Thursday 13th July 2017

[refitman]

Morning all.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

@Willow904 from yesterday

The fall of the iron curtain, the re-unification of Germany. For me this is what the EU represents - a united, rather than a divided, Europe and I have always seen the UK as a major part of that. When Polish people started to make use of their right to move freely about the EU, when they started to come to the UK, I saw that as the moment in which the rift that had divided Europe since the 2nd World War had finally healed.

This is why I'm so passionate about our membership of the EU and why I'm finding it so hard to let go. It has nothing to do with neo-liberalism or being a "Blairite". It's about thinking the freedom people from Eastern Europe now have to travel freely around the EU is a wonderful thing and my disappointment that my country will no longer be part of that wonderful thing. It really is as simple as that.

I coud not agree more.

But it's not Labour's fault that this is sliding away. Really not.

I'm every bit as passionate as you are about the EU and my work depends on it. It's not Labour's job to represent our nostalgia.

But really Willow you don't acknowledge alternative points of view much. Why not try and find something in this post you could give the time of day and respond constructively? I used to enjoy this place because it was a Forum. We discussed stuff.

It's just shit these days.

I posted the other day that we might try and encourage former members back. JA said good night. Only Anatoly acknowledged my comment I think.

There are some lovely friends here but the best stuff is the banter rather than the serious debate.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

If Labour had voted against Article 50 where would be now?

[PorFavor]

Good morfternoon.

Brexit plans could fall apart 'like a chocolate orange', says auditor general

A lack of energy and leadership in Theresa May’s government has left hopes of a successful Brexit at risk of falling apart “like a chocolate orange”, a leading government watchdog has warned.

In an extraordinary intervention that will raise the pressure on the prime minister to reassess her approach to Brexit, the comptroller and auditor general of the National Audit Office said the government had failed to take a unified approach to talks with the EU. He also revealed that a request to see a ministerial plan for the changes needed to leave the EU had been met with only “vague” assurances.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... or-general

[Willow904]

If Labour had voted against Article 50 where would be now?

I have no idea. I do know that 9m people voted for Labour in 2015 despite them refusing to offer a referendum. That's a lot of left wing votes that didn't require following a Brexit policy or promising an end to immigration.

My posts yesterday were about Eurotom, which has mysteriously come up now as an issue, despite the fact the decision to leave had already been taken. If you look at my posts, I was confused about exactly when that decision was taken and how. I asked questions, others answered. I linked to the posts I found on the subject and by the end had a better understanding of Eurotom and why we're leaving but am none the wiser about why it's coming up now. I pointed out George Osborne seemed hypocritical to be complaining about it when he, himself, had voted for it. Because apparently its a natural consequence of leaving the EU. So I'm very frustrated that this is only coming out in the media now, rather than before the vote. It's too late to oppose this particular decision now. If Labour were going to oppose the timing of our withdrawal from Eurotom they needed to do it back in March as far as I can see, or do you think I've got that wrong?

[PaulfromYorkshire]

If Labour had voted against Article 50 where would be now?

I have no idea. I do know that 9m people voted for Labour in 2015 despite them refusing to offer a referendum. That's a lot of left wing votes that didn't require following a Brexit policy or promising an end to immigration.

My posts yesterday were about Eurotom, which has mysteriously come up now as an issue, despite the fact the decision to leave had already been taken. If you look at my posts, I was confused about exactly when that decision was taken and how. I asked questions, others answered. I linked to the posts I found on the subject and by the end had a better understanding of Eurotom and why we're leaving but am none the wiser about why it's coming up now. I pointed out George Osborne seemed hypocritical to be complaining about it when he, himself, had voted for it. Because apparently its a natural consequence of leaving the EU. So I'm very frustrated that this is only coming out in the media now, rather than before the vote. It's too late to oppose this particular decision now. If Labour were going to oppose the timing of our withdrawal from Eurotom they needed to do it back in March as far as I can see, or do you think I've got that wrong?

You could have discussed all that without blaming Corbyn.

That's the trouble with this Forum.

I feel unwelcome and so do lots of other people who used to post here.

If you support Corbyn you are bullied here.

[HindleA]

"This forum is shit"part 567 to be continued,no doubt.Fucking draining,to be honest."Debate",well it comes and goes,a plethora of information and exchange about social care as an example.We all have our own obsessions.

[Willow904]

If Labour had voted against Article 50 where would be now?

