FlyTheNest

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 7:21 am**

Morning all.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 8:16 am**

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... 41m-a-year" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.nao.org.uk/report/nhs-finan ... inability/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 8:23 am**

Corbyn could face string of resignations if he backs 'people's vote'
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... oples-vote" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

oh for chrissake
this is completely absurd
he'll get ripped if he doesn't and same if he does
I can only hope this bullshit is news spinning

enough
I'm absolutely terrified of Tory government with good cause
Anyone paying attention must understand our danger from them

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 8:24 am**

'morning, everyone

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 8:43 am**

Last night's posts here are much appreciated
The suggestion a lot of people don't understand what 'no deal' means is likely true

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 8:51 am**

Prince Philip still drives?

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 9:34 am**

My father was a newspaper publisher. He didn't like labour unions yet instructed me never cross a picket because not standing with peers was disgraceful. I told him I was troubled by his political and philosophical inconsistencies. He laughed at me and pejoratively called me a communist. Then he suggested we get ice cream.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 10:06 am**

Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)

- Walt Whitman
(1819-1892)

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 11:24 am**

So the Labour MPs who "defied" Corbyn and met with May yesterday later said it was effectively a waste of time, and agreed that "no deal" has to be removed as an option.

Who would ever have thunk it?

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 11:57 am**

Boris Johnson's Staffordshire speech and question/answers
I have not words enough describing the awfulness
How does he get away with this?

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 12:04 pm**

Good morfternoon.

So some of you tried to watch Question Time yesterday. I bailed out, too. Isabel Oakeshott awful, Diane Abbott a cause for concern, Rory Stewart forced into denying his intelligence, and as for the audience . . .

I felt for the legal bloke (Arnand Menin?).

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 12:05 pm**

The opposition can easily remove "no deal" as an option - by voting for the deal on offer.

I appreciate the drawbacks of the deal, but they are mostly drawbacks of leaving the EU, something MPs have decided to do, rather than poor negotiation.

And I appreciate the reluctance of the opposition to enable a Tory government to negotiate the future relationship with the EU with their harder Brexit aims, but the Tories were put in charge of this process, by a whisker, by the electorate at the the last GE.

The opposition's attempt to give the public another chance to decide who negotiates with a GE has failed (for now).

So what is achieved by refusing to support the WA?

What is achieved is thwarting Brexit - revocation, further referendums etc, but Corbyn doesn't support this, he is committed to delivering on the referendum.

OR

What is achieved is a harder Brexit, by crashing out with "no deal", supported by those in the far right of the Tory party, but, again, not something Corbyn supports.

Ironically, what Corbyn supports - delivering Brexit, fulfilling the referendum mandate, leaving the EU institutions but retaining close trading relations via some kind of Customs Union - are most easily achieved through supporting May's bill.

The further irony is that the hard Brexiteers within the Tory party and the DUP are ideologically opposed to the deal to the extent that its passing could precipitate the very schism within government that Corbyn is hoping for in order to force a GE.

As such I struggle to understand what Corbyn is trying to achieve with his current strategy. I can see what the ERG lobby are trying to achieve, and May - "my deal or no deal" - and the remain lobby, who have to stop us leaving in order to stay put. But Corbyn? I'm a bit baffled really. Unless he's playing the game of letting May crash out so he can make political capital, but that seems a pretty dark strategy for some one who is supposed to care about those least able to weather the economic turmoil such an outcome would entail. Perhaps he's waiting for the Tory moderates to make a move, as they will be needed to form a majority for some kind of alternative to May's deal. I hope he is at least talking to them, even if talking to May appears pointless.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 12:07 pm**

Anand Menon!

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 12:11 pm**

@Willow904

Thanks for that very coherent, Emperor's Clothes-esque post. I don't think you missed anything.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 12:24 pm**

The current Labour "strategy" is making sure that the Tories "own" Brexit and the consequences of it. That has been consistent for the past 2 and a half years.

