Europe --- In or Out

[Rayvin 5183]

7 minutes ago, NJS said:

My understanding was that the transition allowed a negotiation on all elements of a future relationship - as I said I may be wrong. 

 

I think Swinson muddyed the water with the revoke without a vote thing - they still won't answer what they want the other option in a vote to be and what they'd do if  leave won - I think having a reasonable alternative to cover the latter outcome is sensible but again you'd have to explain this well. 

 

Yeah, it's almost as if the party in government should mitigate the damage by getting a "least damaging Brexit deal" option to stand against remain in a referendum, thus giving the people a reasonably safe and informed democratic exercise which can be used to resolve this matter once and for all.

 

Its actually a real shame it's Labour who are doing that since if any other party did it the media would be talking about it as if it was the most sensible thing anyone anywhere had ever proposed.

 

Because it's Labour the whole strategy is being consumed by rabid anti-Corbynism.

 

I've been paying attention to Swinson over the past few days for the first time and am not sold on her at all. I don't like throwing around labels about people being closet Tories but fucking hell. Were the Lib Dems always like this or is it new? I'm wondering if i just never really noticed - I always had them as soft left.

[Renton 21310]

1 hour ago, Rayvin said:

Also,  were you not coming around to Labour's position the other day?

 

I was more coming out against Swinson and the LDs tbf. You're right though, the problem is there is no good way forward now imo, I don't relish revoke without a confirmatory referendum. This situation is at least partly due to Labour's ambiguity for the past 3 years. 

[Rayvin 5183]

Just now, Renton said:

 

I was more coming out against Swinson and the LDs tbf. You're right though, the problem is there is no good way forward now imo, I don't relish revoke without a confirmatory referendum. This situation is at least partly due to Labour's ambiguity for the past 3 years. 

 

But how is Labour's stance bad for remaining? It isn't. Honestly, it's better than coming out for remain. I don't believe this idea that no one, in a country of people who bought Brexit, will buy Labours neutrality. It will be worth some votes.

[zerosum 234]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49807401

[Rayvin 5183]

2 minutes ago, zerosum said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49807401

 

Good for them. I don't think anyone in here was particularly excited about them having committed crimes or not anyway - it's not like bring found guilty would change anything, as we will see in 30 mins from the government.

[Renton 21310]

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

 

But how is Labour's stance bad for remaining? It isn't. Honestly, it's better than coming out for remain. I don't believe this idea that no one, in a country of people who bought Brexit, will buy Labours neutrality. It will be worth some votes.

 

It's incoherent. How can you strike a new deal with the EU whilst being so half hearted about it you will campaign against it? What are the EU to make of this? It's not as simple as just offering "Norway". The details are important and need to be thrashed out prior to a referendum. It's a farce imo. 

[Renton 21310]

My answer would be to revoke, take the pressure off, and restock. Get a citizens assembly to decide the next step in our relationship with the EU. Go from there.

[Rayvin 5183]

Just now, Renton said:

 

It's incoherent. How can you strike a new deal with the EU whilst being so half hearted about it you will campaign against it? What are the EU to make of this? It's not as simple as just offering "Norway". The details are important and need to be thrashed out prior to a referendum. It's a farce imo. 

 

But what are you saying, that the EU will deliberately undermine the negotiation to force a Remain vote? That seems unlikely to me since, if they do that, there's still a chance that Labour's deal will 1 - win a referendum and 2 - fail to get through Parliament.

 

This is exactly what Cameron should have done before the original vote. Nail down the terms of what leaving means and put it to the people.

 

But again, how does this -actually- hurt the idea of getting a remain outcome? What you've described about it being incoherent surely only hurts Labour in the eyes of Remainers. Who are going to vote for a Remain party anyway.

[NJS 4371]

I think the libs tacitly hoped/hope to have no deal versus remain to load the vote - I don't think that's fair really. 

 

As I said not much discussion has been had about another leave victory. 

[Rayvin 5183]

Just now, NJS said:

I think the libs tacitly hoped/hope to have no deal versus remain to load the vote - I don't think that's fair really. 

 

As I said not much discussion has been had about another leave victory. 

 

If it's another leave victory on a specific set of terms then IMO it has to be enforced. There is no legitimacy in undermining a democratic outcome with a clear direction. The mandate for action would be there, and even if it was no deal, at least it would have been a clear vote. I don't see how anyone can oppose that really. Plenty may leave the country though.