I have no idea. I do know that 9m people voted for Labour in 2015 despite them refusing to offer a referendum. That's a lot of left wing votes that didn't require following a Brexit policy or promising an end to immigration.

My posts yesterday were about Eurotom, which has mysteriously come up now as an issue, despite the fact the decision to leave had already been taken. If you look at my posts, I was confused about exactly when that decision was taken and how. I asked questions, others answered. I linked to the posts I found on the subject and by the end had a better understanding of Eurotom and why we're leaving but am none the wiser about why it's coming up now. I pointed out George Osborne seemed hypocritical to be complaining about it when he, himself, had voted for it. Because apparently its a natural consequence of leaving the EU. So I'm very frustrated that this is only coming out in the media now, rather than before the vote. It's too late to oppose this particular decision now. If Labour were going to oppose the timing of our withdrawal from Eurotom they needed to do it back in March as far as I can see, or do you think I've got that wrong?

You could have discussed all that without blaming Corbyn.

That's the trouble with this Forum.

I feel unwelcome and so do lots of other people who used to post here.

If you support Corbyn you are bullied here.

How did I bully you?

And the point about Corbyn is that he very clearly, for a very long time, did not share my view of the EU, so it's very hard to have faith in his ability to represent my point of view. Which is not to say he doesn't represent other people's views or that their views don't deserve being representing. The point I come back to over and over is that some of those views are mutually exclusive and I still don't know what side he and Labour will come down on ultimately.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

"This forum is shit"part 567 to be continued,no doubt.Fucking draining,to be honest."Debate",well it comes and goes,a plethora of information and exchange about social care as an example.We all have our own obsessions.

Well said

I do appreciate all the stuff I learn here on social care and schools.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

How did I bully you?

And the point about Corbyn is that he very clearly, for a very long time, did not share my view of the EU, so it's very hard to have faith in his ability to represent my point of view. Which is not to say he doesn't represent other people's views or that their views don't deserve being representing. The point I come back to over and over is that some of those views are mutually exclusive and I still don't know what side he and Labour will come down on ultimately.

You bully because you don't acknowledge the validity of others' viewpoints.

You reply as though we are scum.

Do you understand now?

[adam]

If you support Corbyn you are bullied here.

Really?

[HindleA]

Different views.My seat went blue,I could have easilly bemoaned my long held contention that I was "doomed",and blamed Corbyn,and cursed all.those who voted for him,but specifically didn't.It is more complicated,specific outwith the simplistic narrative,a similar % Brexit vote neighbour increased his vote as an example.Banter has serious aspects as to lessening tensions etc,by the way,although mainly to maintain the level of stupidity I find necessary to survive.

[yahyah]

It is going to be one of those days.

Popped in here to find things the same as always it seems.
Just when you think it is safe to dip toes in the water.

Please don't stop posting Willow.
Disappointed to see Paul attacking you.
The problem is words typed on the page, any nuance is hard to pick up.
Positions are too polarised, if someone wants to take offence they will find what they want to see.

and to cap it all the Windows 10 Creator update has caused havoc on my laptop.
Slowed everything down. Can't type in some boxes. Arrghhh. Just when I have a lot of work to do today. Have cleaned up, checked for malware etc. fingers crossed.

Hope all you lovely peeps are ok.

[RogerOThornhill]

Morning all.

Britain must leave EU nuclear body: Verhofstadt

https://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/36357 ... adt/#page1

"In my opinion, since in the Lisbon Treaty Euratom and the EU are fully interlinked, you cannot be fully part of Euratom and not part of the European Union," Verhofstadt told MEPs.

"Because oversight of Euratom is part of the European Union, part of budget and so on," said the former Belgian prime minister, who was appointed the EU parliament's Brexit representative last year.

British Prime Minister Theresa May has said she plans to push ahead with plans to withdraw from Euratom, which oversees nuclear activity within the 28-member bloc.

But it's good that we're taking back control I guess...

[HindleA]

Check the history,it ebbs and flows.There was carnage after the "Sue Marsh took Maximarse job",crisis ;multiple fallings out,leavings which still retain.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

It is going to be one of those days.

Popped in here to find things the same as always it seems.
Just when you think it is safe to dip toes in the water.