(the only possible exception to this was most Labour MPs voting for A50 - but there were reasons for that, and it is a mistake to think Corbyn imposed it on an unwilling PLP)

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 12:26 pm**

@Willow

What is achieved by refusing to support the WA is a negotiating hand isn't it?

It's the moment for Corbyn and Starmer to get modifications to the political declaration in return for their support I'd say.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 12:30 pm**

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:@Willow

What is achieved by refusing to support the WA is a negotiating hand isn't it?

It's the moment for Corbyn and Starmer to get modifications to the political declaration in return for their support I'd say.

I take your point about the philosophy of it - but Willow904 nails the practicalities, I think.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 12:39 pm**

Once we have had another HoC showdown on Jan 29 - and if no major concessions are offered it is overwhelmingly likely May's deal will be heavily thumbsed down again - watch out for the "Boles amendment". It would be pretty amazing if Labour didn't support it on a whipped vote.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 1:24 pm**

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... pay-battle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Women win 12-year equal pay battle with Glasgow city council
Thousands of female council workers to receive payouts that could total more than £500m

(Not just female)

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 1:24 pm**

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:@Willow

What is achieved by refusing to support the WA is a negotiating hand isn't it?

It's the moment for Corbyn and Starmer to get modifications to the political declaration in return for their support I'd say.

May isn't showing much signs of being open to that, which is presumably why Corbyn declined the opportunity to put such proposals when asked.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 1:27 pm**

citizenJA wrote:
Corbyn could face string of resignations if he backs 'people's vote'
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... oples-vote" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
oh for chrissake
this is completely absurd
he'll get ripped if he doesn't and same if he does
I can only hope this bullshit is news spinning

enough
I'm absolutely terrified of Tory government with good cause
Anyone paying attention must understand our danger from them

Its an illustration that the simplistic media/FBPE line that Corbyn's personal stubbornness is the only thing stopping this, is baloney.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 1:33 pm**

I respect Willow's contributions very much but I'm perplexed.
It's my understanding voting for May's withdrawal agreement hands May and her government the vehicle continuing their rule without effective restraint.
Am I misunderstanding the situation?

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 1:43 pm**

AnatolyKasparov wrote:The current Labour "strategy" is making sure that the Tories "own" Brexit and the consequences of it. That has been consistent for the past 2 and a half years.

(the only possible exception to this was most Labour MPs voting for A50 - but there were reasons for that, and it is a mistake to think Corbyn imposed it on an unwilling PLP)

I don't disagree that voting with the government would be damaging to Labour, it's rarely a good policy for an opposition and I completely understand their reluctance. This isn't a normal situation though. In opposing May, Labour is siding with the extreme far right of the Tory party against the more moderate centre. Particularly worrying is Labour echoing the far right's misrepresentation that the deal is a "bad deal". It's an ok deal, the sort of deal any government would have ended up negotiating. It's only bad in the sense that leaving the EU is bad. Using the lies of our ideological enemies because they are politically expedient is an extremely dangerous game to play and I can't help but fear it is not going to end well.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 1:46 pm**

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... -in-dublin" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Woman denied abortion in Dublin despite new legislation

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 1:47 pm**

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... ingham-zoo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Police pick up penguins stolen from Nottingham zoo

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 1:51 pm**

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... y-councils" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Schools pushing children into home schooling, say councils

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 1:54 pm**

citizenJA wrote:I respect Willow's contributions very much but I'm perplexed.
It's my understanding voting for May's withdrawal agreement hands May and her government the vehicle continuing their rule without effective restraint.
Am I misunderstanding the situation?

May and her government are going to continue to be in power whether the withdrawal agreement is passed or not.

If the withdrawal agreement is passed we will enter a transition period in which all the restrictions of EU membership remains and if we don't agree terms in time a backstop will kick in keeping us in a customs union and unable to pursue independent trade deals for the foreseeable future which is why the far right ERG lobby are against it.