[Renton 21310]

7 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

If it's another leave victory on a specific set of terms then IMO it has to be enforced. There is no legitimacy in undermining a democratic outcome with a clear direction. The mandate for action would be there, and even if it was no deal, at least it would have been a clear vote. I don't see how anyone can oppose that really. Plenty may leave the country though.

 

I maintain that knowingly breaking the GFA, an internationally brokered agreement, is a huge issue. It's one thing to have no deal as a result of political failings, quite another to offer it in a referendum. The only feasible option is May's deal as an alternative,  guaranteeing a Remain win imo. 

[Rayvin 5183]

Just now, Renton said:

 

I maintain that knowingly breaking the GFA, an internationally brokered agreement, is a huge issue. It's one thing to have no deal as a result of political failings, quite another to offer it in a referendum. The only feasible option is May's deal as an alternative,  guaranteeing a Remain win imo. 

 

Fair enough, I'm just saying that the vote's outcome, if all options are clearly specified beforehand, must be honoured.

 

As an aside -

 

YouGov carried out a useful poll:

 

Labour pro-remain campaigners are flagging up some figures from a poll conducted for the People’s Vote campaign. It found that 72% of Labour leave voters said they would definitely not vote Conservative, and 48% said they would definitely not vote for the Brexit party. But only 14% of Labour remain voters said they would definitely not vote Lib Dems. Labour remainers think this shows that the fear of Labour losing millions of voters to leave parties is exaggerated; they claim the real risk is from Labour losing remain votes to the Lib Dems and the Greens.

 

I think it's irrelevant to look at the 72% figure for the Tories since the BP are Tory-lite, so let's say that just over half of Labour Leave voters would consider switching to a Leave Party. Ok, so the numbers on the Remain side are far more damaging to Labour itself, as we all acknowledge. But from the standpoint of getting a referendum, if we can pull some of that 52% of Labour Leave Voters who would be tempted to vote for Farage, back into voting for Labour, it's a victory.

 

On the other hand, it's strangely selfless of Labour to be doing this...

[Meenzer 15406]

53 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

On the other hand, it's strangely selfless of Labour to be doing this...

 

You keep acting like they have a broader strategy or a clue what they're doing.  

[Rayvin 5183]

2 minutes ago, Meenzer said:

 

You keep acting like they have a broader strategy or a clue what they're doing.  

 

Whether through incompetence or strategy, they made the right decision. And I'm sticking to that until someone comes along and actually points out how competing with the Lib Dems for remain voters does anything to strengthen the chances of a remain parliament.

[Meenzer 15406]

The horse has long since bolted from that particular stable though. If Labour had (had) anything about them, there wouldn't - couldn't - have been a Lib Dem revival in the first place. It's not that long since commentators were suggesting the Lib Dems fold and merge into Change UK and it felt like a fairly reasonable idea. The dithering over Europe from the two main parties is precisely what's enabled the Lib Dem and Brexit Party (re)emergences, and there's only so far the benefit of the doubt can stretch before it snaps.

[Rayvin 5183]

Just now, Meenzer said:

The horse has long since bolted from that particular stable though. If Labour had (had) anything about them, there wouldn't - couldn't - have been a Lib Dem revival in the first place. It's not that long since commentators were suggesting the Lib Dems fold and merge into Change UK and it felt like a fairly reasonable idea. The dithering over Europe from the two main parties is precisely what's opened the door to the Lib Dem and Brexit Party (re)emergences, and there's only so far the benefit of the doubt can stretch before it snaps.

 

I agree - Labour's current stance is actually what the membership wanted them to do the previous year, and had they done it, the LD resurgence wouldn't have happened. But what is your concern here? It sounds like you're concerned about Labour's electoral prospects, but since we're talking about them losing out to the LDs, it doesn't harm remain. Which has been my central point for two pages.

 

Labour's position does still leave the door open for soft leavers - and apparently they have 52% of 2017 Labour Leavers to play for. They're the only group in the remain + labour voter base that can be 'lost' from a remain standpoint.

[Meenzer 15406]

23 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

It sounds like you're concerned about Labour's electoral prospects, but since we're talking about them losing out to the LDs, it doesn't harm remain.

 

At this stage, all I can say is I fear you're wrong but I hope you're right.

[Rayvin 5183]

1 minute ago, Meenzer said:

 

At this stage, all I can say is I fear you're wrong but I hope you're right.