Please don't stop posting Willow.
Disappointed to see Paul attacking you.
The problem is words typed on the page, any nuance is hard to pick up.
Positions are too polarised, if someone wants to take offence they will find what they want to see.

and to cap it all the Windows 10 Creator update has caused havoc on my laptop.
Slowed everything down. Can't type in some boxes. Arrghhh. Just when I have a lot of work to do today. Have cleaned up, checked for malware etc. fingers crossed.

Hope all you lovely peeps are ok.

Dear me

[ephemerid]

And the point about Corbyn is that he very clearly, for a very long time, did not share my view of the EU, so it's very hard to have faith in his ability to represent my point of view. Which is not to say he doesn't represent other people's views or that their views don't deserve being representing. The point I come back to over and over is that some of those views are mutually exclusive and I still don't know what side he and Labour will come down on ultimately.

Good morning, all - despite a risk that I might be accused of a "fly-by" I'd like to discuss this with Willow.

It is my view that it doesn't really matter what Corbyn thinks about the EU. On this issue, he has appointed two excellent advocates in Starmer and Thornberry to set out Labour's views and Labour's points of opposition to the government.

Corbyn may be Eurosceptic, but as with his anti-Trident views, he is prepared to support his party's policies. He is just one man - and as a democrat, he is aware that he should support the policy of his party, and that is what he does.
There are hundreds of Labour MPs and Lords; there are thousands of Labour officials and affiliates; there are hundreds of thousands of Labour members; and there are millions of Labour voters - each of them may have different ideas.

It is my view, and has been since the referendum, that Labour had no choice other than to be SEEN to accept "the will of the people". We all know that the referendum was stupidity of gargantuan proportions, we all know that the question was too binary, we all know that it only happened so that Cameron could destroy the UKIP threat and placate his backbenchers, we all know that it was an act of monumental vain folly - and we also know that the result was advisory only.
The Tories were thus not compelled to activate Article 50, but they did. Because they did, even though the vote was so close, we are going to leave the EU unless something is done to prevent it. The invocation of Article 50 means that all legislation pertaining to our membership of the EU and its many organisations is under threat, including things like Euratom. This should come as no surprise to anyone, and I'm at a loss to understand why people didn't realise this.

Labour is between a rock and hard place on this. It is impossible for them to attract members and voters if they are seen to be thwarting Brexit; had they done so, they would not have gained so many votes in the last General Election. Starmer's six-point plan for the negotiations is not a fudge as many opine - it is the only sensible thing to do when faced with this impasse.
The Tories are currently in a very weak position, and the long game that Labour have been apparently playing is coming to the fore; Starmer will fight for his six-point plan every step of the way, and if the Tory rebels actually have any conscience, it is not impossible for this government to be brought down. Better Tory governments than this one have fallen over Europe.

This is not the time for Labour to announce "what side he (Corbyn) and Labour will come down on ultimately". What Corbyn wants is not relevant, and the party was and is pro-Remain - it seems to me that Labour is plotting a very careful course through a minefield, and they deserve credit for it in my opinion.
Should there be another election, and I think there will be another one before the Article 50 cut-off point, Labour could win and the whole issue will be looked at again. It is entirely possible that Labour might decide to have another referendum, this time with better questions and hopefully with a more conclusive result.

Many Labour heartlands voted Leave. In Wales, in the North, all over the UK. It would be electoral suicide for Labour to be seen to be denying all those people what they wanted, and it makes sense to me that they have proceeded in the way they have until now. However, Starmer has signalled his intention to push hard for a softer Brexit, his six-point plan encompasses many of the issues that we are concerned about, and he will fight hard Brexit, line by line, clause by clause, page by page, every single step of the way.

Like you, Willow, I do not want us to leave the European Union. Like you, I feel very strongly that it is responsible for a lot of good. But I also believe that there are problems with it, and that we are better inside than out so that we can effect the changes we want to see.
What we have to do now is offer Labour our support through a very complex and delicate discussion on the Great Repeal Bill, and hope that Labour's approach begins to yield results. To do otherwise, as PFY pointed out, is to let the Tories loose with their venom.

Today, I am having a PIP assessment. To say I am worried is putting it mildly. For me and others like me, the EU is not the first thing that springs to mind when I consider where to cast my vote. Yes, it's important; but Corbyn has, rightly in my opinion, focussed much of his campaigning on the day-to-day problems many of us have to face in a climate of unnecessary austerity. That is why he did so well in the polls, that is why Labour gained 30 seats, and that is why there is a groundswell of support for Labour in a way we haven't seen for a very long time. And yes - Labour IS doing the right thing on Brexit for now. A day is a long time in politics.

