the right party as those leading it and some of the voters who are necessary to make voting Labour not a wasted vote believe in significantly different things to me. As Labour can't bridge the divide between their urban remain voters and their provincial leave voters and therefore do not currently represent a viable alternative government in our FPTP system, my vote for them becomes wasted as they neither represent a genuine chance to gain power or represent clear and unequivocal opposition to a government intent on a hard Brexit that I personally oppose. Understanding why Labour are in an impossible position doesn't change the fact they are in an impossible position. Labour members voted for Corbyn because they wanted to oppose austerity, but austerity is yesterday's battle. Todays battle is the UK's position in Europe and Corbyn is not a good leader on this issue. How can I put my trust in someone who has long supported Brexit when I'm pro-EU? I can't.

Vote Green.

Easy.
Easiest way to get Tories in government, after the don't vote at all option.

No. The Tories will win anyway. The likelihood of a Labour party led by Corbyn and McDonnell getting anywhere near power is precisely zero.

So vote as a matter of principle instead.

Vote Green.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 1:34 pm

Brexit: What Next? Maybe No Exit At All…

https://www.socialeurope.eu/2016/11/bre ... aybe-none/#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 1:51 pm

'as a matter of principle' !

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 2:07 pm

Hmm.
Corbyn campaigned for Remain in the referendum. He has criticised the EU in the past. Those are the bald facts.
And pace SH, Willow et al, the worst thing for Labour to do at present is to take firm stances. The road to March 2017 is like a winding alpine road with sheer drops and hairpins; and there's a thick fog. Yet some of you want Labour to drive down it at 100 mph. The leadership is right to be vague and ambiguous until it needs to take a stand. At least wait for the SC decision and allow the horrors of brexit as long as possible to seep into the public consciousness.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 2:11 pm

citizenJA wrote:'as a matter of principle' !

"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others."

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 2:17 pm

frightful_oik wrote:Hmm.
Corbyn campaigned for Remain in the referendum. He has criticised the EU in the past. Those are the bald facts.
And pace SH, Willow et al, the worst thing for Labour to do at present is to take firm stances. The road to March 2017 is like a winding alpine road with sheer drops and hairpins; and there's a thick fog. Yet some of you want Labour to drive down it at 100 mph. The leadership is right to be vague and ambiguous until it needs to take a stand. At least wait for the SC decision and allow the horrors of brexit as long as possible to seep into the public consciousness.

Spot on IMHO

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 2:27 pm

Just a thought. Which is likely to happen sooner, Brexit or charging in the NHS?

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 2:38 pm

frightful_oik wrote:Hmm.
Corbyn campaigned for Remain in the referendum. He has criticised the EU in the past. Those are the bald facts.
And pace SH, Willow et al, the worst thing for Labour to do at present is to take firm stances. The road to March 2017 is like a winding alpine road with sheer drops and hairpins; and there's a thick fog. Yet some of you want Labour to drive down it at 100 mph. The leadership is right to be vague and ambiguous until it needs to take a stand. At least wait for the SC decision and allow the horrors of brexit as long as possible to seep into the public consciousness.

You're talking about tactics as if we all know what Labour's ultimate best case scenario is and we're all in agreement on it. That's simply not the case. Some Labour supporters want to leave the EU and single market entirely and some want to remain in, as much as is feasible. The party can only operate in the interests of one group or another, whether overtly or covertly and I find myself unable to put blind trust in a lifelong Eurosceptic to work effectively to achieve the latter when he has always been in support of the former. I don't trust Corbyn to take the right stands when it comes to it, because he has previously said so many things on the EU that lead me to believe we want completely different things on this particular issue. While we wait to see what stand Labour may eventually decide to take, the hard Brexiters are busy building the narrative that only leaving the single market will fulfill the referendum mandate. If this idea takes hold, then even if MPs do want to go for the single market 'Norway' option, it will be hard to win public support because neither the Tories or Labour are putting in the legwork to convince the public a single market option is the best choice. As for the horrors of Brexit seeping in, surely this will only really hit home once we have left, by which point our direction of travel - hard or soft Brexit - may well already be set.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 2:44 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Just a thought. Which is likely to happen sooner, Brexit or charging in the NHS?

