FlyTheNest

Morning

Dr Lovely wildly criticising Corbyn on Today (4,4).

Tsk I don't know what all the fuss is about.It was only sixteen years after the SDP that the not the real Labour Party got elected and only thirty eight and counting since.Any minute now..

I don't know about anybody else but being a mere plebian I am taking my instructions via memo from the intelligentsia as is there historic purpose.

"Age Of Purification"

"Labour" Asinine pricks,to misquote.

Self appointed vanguard intellectuals.

HindleA wrote:Self appointed vanguard intellectuals.

Angela Smith has said intellectuals are bad.

Good-morning, everyone

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

Two senior Tories ready to resign if May fails to change Brexit direction
Justine Greening and Dominic Grieve say they would not be able to support government under no deal

The strength of feeling against "no deal Brexit" among moderate Tories appears genuine but what are they actually prepared to do to prevent it? What can they do? Given the reckless abandon with which much of Parliament voted to head us down this road, the enormous reluctance to vote through a WA which is merely an embodiment of the disadvantages of Brexit which have always been there is striking. The time for second thoughts was before we triggered article 50, giving May democratic blessing to negotiate the WA on her terms and voted through the Withdrawal Bill. Despite such mistakes, it's natural the opposition would rather not help the government get it's deal through, but the Tory rebels have no such excuse. They had opportunities in the summer to change the direction of Brexit, to influence the WA and future declaration, but they balked. Can they really do now, what they were unable to do previously and persuade May to tweak the future declaration, under threat of further resignations? And if they did manage to push the government's position towards a softer Brexit, would there be enough Labour votes to help them outvote the hard Brexit Tories anyway?

It seems to me that for all the coming and going, the arithmetic hasn't changed, the MPs in the Commons are the same and the lack of a majority for any option remains.

All true, but the majority of MPs against no deal has if anything become more solid. Some sort of delay looks all the more likely as the clock ticks.

A majority against something isn't the same as a majority for something and it's the latter that Parliament is having trouble with.

There does seem now more potential for the EU to extend article 50 in order to prepare for no deal, which they were trying to avoid doing before, but an extension won't change the basic choice between no deal, rubbish deal (as all ways of leaving the EU will mean losing more than we gain) or remain. 3 months, 6 months, whatever, the choice will be the same as will be the people choosing unless we have a GE, which remains unlikely.

If there had been a majority for, say, a Norway model or whatever, it would surely have already made itself felt by now. As things are, the split between "people's vote", soft Brexit and Corbyn's not so soft Brexit means the government is unable to find a majority to move forward even if it is willing to change direction. At least one of the factions has to move to take us forward. And the government no doubt thinks it reasonable to expect others to move to their position. In a normal world, the BBC, champion of the establishment, would be arguing for such, supporting May's deal and challenging its critics. That it's not reveals how much of our cultural and political levers have been captured by outside interests.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexit ... uencing-ga" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Revealed: How dark money is winning ‘the Brexit influencing game’
PETER GEOGHEGAN and JENNA CORDEROY 21 February 2019

The main problem as I see it is that the obvious consensus position is being offered by someone labelled extreme, dangerous and the rest.

Bizarre situation.

Yes, there is that too!

Good morfternoon.

Euro MPs are confirming that the mood in Brussels is anything but positive with some choice words today.

The prominent Greek MEP, Stelios Koulouglou, told the Guardian:

Everyone in the [EU] negotiating team is completely fed up with May. (Politics Live, Guardian)

I bet they are. I mean they can't even look forward to some banter over dinner!

Breaking News (BBC News) - Government unable to replicate EU deal with Japan before March 2019.

The BBC is describing the replication as an "ambition" - whereas I seem to recall that it was sold by Liam Fox as something rather more definite than that.




Edited - typo

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:The main problem as I see it is that the obvious consensus position is being offered by someone labelled extreme, dangerous and the rest.

Bizarre situation.

Consensus position?

I rather thought the point was that there isn't one.

I think EFTA/EEA +CU could have been worked up into a consensus position for the general population, at least in the short/medium term, had the govt been so inclined. Whether it would have achieved anything like consensus among politicians I don't know.
That's pretty much where Labour would have ended up had they been the govt.
Tories and PVers would have been against it in principle for the reason Paul says.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/ ... ssion=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

An inevitable division: the politics and consequences of the Labour split
I thought this was an interesting read, although it's a long article with a much better short one trying to get out of it.