[adam]

Willow made the point yesterday that before the Scottish Indie referendum we had white papers and detailed policy positions and clear plans for what Independence would mean and how it would attempt to work.

This time we had nothing. This is the heart of the problem - clear position papers before hand would have shaped the debate, or maybe even provoked a debate. This was a failing of all of our politicians.

It is the job of an opposition to hold government to account about these things, but overwhelmingly it was a failure on the part of the government, who forced the referendum on us, shaped its form and were always going to be the ones in power in its immediate aftermath, and of the Leave campaigns who should have been much more clear about exactly what would happen next with an acknowledgement that, at the very least, it would be complex and detailed.

[Willow904]

How did I bully you?

And the point about Corbyn is that he very clearly, for a very long time, did not share my view of the EU, so it's very hard to have faith in his ability to represent my point of view. Which is not to say he doesn't represent other people's views or that their views don't deserve being representing. The point I come back to over and over is that some of those views are mutually exclusive and I still don't know what side he and Labour will come down on ultimately.

You bully because you don't acknowledge the validity of others' viewpoints.

You reply as though we are scum.

Do you understand now?

No, not really.

I don't remember making any personal remarks about you.

A lot of communication is non verbal in nature so any discussion on an internet forum is only ever going to be half a conversation. I'm not very good at banter or small talk in real life, so I'm doubtless even less convivial when reduced to mere words, but even then, I don't really understand what remark I have addressed to you that you have interpreted as me implying you are scum. I really don't. I know what it's like to find myself in agreement with a Labour leader and trying to share my enthusiasm only for others to have reservations and criticisms, but I just kept trying to share the positives. You appear to be in a similar place with Corbyn and of course it's frustrating when others can't see what you see in someone, but it's not personal. Why do you think it personal?

[PaulfromYorkshire]

@Adam @Willow

Well why do you think everyone left?

Lots of people felt bullied here. Not just me.

Willow thanks for replying. You have never been directly aggressive with me, but nor have you EVER that I remember acknowledged that anything I have had to say on Corbyn and Brexit had any validity. When I reply to your posts and you just ignore my views it makes me feel like scum.

Maybe you think I'm a bit odd. Fair enough. But don't you miss all the other friends who have left here? I can't speak for them, but I wonder if they felt bullied too. For daring to think about Scottish independence, for daring to listen to Corbyn, for daring to explore anything but Hard Remain.

I'm as pro-Union, pro-EU and "moderate" as they come. Yet this place has made me feel unwelcome.

The trouble is that these are the topics I feel qualified to speak to. There's so much other good stuff here on social care, schools etc. that I read and learn from. But this is a Forum and I should feel free to have a voice here. I don't. Look at yahyah's horrible post above.

[adam]

I dunno, I wasn't here. People on different sides of many questions have more or less left. I'm very surprised to see the description 'YahYah's horrible post' - I honestly don't understand what you mean.

[adam]

Full results of the select committee chair elections are here.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

I dunno, I wasn't here. People on different sides of many questions have more or less left. I'm very surprised to see the description 'YahYah's horrible post' - I honestly don't understand what you mean.

Well because she weighed in on Willow's side against me.

yahyah has bullied me a lot here. There I've called it and I'm off.

Bye x

[ephemerid]

@Adam @Willow

Well why do you think everyone left?

Lots of people felt bullied here. Not just me.

Willow thanks for replying. You have never been directly aggressive with me, but nor have you EVER that I remember acknowledged that anything I have had to say on Corbyn and Brexit had any validity. When I reply to your posts and you just ignore my views it makes me feel like scum.

Maybe you think I'm a bit odd. Fair enough. But don't you miss all the other friends who have left here? I can't speak for them, but I wonder if they felt bullied too. For daring to think about Scottish independence, for daring to listen to Corbyn, for daring to explore anything but Hard Remain.

I'm as pro-Union, pro-EU and "moderate" as they come. Yet this place has made me feel unwelcome.

The trouble is that these are the topics I feel qualified to speak to. There's so much other good stuff here on social care, schools etc. that I read and learn from. But this is a Forum and I should feel free to have a voice here. I don't. Look at yahyah's horrible post above.

I couldn't have put it better. Thank you.

[HindleA]

Think,saying fuck all,until an opportunity arises.That's the problem.