I'm hoping a collapse in property prices comes first, that way we have a chance of getting the Tories out before they destroy everything!

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:02 pm

Willow904 wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:Hmm.
Corbyn campaigned for Remain in the referendum. He has criticised the EU in the past. Those are the bald facts.
And pace SH, Willow et al, the worst thing for Labour to do at present is to take firm stances. The road to March 2017 is like a winding alpine road with sheer drops and hairpins; and there's a thick fog. Yet some of you want Labour to drive down it at 100 mph. The leadership is right to be vague and ambiguous until it needs to take a stand. At least wait for the SC decision and allow the horrors of brexit as long as possible to seep into the public consciousness.
You're talking about tactics as if we all know what Labour's ultimate best case scenario is and we're all in agreement on it. That's simply not the case. Some Labour supporters want to leave the EU and single market entirely and some want to remain in, as much as is feasible.

Absolutely wrong I'm afraid. My point about the fog was that it's a path strewn with unknown twists. As for the narrative, the gov will have to give some kind of indication of where they're headed or look even more clueless than they do now. EU leaders will then point out the implications of that course. Of course if you don't trust Corbyn your vote will go elsewhere just the same as mine would if any of the no-marks in the rebellious PLP were leading Labour.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:17 pm

frightful_oik wrote:Hmm.
Corbyn campaigned for Remain in the referendum. He has criticised the EU in the past. Those are the bald facts.
And pace SH, Willow et al, the worst thing for Labour to do at present is to take firm stances. The road to March 2017 is like a winding alpine road with sheer drops and hairpins; and there's a thick fog. Yet some of you want Labour to drive down it at 100 mph. The leadership is right to be vague and ambiguous until it needs to take a stand. At least wait for the SC decision and allow the horrors of brexit as long as possible to seep into the public consciousness.

Labour's position is extremely firm and clear.

It will vote for article 50 regardless.

My objection to that is not lack of clarity. It is that it is hopelessly wrong.

(I'd expect many like Miliband to vote against, but without a party position to, say, vote against art 50 without single market *membership* guarantees, the government can do as it likes.)

We can tell what Corbyn and McDonnell think about the EU from their words and actions. They've spent their careers arguing it is a capitalist ramp.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:20 pm

Silly season seems to be arriving now, with "Rees Mogg set to defect to UKIP" apparently in some papers today

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:24 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:Hmm.
Corbyn campaigned for Remain in the referendum. He has criticised the EU in the past. Those are the bald facts.
And pace SH, Willow et al, the worst thing for Labour to do at present is to take firm stances. The road to March 2017 is like a winding alpine road with sheer drops and hairpins; and there's a thick fog. Yet some of you want Labour to drive down it at 100 mph. The leadership is right to be vague and ambiguous until it needs to take a stand. At least wait for the SC decision and allow the horrors of brexit as long as possible to seep into the public consciousness.

Labour's position is extremely firm and clear.

It will vote for article 50 regardless.

My objection to that is not lack of clarity. It is that it is hopelessly wrong.

(I'd expect many like Miliband to vote against, but without a party position to, say, vote against art 50 without single market *membership* guarantees, the government can do as it likes.)

We can tell what Corbyn and McDonnell think about the EU from their words and actions. They've spent their careers arguing it is a capitalist ramp.

This is quite ridiculous. One day you're complaining that the Labour position isn't firm and clear, and intolerably so, now when it suits you to say the opposite you say it's firm and clear.