 

Well then we agree on that point

[ewerk 30266]

So we have Labour, Lib Dems and SNP and a number of independents in favour of a People’s Vote. Why not push for it now? This is as close as we’re going to get for a majority for a PV as we’re going to get in this parliament. Why delay? 

[Rayvin 5183]

2 minutes ago, ewerk said:

So we have Labour, Lib Dems and SNP and a number of independents in favour of a People’s Vote. Why not push for it now? This is as close as we’re going to get for a majority for a PV as we’re going to get in this parliament. Why delay? 

 

I've wondered this too, and I can only think it's because it lacks legitimacy without a coalition government behind it. Also not totally clear that there is a majority - a good number of Labour MPs seem to want a deal.

[ewerk 30266]

Just now, Rayvin said:

 

I've wondered this too, and I can only think it's because it lacks legitimacy without a coalition government behind it. Also not totally clear that there is a majority - a good number of Labour MPs seem to want a deal.

I don’t think most of them are true believers but it could spun that another referendum is the only way to deliver leave.

[Rayvin 5183]

1 minute ago, ewerk said:

I don’t think most of them are true believers but it could spun that another referendum is the only way to deliver leave.

 

It's certainly the one way to deliver a safe leave.

 

How far all these parties are prepared to work together is unclear though, Remain has been hopelessly disunited.

[Rayvin 5183]

I'm listening to Labour's policy on Brexit and it's clear and it makes sense - it continues to perplex me why anyone thinks this is a bad position:

 

Labour will end the Brexit crisis by taking the decision back to the people with the choice of a credible leave deal alongside remain. That’s not complicated. Labour is a democratic party that trusts the people. After three and a half years of Tory Brexit failure and division, the only way we can settle this issue and bring people back together is by taking the decision out of the hands of politicians and letting the people decide.

So within three months of coming to power a Labour government will secure a sensible deal based on the terms we have long advocated and discussed with the EU trade unions and businesses: a new customs union a close single market relationship and guarantees of rights and protections. And within six months of being elected we will put that deal to a public vote alongside remain. And as a Labour prime minister I pledge to carry out whatever the people decide.

Corbyn says only Labour is offering a referendum.

Only a vote for Labour will deliver a public vote on Brexit. Only a Labour government will put the power back into the hands of the people. We can bring our country and our people together. Let’s stop a no-deal Brexit and let the people decide.

[Renton 21310]

17 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

I'm listening to Labour's policy on Brexit and it's clear and it makes sense - it continues to perplex me why anyone thinks this is a bad position:

 

Labour will end the Brexit crisis by taking the decision back to the people with the choice of a credible leave deal alongside remain. That’s not complicated. Labour is a democratic party that trusts the people. After three and a half years of Tory Brexit failure and division, the only way we can settle this issue and bring people back together is by taking the decision out of the hands of politicians and letting the people decide.

So within three months of coming to power a Labour government will secure a sensible deal based on the terms we have long advocated and discussed with the EU trade unions and businesses: a new customs union a close single market relationship and guarantees of rights and protections. And within six months of being elected we will put that deal to a public vote alongside remain. And as a Labour prime minister I pledge to carry out whatever the people decide.

Corbyn says only Labour is offering a referendum.

Only a vote for Labour will deliver a public vote on Brexit. Only a Labour government will put the power back into the hands of the people. We can bring our country and our people together. Let’s stop a no-deal Brexit and let the people decide.

 

Negotiating a deal in 3 months and putting it to the people within 6 months is impossible. It seems like so many, that Corbyn doesn't do details.

 

His policy on stealing IP rights on proprietary pharmaceuticals and manufacturing in state owned generic factories is hilarious btw. Like he doesn't realise we live in a globally connected world. His shadow cabinet will have fun defending this bobbins in coming interviews.

[Rayvin 5183]

Just now, Renton said:

 

Negotiating a deal in 3 months and putting it to the people within 6 months is impossible. It seems like so many, that Corbyn doesn't do details.

 

His policy on stealing IP rights on proprietary pharmaceuticals and manufacturing in state owned generic factories is hilarious btw. Like he doesn't realise we live in a globally connected world. His shadow cabinet will have fun defending this bobbins in coming interviews.

 

Why is it impossible? How long does it take to sort out a referendum?

 

I thought the idea on drugs wasn't stealing it, it was simply denying public funding to anyone who doesn't play ball.

 

Honestly though man, this is the sort of stuff people will get behind. Labour have looked uncertain and dithering for ages, but Corbyn looks totally confident on this GE. There's a lot of stuff in that speech that I totally support and would love to see come in.