[Willow904]

@Ephemerid

The invocation of Article 50 means that all legislation pertaining to our membership of the EU and its many organisations is under threat, including things like Euratom. This should come as no surprise to anyone, and I'm at a loss to understand why people didn't realise this.

If you're at a loss why people didn't realise this, then surely you can understand why I'm confused by Keir Starmer talking as if we don't have to leave Eurotom, which is what prompted some of my comments yesterday:

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

Labour’s Keir Starmer has urged the government to keep Britain in the Euratom treaty that governs the movement of nuclear materials – and drop its red line on the future role of the European court of justice or risk defeat in the House of Commons.

As I said yesterday, I agree with what he said about the ECJ, but I find it confusing that Labour is talking as though we can remain in Eurotom and as if we haven't already notified our intention to leave anyway. Is it really so surprising no one understands the implications of leaving the EU when such misleading statements are constantly being made by all parties? Conversely, we can remain in the single market having left the EU, it just wouldn't be politically popular with some leave voters, yet some in Labour talk as if it's technically impossible. More confusion.

I wish you well in your PIP assessment. I have never understood why anyone who isn't really rich supports the Tories and their assaults on the welfare state. Any one of us could find ourselves in need of a safety net. I clearly didn't vote for Labour in the last election because I agree with their Brexit policy, so it's not news to me that people voted on other things as well. Perhaps the Repeal Bill and Labour's response to it will reassure me, but as long as Labour are making misleading statements about Brexit and appearing to support contradictory positions I will probably remain doubtful about their intentions.

[RogerOThornhill]

Full results of the select committee chair elections are here.

I see Ian Mearns has a new job as Chair of the Backbench Business Committee - bit sad that I won't see him again on the Edu Select Committee as I though he was excellent - him and Neil Carmichael made a good team.

Be interesting to see who gets to sit next to Rob Halfon as his effective deputy since that seems to be how it works. I suspect (and hope since it seems to be an area going to pot) we'll see a decent focus on FE and apprenticeships.

[Tonibel]

Thank you @ephemerid. You have expressed exactly my views about Labour's approach to Brexit, but much more clearly and comprehensively than I could.
Good luck with PIP

[PorFavor]

@ephemerid

I hope all goes well for you (PIP). Stressful.

[PorFavor]

Jeremy Corbyn will be meeting Michel Barnier today.

[Willow904]

@Adam @Willow

Well why do you think everyone left?

I know some wanted SpinningHugo banned and some didn't and left over that. My position was that it was up to Refitman.

Other than that, I assume different people have left at different times for different reasons. Corbyn's election as leader has been pretty divisive within Labour and this forum has reflected that, although there wasn't always unanimity over Ed's leadership either.

We disagree over Corbyn and his approach to Brexit but I link and comment on other things that many on this forum are in agreement on and I don't see the problem really. What others respond to leads to discussion. Sometimes people don't respond to links other than to thank because there's not a lot to discuss. It may be the case that you feel I don't acknowledge you much because I am mostly drawn to this site because of the various links and you don't link articles as much as others. And yes, sometimes I vent when I'm frustrated and yes, I accept that it is boring for some, but I don't feel I do so every time I post here and I don't understand why my posts would be felt to be bullying. None of us, as individuals, have much control over the balance of contributors.

[adam]

I'm sorry but another 'this is the heart of the whole fucking problem' thing. From the just published government position paper on Nuclear...

Conclusion
19. It is clear that the UK and the Euratom Community have a strong mutual interest in ensuring close co-operation in the future, to harness shared expertise and maximise shared interests.

Yes, but the way to do this is to be within this organisation. We've chosen not to closely co-operate. We've chosen not to pursue this successful way of harnessing shared expertise and maximising our shared interests. We've turned out back on our shared interests. The paper doesn't acknowledge this at all.

[HindleA]

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


Whether it’s teachers’ pay or disability benefits – the freeze is chilling
Frances Ryan


Killing

[HindleA]

Shortening lives and quality of,for the pedants.

[adam]

Also, I'm being pedantic now but if you ignore the front cover and the blank reverse page, it's three and a half sides long. Less than 1500 words on the future relationships between our nuclear industries, Europe and the rest of the world. And it doesn't mention medical isotopes at all, pretending that it's not an issue.