The Labour party isn't attractive to you right now that's obvious, but with tactical swerves and transparent attacks like this the Greens are welcome to you IMHO

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:25 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Silly season seems to be arriving now, with "Rees Mogg set to defect to UKIP" apparently in some papers today

Why would he do that now the Tory party has pretty much caved in to the Eurosceptics? He has a safe Tory seat that will become even safer after the boundary review. I don't believe he would win as a Ukipper. The area voted in favour of remain.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:26 pm

Always remembering SH that Caroline Lucas is not really the hard Remain politician you'd like her to be and only says she's voting against Article 50 because the Tories haven't published any plans.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:30 pm

Is there actually anything wrong with this?

When it comes to Britain’s referendum vote to leave the European Union we in the Labour party respect that decision, and we want to work together with Socialist and progressive parties across Europe to find the best possible solution that benefits both Britain and the EU in the Brexit negotiations.

Labour is calling on the British Government to guarantee the rights of all EU Citizens before Article 50 negotiations begin, and not to use them as a bargaining chip in negotiations.

Labour is pushing for Brexit negotiations to be carried out in a transparent manner, in a spirit that aims to find a deal that works for all across our the [sic.] continent.

That is why I am inviting leaders from socialist and progressive parties and movements across Europe to a special conference in London in February.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:32 pm

Clinging to illusions – the blinkered elite who still think austerity works
Aditya Chakrabortty
Theresa May and her cabinet refuse to move on from ideas that hurt the poor and help the rich. It’s a collective death wish

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:36 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:]
This is quite ridiculous. One day you're complaining that the Labour position isn't firm and clear, and intolerably so, now when it suits you to say the opposite you say it's firm and clear.

The Labour party isn't attractive to you right now that's obvious, but with tactical swerves and transparent attacks like this the Greens are welcome to you IMHO

When did I say it wasn't clear? I think you are mischaracterising what I have said because you don't want to hear it.

On Friday you were trying to claim Labour's position was like that of the Greens. It isn't. The Greens oppose invoking Art 50. Labour supports invoking it, regardless.

Labour does try and obfuscate its position, I'd accept. So all the talk of "single market *access*" is nonsense of the most disgraceful kind. It means nothing. North Korea has access. What matters is membership. Similarly all the stuff about social protection is claptrap. Nothing stopping the UK keeping all those.

I have been loyal to Labour for decades, but I'm not tribalist. I'd find it immoral to vote for a party led by Corbyn and McDonnell. The EU is the most important issue of the age. That means I'll vote for the party that most closely represents my views on that. That is the Greens. The art 50 issue has clarified for me what I must do.

Labour is riven over the issue. I suspect most members aren't Lexiters like Corbyn and McDonnell, but they also don't care that much.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:37 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:Hmm.
Corbyn campaigned for Remain in the referendum. He has criticised the EU in the past. Those are the bald facts.
And pace SH, Willow et al, the worst thing for Labour to do at present is to take firm stances. The road to March 2017 is like a winding alpine road with sheer drops and hairpins; and there's a thick fog. Yet some of you want Labour to drive down it at 100 mph. The leadership is right to be vague and ambiguous until it needs to take a stand. At least wait for the SC decision and allow the horrors of brexit as long as possible to seep into the public consciousness.

Labour's position is extremely firm and clear.

It will vote for article 50 regardless.

My objection to that is not lack of clarity. It is that it is hopelessly wrong.

(I'd expect many like Miliband to vote against, but without a party position to, say, vote against art 50 without single market *membership* guarantees, the government can do as it likes.)

We can tell what Corbyn and McDonnell think about the EU from their words and actions. They've spent their careers arguing it is a capitalist ramp.
This is quite ridiculous. One day you're complaining that the Labour position isn't firm and clear, and intolerably so, now when it suits you to say the opposite you say it's firm and clear.

The Labour party isn't attractive to you right now that's obvious, but with tactical swerves and transparent attacks like this the Greens are welcome to you IMHO

This Green doesn't want him. He is basically Convolvulus from Asterix and the Roman Agent.