If we leave without the withdrawal agreement we will face economic chaos, with shortages and job losses but the government will be completely free from EU rules and able to start working on that independent UK/US trade deal, which gives them the NHS and us chlorinated chicken, straight away.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 1:56 pm**

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... ingham-zoo

Police pick up penguins stolen from Nottingham zoo

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 2:07 pm**

Willow904 wrote:---
It's only bad in the sense that leaving the EU is bad. Using the lies of our ideological enemies because they are politically expedient is an extremely dangerous game to play and I can't help but fear it is not going to end well.

(cJA edit)
The lies of ideological enemies are currently intransigent. I wrote earlier I'm terrified of Tory government. I mean this literally; I'm not being dramatic. It's a Tory withdrawal agreement handing people and country to whatever the Tory party wants from Brexit. I agree with you entirely it's dangerous. I think the time we're living through is dangerous. I'm not convinced Labour are willfully playing games. I don't think they've any choice. There's greater inequality between government and opposition than conventionally understood. The Tory party and those supporting them largely own public discourse. Look at the horror speech Boris Johnson gave today. Lies and utterly foolish assertions and it's reported like it has legitimacy. The lies are pointed out and documented but the fact remains Johnson stays a Tory MP, supporting a Tory government.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 2:09 pm**

Well.......Stephen Bush has put the proverbial cat amongst pigeons by suggesting Feb 28 as a possible GE date

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 2:13 pm**

Willow904 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:I respect Willow's contributions very much but I'm perplexed.
It's my understanding voting for May's withdrawal agreement hands May and her government the vehicle continuing their rule without effective restraint.
Am I misunderstanding the situation?
May and her government are going to continue to be in power whether the withdrawal agreement is passed or not.
---

(cJA edit)
I'm unsure

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 2:23 pm**

citizenJA wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:I respect Willow's contributions very much but I'm perplexed.
It's my understanding voting for May's withdrawal agreement hands May and her government the vehicle continuing their rule without effective restraint.
Am I misunderstanding the situation?
May and her government are going to continue to be in power whether the withdrawal agreement is passed or not.
---
(cJA edit)
I'm unsure

Or vice versa.

May and her government could fall at any time regardless of whether the withdrawal agreement is passed or not.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 2:24 pm**

74,Labour government,Leeds win League..

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 2:31 pm**

Another election,referendum following year...
.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 2:32 pm**

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Well.......Stephen Bush has put the proverbial cat amongst pigeons by suggesting Feb 28 as a possible GE date

A bluff to scare a few more Tory MPs on board?

If not I look forward to the great media about-face where May's "bad" deal becomes the "best deal ever".

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 2:32 pm**

HindleA wrote:74,Labour government,Leeds win League..

There's always a downside to anything

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 2:41 pm**

(Man U relegated)

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 2:50 pm**

My 12 year old ambition was to win the FA Cup and become Prime Minister,still time.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 2:59 pm**

((Feb 28th was the date of the (first)74 GE ))

(No doubt the bracket expert will point out any errors)

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 3:36 pm**

Willow904 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:The current Labour "strategy" is making sure that the Tories "own" Brexit and the consequences of it. That has been consistent for the past 2 and a half years.

(the only possible exception to this was most Labour MPs voting for A50 - but there were reasons for that, and it is a mistake to think Corbyn imposed it on an unwilling PLP)
I don't disagree that voting with the government would be damaging to Labour, it's rarely a good policy for an opposition and I completely understand their reluctance. This isn't a normal situation though. In opposing May, Labour is siding with the extreme far right of the Tory party against the more moderate centre. Particularly worrying is Labour echoing the far right's misrepresentation that the deal is a "bad deal". It's an ok deal, the sort of deal any government would have ended up negotiating. It's only bad in the sense that leaving the EU is bad. Using the lies of our ideological enemies because they are politically expedient is an extremely dangerous game to play and I can't help but fear it is not going to end well.