[RogerOThornhill]

Robert Hutton‏Verified account @RobDotHutton 10m10 minutes ago
More
Something weird about UK political discourse that requires leaders to insist that given chance, they'd do thing that destroyed them again.

and the two example cited:

Cameron: I don't regret calling the referendum that led to a result I think's a disaster, while destroying my career and legacy.
May: I don't regret snap election that has destroyed my reputation.

I guess it's the politician not being able to admit that they ever make mistakes. To do so would be a sign of weakness. But o non-politicians it just looks really odd. Why not say "Yep, misjudged that. Sorry everyone..."

[ephemerid]

Willow - thank you for the reply and your good wishes.

Invocation of Article 50 with no exemptions infers leaving the EU and all it's associated agencies - however, it is possible to negotiate some form of inclusion into various EU agencies, and that is not a contradictory position for Labour to hold.
Theresa May sent her letter invoking Article 50 with no caveats and no indication that she had any intention of negotiating anything other than a full Brexit as above. She left herself - and the country - with no wriggle room. Brexit means Brexit!

If there really IS any confusion, it's entirely due to the Tory Brexit ministers insisting that we can have pretty much what we want after Brexit. What Starmer is doing is highlighting a few very serious areas, like Euratom, where we can't.
I simply cannot see what the problem is, and why you think that Labour's position is contradictory. Labour is pro-Remain, but is now tasked with the job of limiting the immense damage that a hard Brexit will inevitably cause.

In March, Labour set out the six tests for Brexit it will fight the government on. In detail. Those tests, if passed, would ensure the softest of soft Brexits, and possibly open the door to another referendum. That is not a bad thing.
Labour is stepping carefully through a legal and electoral minefield; it must respect the result of the referendum but at the same time attempt to limit the damage the Brexiteers are so determined to unleash on us.

The reason why the whole sorry performance is confusing is because this whole thing is incredibly complex. Labour's position reflects that, IMHO; it's the stupid simplicity of Davis and Co's approach that is causing confusion.
I appreciate your passion on all things EU, and I share it; but I truly think that Labour has not been responsible for the issues you highlight. I simply do not see any contradiction here. This is a fast-moving, difficult, and potentially dangerous situation both for our country and for Labour; so if the tune varies a bit as circumstances change, that's no surprise - but the song remains the same. Labour IS pro-Remain.

I suspect we will have to agree to disagree on this.

Thanks to those of you who wish me well. The full unexpurgated version of what Crapita does to me will be published elsewhere!

[adam]

The three just published position papers - Judicial and Administrative Proceedings, Nuclear Materials and Safeguards and Privileges and Immunities - here.

[adam]

I truly think that Labour has not been responsible for the issues you highlight

I don't think they're responsible - I don't think anyone's responsible other than the government and the leave campaign - but I don't think what they're doing has been good enough.

I appreciate the argument about remaining electable enough but (whispers) I think Hugo is right in pointing out (perhaps not in exactly these terms) that what they're doing is oppositional - we don't agree with what the government are doing but we can't be firm about what we would do yet - and you can only focus on being oppositional for so long. And I think a lot of the one-by-one issues coming through now - details on the Irish border, on the future issues about citizenship and rights, about nuclear and so on, should have been raised in much more detail in the Article 50 debates in parliament and much more fuss should have been made about demanding answers - in fact all of that should have happened before the referendum, but I can see that the country wasn't even trying to have any kind of grownup discussion then, it was just trying to scream 'sovereignty and foreigners'.

Luck and love today.

[AngryAsWell]

Euratom is the perfect test case for revoking Article 50

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analy ... article-50" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AnatolyKasparov]

If you support Corbyn you are bullied here.

Really?

There is a tinge of that at times, yes.

(though "supporting" maybe isn't even the right word - just realising that he isn't to blame for everything bad)

I have no doubt that JC's personal views are Eurosceptic, perhaps strongly so. But I also think it isn't *that* important for him, and that cuts both ways. It means that if there IS a genuine groundswell for minimising or even putting on hold Brexit, he wouldn't stand against it.

[adam]

Also, I'm being pedantic now but if you ignore the front cover and the blank reverse page, it's three and a half sides long. Less than 1500 words on the future relationships between our nuclear industries, Europe and the rest of the world. And it doesn't mention medical isotopes at all, pretending that it's not an issue.

Replying to myself, but for what it's worth the 'consolidated version' (?) of the Euratom treaty itself is over 30,000 words long.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

@Adam @Willow

Well why do you think everyone left?

I know some wanted SpinningHugo banned and some didn't and left over that. My position was that it was up to Refitman.