Post by **refitman** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:41 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:]
This is quite ridiculous. One day you're complaining that the Labour position isn't firm and clear, and intolerably so, now when it suits you to say the opposite you say it's firm and clear.

The Labour party isn't attractive to you right now that's obvious, but with tactical swerves and transparent attacks like this the Greens are welcome to you IMHO

When did I say it wasn't clear? I think you are mischaracterising what I have said because you don't want to hear it.

On Friday you were trying to claim Labour's position was like that of the Greens. It isn't. The Greens oppose invoking Art 50. Labour supports invoking it, regardless.

Labour does try and obfuscate its position, I'd accept. So all the talk of "single market *access*" is nonsense of the most disgraceful kind. It means nothing. North Korea has access. What matters is membership. Similarly all the stuff about social protection is claptrap. Nothing stopping the UK keeping all those.

I have been loyal to Labour for decades, but I'm not tribalist. I'd find it immoral to vote for a party led by Corbyn and McDonnell. The EU is the most important issue of the age. That means I'll vote for the party that most closely represents my views on that. That is the Greens. The art 50 issue has clarified for me what I must do.

Labour is riven over the issue. I suspect most members aren't Lexiters like Corbyn and McDonnell, but they also don't care that much.

Well, you do keep going on about how Corbyn says one thing, then Starmer another and McDonnell a 3rd. If that isn't saying the message is "not clear", I don't know what is.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:41 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Always remembering SH that Caroline Lucas is not really the hard Remain politician you'd like her to be and only says she's voting against Article 50 because the Tories haven't published any plans.

Which is the right position.

If the position of the government was that respect for the vote entailed leaving the EU, whilst retaining single market membership, that probably would entail respecting both the 52 and 48%.

Unlike Labour, who seem to be determined to be the party for the 0%.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:44 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:]
This is quite ridiculous. One day you're complaining that the Labour position isn't firm and clear, and intolerably so, now when it suits you to say the opposite you say it's firm and clear.

The Labour party isn't attractive to you right now that's obvious, but with tactical swerves and transparent attacks like this the Greens are welcome to you IMHO

When did I say it wasn't clear? I think you are mischaracterising what I have said because you don't want to hear it.

On Friday you were trying to claim Labour's position was like that of the Greens. It isn't. The Greens oppose invoking Art 50. Labour supports invoking it, regardless.

Labour does try and obfuscate its position, I'd accept. So all the talk of "single market *access*" is nonsense of the most disgraceful kind. It means nothing. North Korea has access. What matters is membership. Similarly all the stuff about social protection is claptrap. Nothing stopping the UK keeping all those.

I have been loyal to Labour for decades, but I'm not tribalist. I'd find it immoral to vote for a party led by Corbyn and McDonnell. The EU is the most important issue of the age. That means I'll vote for the party that most closely represents my views on that. That is the Greens. The art 50 issue has clarified for me what I must do.

Labour is riven over the issue. I suspect most members aren't Lexiters like Corbyn and McDonnell, but they also don't care that much.

Yes to this last comment.

Whereas we all care about the NHS, opposing grammar schools etc. So surely it's better to stop futile arguments about a referendum we never wanted and get on with the rest.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:47 pm

Well I'm sure SH that you and Caroline will get on just fabulously

Remind me of your views on renationalising the railways.....

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:50 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:]
This is quite ridiculous. One day you're complaining that the Labour position isn't firm and clear, and intolerably so, now when it suits you to say the opposite you say it's firm and clear.

The Labour party isn't attractive to you right now that's obvious, but with tactical swerves and transparent attacks like this the Greens are welcome to you IMHO

When did I say it wasn't clear? I think you are mischaracterising what I have said because you don't want to hear it.

On Friday you were trying to claim Labour's position was like that of the Greens. It isn't. The Greens oppose invoking Art 50. Labour supports invoking it, regardless.