I'm not sure I really buy this being an OK deal. I see what you mean in a kind of legal, technical sense, but a good deal in any context needs a degree of trust and goodwill around it that is almost entirely absent here. Brussels doesn't trust the UK to deliver and vice versa. And, even worse, the potential "signatories" in the UK don't trust each other. And that's because May hasn't listened to other parties through the process and incorporated their suggestions. I believe it would have been a better deal, in all senses, if she had. And it still could be.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 4:04 pm**

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:The current Labour "strategy" is making sure that the Tories "own" Brexit and the consequences of it. That has been consistent for the past 2 and a half years.

(the only possible exception to this was most Labour MPs voting for A50 - but there were reasons for that, and it is a mistake to think Corbyn imposed it on an unwilling PLP)
I don't disagree that voting with the government would be damaging to Labour, it's rarely a good policy for an opposition and I completely understand their reluctance. This isn't a normal situation though. In opposing May, Labour is siding with the extreme far right of the Tory party against the more moderate centre. Particularly worrying is Labour echoing the far right's misrepresentation that the deal is a "bad deal". It's an ok deal, the sort of deal any government would have ended up negotiating. It's only bad in the sense that leaving the EU is bad. Using the lies of our ideological enemies because they are politically expedient is an extremely dangerous game to play and I can't help but fear it is not going to end well.
I'm not sure I really buy this being an OK deal. I see what you mean in a kind of legal, technical sense, but a good deal in any context needs a degree of trust and goodwill around it that is almost entirely absent here. Brussels doesn't trust the UK to deliver and vice versa. And, even worse, the potential "signatories" in the UK don't trust each other. And that's because May hasn't listened to other parties through the process and incorporated their suggestions. I believe it would have been a better deal, in all senses, if she had. And it still could be.

But that's what I mean, Labour are opposed to May, not the deal. The probem, though, is it's not just May's deal, it's also the EU's deal and rejecting it will only diminish any good will towards the UK when a WA very much like this one was always going to be part of the article 50 process a majority in parliament voted for.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 4:10 pm**

Aren't Labour explicitly opposed to the deal, as it breaks the 6 rules?

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 4:19 pm**

Willow904 wrote:Corbyn doesn't support this, he is committed to delivering on the referendum.

I read something the other day that made me wonder about his commitment. He's asked May to take 'no deal' off the table and it's in her power to revoke A50, or to commit to doing so at the last minute if necessary. The comment I saw was the usual anti-JC stuff suggesting he was for hard brexit and therefore stupid for asking her to do something he didn't actually want.
I've never bought the JC-as-hard-brexiter line so it made me think about the alternative implications. He certainly might be bluffing as there's next to no chance May will rule out no deal, but how unhappy would he really be if, in the end, A50 was revoked? By the tory govt?

As for an impending GE, apparently No10 ruled it out this am so there you go.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 4:46 pm**

refitman wrote:Aren't Labour explicitly opposed to the deal, as it breaks the 6 rules?

So does their own Brexit policy.

As a device to try to hold the government to account over its complacent promises it had its uses but I don't think it's a credible measure of whether May's deal is acceptable as a compromise in a crisis situation. It certainly isn't an acceptable reason to risk something worse.

I suspect those against supporting the WA through gritted teeth as I have suggested (in part, though only in part, playing devil's advocate) are pretty confident it will never come to "no deal" and Corbyn will be hailed a genius for holding out and winning something better than May's train crash. I hope that's the case. I'm just pointing out that Corbyn is not in a particularly strong position and ticking clocks, treacherous Tories and an unpredictable third party in the EU make voting for May's deal the only certain way Corbyn has in his own hands of preventing "no deal".