Other than that, I assume different people have left at different times for different reasons. Corbyn's election as leader has been pretty divisive within Labour and this forum has reflected that, although there wasn't always unanimity over Ed's leadership either.

We disagree over Corbyn and his approach to Brexit but I link and comment on other things that many on this forum are in agreement on and I don't see the problem really. What others respond to leads to discussion. Sometimes people don't respond to links other than to thank because there's not a lot to discuss. It may be the case that you feel I don't acknowledge you much because I am mostly drawn to this site because of the various links and you don't link articles as much as others. And yes, sometimes I vent when I'm frustrated and yes, I accept that it is boring for some, but I don't feel I do so every time I post here and I don't understand why my posts would be felt to be bullying. None of us, as individuals, have much control over the balance of contributors.

I think you still misunderstand me. Please feel free to ignore all my posts

But EVERY time you post that Brexit is "all Labour's fault" without a qualifier (that IMHO may seem trite, but make a LOT of difference to some of us) you will upset me and a lot of other people, because we've taken the time and trouble to engage with this and discuss it with you (and with others).

Your arguments (and Hugo's) rest, understandably, on a highly legalistic view of the post-referendum world. My view, as evidenced by the shenanigans around the Lisbon treaty, is that the EU can and probably will be extremely flexible about Article 50 and the legal niceties can largely be ignored if the UK government engages positively around the mess we are in. Labour are quite capable of this. The Tories are not.

I'm very interested in your insights into the legal aspects of Brexit. I'm glad you post them. But can't you see that a narrow legal interpretation of Brexit probably falls short of reality? I can't quite remember the sorry story after Lisbon, but didn't some countries just keep voting until they got the right result?

[AnatolyKasparov]

I called for SH to be banned, on one occasion, when he was being gratuitously unpleasant at a very bad time. I've sort of regretted it ever since.

As they say, MOTWTW.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

If you support Corbyn you are bullied here.

Really?

There is a tinge of that at times, yes.

(though "supporting" maybe isn't even the right word - just realising that he isn't to blame for everything bad)

I have no doubt that JC's personal views are Eurosceptic, perhaps strongly so. But I also think it isn't *that* important for him, and that cuts both ways. It means that if there IS a genuine groundswell for minimising or even putting on hold Brexit, he wouldn't stand against it.

Exactly.

[AngryAsWell]

Brexit Bill ‘On Hold’ Until The Autumn Amid Fears Of Tory Rebellion To Back A ‘Soft Brexit’

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/r ... witter.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Willow904]

Willow - thank you for the reply and your good wishes.

Invocation of Article 50 with no exemptions infers leaving the EU and all it's associated agencies - however, it is possible to negotiate some form of inclusion into various EU agencies, and that is not a contradictory position for Labour to hold.
Theresa May sent her letter invoking Article 50 with no caveats and no indication that she had any intention of negotiating anything other than a full Brexit as above. She left herself - and the country - with no wriggle room. Brexit means Brexit!

If there really IS any confusion, it's entirely due to the Tory Brexit ministers insisting that we can have pretty much what we want after Brexit. What Starmer is doing is highlighting a few very serious areas, like Euratom, where we can't.
I simply cannot see what the problem is, and why you think that Labour's position is contradictory. Labour is pro-Remain, but is now tasked with the job of limiting the immense damage that a hard Brexit will inevitably cause.

In March, Labour set out the six tests for Brexit it will fight the government on. In detail. Those tests, if passed, would ensure the softest of soft Brexits, and possibly open the door to another referendum. That is not a bad thing.
Labour is stepping carefully through a legal and electoral minefield; it must respect the result of the referendum but at the same time attempt to limit the damage the Brexiteers are so determined to unleash on us.

The reason why the whole sorry performance is confusing is because this whole thing is incredibly complex. Labour's position reflects that, IMHO; it's the stupid simplicity of Davis and Co's approach that is causing confusion.
I appreciate your passion on all things EU, and I share it; but I truly think that Labour has not been responsible for the issues you highlight. I simply do not see any contradiction here. This is a fast-moving, difficult, and potentially dangerous situation both for our country and for Labour; so if the tune varies a bit as circumstances change, that's no surprise - but the song remains the same. Labour IS pro-Remain.

I suspect we will have to agree to disagree on this.

Thanks to those of you who wish me well. The full unexpurgated version of what Crapita does to me will be published elsewhere!