Political success is always about leading complex coalitions of interests. The Labourist fantasy is that all elements of such a coalition can always be contained inside the Labour Party. As the split deepens, it will become apparent that Labour’s remaining vote and support will not be enough on its own, or even after another period of considerable growth, to win the battles that Labour needs to win.

Labour must seek to lead a coalition of progressive forces. All parts of that formula are important. It cannot keep pretending that all sections of the Labour Party are even potentially progressive in character. It cannot afford to ignore the existence of progressive forces outside of Labour or the need to make common cause with them.

Ah, the good old "progressive alliance" - alas, the obstacles to that haven't become any less real over time.

Willow904 wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:The main problem as I see it is that the obvious consensus position is being offered by someone labelled extreme, dangerous and the rest.

Bizarre situation.

Consensus position?

I rather thought the point was that there isn't one.

You'd think so in the news Willow.

But I think often of my friends and neighbours in my village who I love and respect and who I know were still undecided the day before which way to vote. My guess is there were very many of these voters. Whereas Corbyn gave the EU 7/10, the average Brit I reckon gave it 4.8/10.

Consensus won't be found in the TV studios. We need to listen to people like my neighbours if we are to find the common ground. I think many of the wise posters here, very much including you Willow, know what that would look like.

It would be very interesting indeed to have a General Election now with Labour standing on its Brexit proposal.

Having confined my own comments to the current parliament and what can realistically happen from here, I see the conversation has moved onto rather more theoretical ground - not an area I excel at!

I have to say, though, that I find it hard to imagine Corbyn negotiating to keep us in a single market he has opposed all his life. I wouldn't like to guess what would have happened if Labour had won in 2017. The manifesto was very vague on Brexit.

As for a Brexit policy that would find consensus among the public, as opposed to parliament, I'm not sure the EU has ever been a priority for most people. I suspect any outcome that doesn't do too much harm to the economy or have much impact on people's lifestyles would be acceptable to most people. Even the debate around immigration seems to have lost its urgency without the constant efforts of Farage and friends to keep it whipped up.

I'm not convinced Brexit has ever been about what ordinary people want. It's been an answer in search of a question in a way, the messy consequence of people in positions of power trying to manipulate support for an action that is really only of benefit to a very few. Having won/cheated their way to a mandate, they can't even be bothered to invent reasons for it anymore, it just has to happen. "Will of the people".

I don't think there's going to be any happy endings. The damage has already been done.

Willow904 wrote:Having confined my own comments to the current parliament and what can realistically happen from here, I see the conversation has moved onto rather more theoretical ground - not an area I excel at!

I have to say, though, that I find it hard to imagine Corbyn negotiating to keep us in a single market he has opposed all his life. I wouldn't like to guess what would have happened if Labour had won in 2017. The manifesto was very vague on Brexit.

As for a Brexit policy that would find consensus among the public, as opposed to parliament, I'm not sure the EU has ever been a priority for most people. I suspect any outcome that doesn't do too much harm to the economy or have much impact on people's lifestyles would be acceptable to most people. Even the debate around immigration seems to have lost its urgency without the constant efforts of Farage and friends to keep it whipped up.

I'm not convinced Brexit has ever been about what ordinary people want. It's been an answer in search of a question in a way, the messy consequence of people in positions of power trying to manipulate support for an action that is really only of benefit to a very few. Having won/cheated their way to a mandate, they can't even be bothered to invent reasons for it anymore, it just has to happen. "Will of the people".

I don't think there's going to be any happy endings. The damage has already been done.

I agree with much of this, especially the chilling coda.

Two thoughts on Corbyn.

I don't think he opposes a single market per se, he just wants a socialist one!

All evidence is that he sees the democratic will of the party as more important than his own view.

Willow904 wrote: I have to say, though, that I find it hard to imagine Corbyn negotiating to keep us in a single market he has opposed all his life.

Corbyn/Starmer have always said that they wanted to negotiate a deal which wouldn't endanger the GFA, haven't they? Which inevitably leads to something very close to the single market.


Moving away from the theoretical, imo May is taking us to the brink with the encouragement of the ERG who think the EU will blink or if not it's no deal which they're happy with. May herself knows the EU won't blink but thinks MPs will. I think so too.
There's no problem with an extension for admin purposes if the deal's signed.