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 4:58 pm**

gilsey wrote:
Willow904 wrote:Corbyn doesn't support this, he is committed to delivering on the referendum.
I read something the other day that made me wonder about his commitment. He's asked May to take 'no deal' off the table and it's in her power to revoke A50, or to commit to doing so at the last minute if necessary. The comment I saw was the usual anti-JC stuff suggesting he was for hard brexit and therefore stupid for asking her to do something he didn't actually want.
I've never bought the JC-as-hard-brexiter line so it made me think about the alternative implications. He certainly might be bluffing as there's next to no chance May will rule out no deal, but how unhappy would he really be if, in the end, A50 was revoked? By the tory govt?

As for an impending GE, apparently No10 ruled it out this am so there you go.

(cJA bold)
he'd insist he was very angry then shrug his shoulders & do a victory dance on the bus ride home

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 4:58 pm**

I might be projecting a bit there
it's what I might do

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 5:02 pm**

Hmm, regarding QT last night:

PBol @pamelakrb
· 10h

Being an audience member at #bbcquestiontime I was absolutely disgusted about the ratio of leavers to remainers there and felt in a huge minority 1/n

PBol @pamelakrb

Fiona Bruce basically made fun of Dianne Abott in the briefing before it aired and proceeded to do the same during the show, how is this presenter impartiality? 2/n

Alison Martin @AlisonRMartin

I was in the audience of Question Time tonight - didn't feel like a balanced audience, though the Leavers were loud. The jeers against Diane Abbott were worse than could be heard on the broadcast; was some humour at Diane's expense from BBC staff before the recording.
3,830
12:55 AM - Jan 18, 2019

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 5:03 pm**

Willow904 wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Willow904 wrote: I don't disagree that voting with the government would be damaging to Labour, it's rarely a good policy for an opposition and I completely understand their reluctance. This isn't a normal situation though. In opposing May, Labour is siding with the extreme far right of the Tory party against the more moderate centre. Particularly worrying is Labour echoing the far right's misrepresentation that the deal is a "bad deal". It's an ok deal, the sort of deal any government would have ended up negotiating. It's only bad in the sense that leaving the EU is bad. Using the lies of our ideological enemies because they are politically expedient is an extremely dangerous game to play and I can't help but fear it is not going to end well.
I'm not sure I really buy this being an OK deal. I see what you mean in a kind of legal, technical sense, but a good deal in any context needs a degree of trust and goodwill around it that is almost entirely absent here. Brussels doesn't trust the UK to deliver and vice versa. And, even worse, the potential "signatories" in the UK don't trust each other. And that's because May hasn't listened to other parties through the process and incorporated their suggestions. I believe it would have been a better deal, in all senses, if she had. And it still could be.
But that's what I mean, Labour are opposed to May, not the deal. The probem, though, is it's not just May's deal, it's also the EU's deal and rejecting it will only diminish any good will towards the UK when a WA very much like this one was always going to be part of the article 50 process a majority in parliament voted for.

No I don't agree with this. The EU have said that this is the only deal available with this set of red lines. They've made it abundantly clear that with a new scenario a new deal is possible.

Guy Verhofstadt
‏@guyverhofstadt
It is not up to me, as a humble Belgian, to lecture Brits on what to do, but I think it’s time the national interest overtakes narrow party politics & cross party politics redefines the red lines imposed by hardliners in the Conservative party. We are ready for this. #Brexit

You are right that a new WA would look rather like the old one. But if the red lines shift enough, there will be no need for a backstop and one of the big problems will fall away.

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 5:10 pm**

Meanwhile...

Liam Fox: Customs union 'would not deliver Brexit'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46917999

Liam Fox says that staying in a permanent customs arrangement with the EU would "not be delivering Brexit".

The international trade secretary said he did not believe the UK could have an independent trade policy if it stayed in a customs union.

I don't know about anyone else but it would be nice if he could check and say with some certainty whether this is the case or not.

Maybe ask the Norwegians?

Posted: **Fri 18 Jan, 2019 5:12 pm**

Norway isn't in a CU with the EU.

edit PTO

FlyTheNest

Friday 18th January 2019

Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019

Re: Friday 18th January 2019