This is an apparent quotation from Starmer and personally I found it confusing and it led to me being put right by others here yesterday with me eventually understanding the facts better, but understanding Starmer's position less:

“It’s increasingly clear that the government acted recklessly by giving up on membership of Euratom. As with so many aspects of the prime minister’s Brexit strategy, she has let ideological obsessions – in this case preventing any future role for the European court of justice – take priority over safeguarding jobs and the economy,” said Starmer, who said there were 78,000 UK jobs in the nuclear industry.

It's said as if we can leave the EU without leaving Eurotom. He doesn't talk of the possibility of a new relationship with Eurotom but of membership and I think that misleading. It misled me, anyway. I did say he was right about the ECJ. I also said the Repeal Bill and Labour's reaction to it will hopefully be more robust.

[adam]

It's said as if we can leave the EU without leaving Eurotom. He doesn't talk of the possibility of a new relationship with Eurotom but of membership and I think that misleading. It misled me, anyway. I did say he was right about the ECJ. I also said the Repeal Bill and Labour's reaction to it will hopefully be more robust.

I think the point about leaving Euratom from the government's perspective is that one of their bugbears self-harming intents lunatic core ideas is that we must end up outside of the jurisdiction of the ECJ and we can't be both in Euratom and outside the ECJ's jurisdiction.

[SpinningHugo]

@Willow904 from yesterday

The fall of the iron curtain, the re-unification of Germany. For me this is what the EU represents - a united, rather than a divided, Europe and I have always seen the UK as a major part of that. When Polish people started to make use of their right to move freely about the EU, when they started to come to the UK, I saw that as the moment in which the rift that had divided Europe since the 2nd World War had finally healed.

This is why I'm so passionate about our membership of the EU and why I'm finding it so hard to let go. It has nothing to do with neo-liberalism or being a "Blairite". It's about thinking the freedom people from Eastern Europe now have to travel freely around the EU is a wonderful thing and my disappointment that my country will no longer be part of that wonderful thing. It really is as simple as that.

I coud not agree more.

But it's not Labour's fault that this is sliding away. Really not.

I'm every bit as passionate as you are about the EU and my work depends on it. It's not Labour's job to represent our nostalgia.

But really Willow you don't acknowledge alternative points of view much. Why not try and find something in this post you could give the time of day and respond constructively? I used to enjoy this place because it was a Forum. We discussed stuff.

It's just shit these days.

I posted the other day that we might try and encourage former members back. JA said good night. Only Anatoly acknowledged my comment I think.

There are some lovely friends here but the best stuff is the banter rather than the serious debate.

There was a 3 line Labour whip to invoke art 50 without conditions. 47 Labour MPs defied that whip.

Labour is in part responsible. Primarily? No, but responsible all the same.

Labour's uselessness on the EU has a number of causes.

1. The leadership are Lexiters. Corbyn, McDonnell, Milne, Fisher, Lansman, Murray etc have opposed the EU all their lives. Exiting the EU would enable a Labour government under them to pursue the kind of economics they prefer (eg state aid, widespread nationalisation, state contract preferences), They want us out.

2. The Labour right (eg the appalling Stephen Kinnock) want an end to freedom of movement because they think it is toxic for them in many non-metropolitan seats.

3 (and most importantly) it is electorally advantageous. The best electoral position for Labour is to be ever so fractionally more Remain-y than the Tories. In most seats, that gives remainers no choice but to vote Labour, and doesn't put off mild Brexiters. So long as there is electoral success (which for Labour is basically getting near to, but not actually in power) the MPs who know better will nod along. Vote for Brexit, whilst saying all the downsides are the Tories fault.

4. Although minor, Starmer has proven utterly useless. The holding to account is all being done by others, mainly outside Parliament. Brexiters don't hate Starmer, but they do hate Gina Miller.

In electoral terms, it is a great (if dishonest) strategy.

Just unfortunately disastrous for the UK, especially for the poorest who will be, and are being, hit hardest.

[SpinningHugo]

I do love people who invoke Labour's six tests on Brexit, which are here

https://labourlist.org/2017/03/keir-sta ... arliament/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So the second, which is the important one, is utterly impossible under any government, save by remaining in the EU.

And yet, Labour still voted for art 50 without conditions.

and the same people invoking it then criticise the Tories for wanting to have their cake and eat it.

Shame on them. Shame.

And this may assist

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/cho ... ply-infer/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;