Labour does try and obfuscate its position, I'd accept. So all the talk of "single market *access*" is nonsense of the most disgraceful kind. It means nothing. North Korea has access. What matters is membership. Similarly all the stuff about social protection is claptrap. Nothing stopping the UK keeping all those.

I have been loyal to Labour for decades, but I'm not tribalist. I'd find it immoral to vote for a party led by Corbyn and McDonnell. The EU is the most important issue of the age. That means I'll vote for the party that most closely represents my views on that. That is the Greens. The art 50 issue has clarified for me what I must do.

Labour is riven over the issue. I suspect most members aren't Lexiters like Corbyn and McDonnell, but they also don't care that much.
Yes to this last comment.

Whereas we all care about the NHS, opposing grammar schools etc. So surely it's better to stop futile arguments about a referendum we never wanted and get on with the rest.

No. In fact that is truly dim.

The main reason is this is happening now. Labour could do something about it (unlike say NHS funding). If it had been properly led a campaign to keep single market membership could have worked. It has chosen instead not to oppose the government in anything other than the most empty way.

Second it is to misunderstand the priorities. Grammar schools are a minor issue. There probably will only be one or two as a symbol, and if we had a change of government the policy could be reversed.

Once we are out of the single market that will be it.

Brexit has already cost each of us around £1,000, with much worse to come. The problem is that people don't understand it as it is a bit trickier to grasp than, say, NHS funding.

The scope for funding all the nice things we want has sharply deteriorated because of Brexit.

So no, Labour deserves ridicule, and we should all look for another party to support instead.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 3:53 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Well I'm sure SH that you and Caroline will get on just fabulously

Remind me of your views on renationalising the railways.....

Yeah it is a stupid policy. Guaranteed income is dim as well.

But there is no party reflecting my views on everything. The EU is so much more important than all other issues at the moment, that you have to select the party best placed on that issue. That is the Greens.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 04 Dec, 2016 4:03 pm

frightful_oik wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:Hmm.
Corbyn campaigned for Remain in the referendum. He has criticised the EU in the past. Those are the bald facts.
And pace SH, Willow et al, the worst thing for Labour to do at present is to take firm stances. The road to March 2017 is like a winding alpine road with sheer drops and hairpins; and there's a thick fog. Yet some of you want Labour to drive down it at 100 mph. The leadership is right to be vague and ambiguous until it needs to take a stand. At least wait for the SC decision and allow the horrors of brexit as long as possible to seep into the public consciousness.
You're talking about tactics as if we all know what Labour's ultimate best case scenario is and we're all in agreement on it. That's simply not the case. Some Labour supporters want to leave the EU and single market entirely and some want to remain in, as much as is feasible.
Absolutely wrong I'm afraid. My point about the fog was that it's a path strewn with unknown twists. As for the narrative, the gov will have to give some kind of indication of where they're headed or look even more clueless than they do now. EU leaders will then point out the implications of that course. Of course if you don't trust Corbyn your vote will go elsewhere just the same as mine would if any of the no-marks in the rebellious PLP were leading Labour.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying I'm absolutely wrong about. Corbyn must have an opinion on Brexit, hard or soft, whether he shares it or not. And it would be difficult, if not impossible, for me to vote for a party whose leader prefers to leave the single market. It's tricky, because I do agree with some Labour figures, such as Carwyn Jones, Sadiq Khan, Seema Malhotra and David Lammy. More so than the Libdems, who I only agree with on the EU really. And voting Green where I am is a waste of time. And Corbyn has good principles in general. I'd just like to see a more robust stand against this drift towards divisive nationalism, casting our European neighbours as the enemy we have to disentangle ourselves from, rather than our friends and allies with whom we can co-operate with to not just trade with, but look after our environment, protect human rights etc. Is it so bad of me to wish Labour, a once proud pro-EU party, stand up for all the benefits EU membership can and did bring?