The Deal

[Hibrandenburg]

Worthy of a thread of its own. Who are the winners and who are the losers? I'm struggling to find winners when you compare it to full membership of the EU but maybe they will become apparent as the fine detail emerges.

Losers are easy:

Youth, the opportunities to study and live abroad (not just the EU) have diminished drastically for kids from working and middle class families.

Business, whilst there will be no Tarifs, things have gotten more complex.

EU citizens who have made the UK their home, I'm not sure of the nitty gritty but those who have an entitlement to settled status but not citizenship have become democratic nomads without a say in how the country they live in is run.

UK citizens living in the EU, see above.

Workers, there's no way that employment law will evolve to benefit employees now that the tories don't have to abide by EU employment laws.

That's just off the top of my head.

[Hibbyradge]

I still don't know what benefits leaving the EU brings the UK.

[Ozyhibby]

To be fair, we have to admit that the CAP and CFP were horrendous and that long term we could do better on those issues. Although it’s possible the EU improves those itself. We could start to source food from much cheaper parts of the world in the medium/long term.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

We could start to source food from much cheaper parts of the world in the medium/long term.




Has this been spelled out in detail anywhere? I've only seen The Commonwealth mentioned in this context, and debunked.

[Barney McGrew]

I still don't know what benefits leaving the EU brings the UK.

Blue passports.

[Just_Jimmy]

I still don't know what benefits leaving the EU brings the UK.it still absolutely infuriates me. we had the absolute best deal and we walked away and are now celebrating something that regardless, will be infinitely worse.

still we've taken back our borders haven't we?



Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[Just Alf]

it still absolutely infuriates me. we had the absolute best deal and we walked away and are now celebrating something that regardless, will be infinitely worse.

still we've taken back our borders haven't we?



Sent from my Pixel 3a using TapatalkAgreed, if we ever get a repeat of this virus thing in future we'll be able to close our borders right away... no need to wait on EU permission.... oh wait..

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[calumhibee1]

I still don't know what benefits leaving the EU brings the UK.

:agree:

4 and a half years down the line and I’ve still no idea what could posses people to have voted to leave the EU.

[I'm_cabbaged]

:agree:

4 and a half years down the line and I’ve still no idea what could posses people to have voted to leave the EU.

To stop terrorists guised as doctors, nurses, scientists and any other profession that brings benefit to these shores 👍

[Bangkok Hibby]

:agree:

4 and a half years down the line and I’ve still no idea what could posses people to have voted to leave the EU.

Isnt it blatantly obvious. Of those who could be bothered to vote, xenophobia was the over riding reason. Of course a decent level of stupidity and gullibility helped.

[Jack]

I kinda remember the EU recommending a minimum level of old age pensions across the block. As the UK state pension is close to the bottom that would have meant an increase for our pensioners.

There was also something about the EU introducing tighter financial controls to mainly combat money laundering, tax evasion and other dodgy deals that Jacob Rees-Mogg and his pals have a certain expertise in. So the financial criminals will benefit.

[lapsedhibee]

:agree:

4 and a half years down the line and I’ve still no idea what could posses people to have voted to leave the EU.

A good long read here by Fintan O'Toole, arguing that at least part of the reason was the English's inability to get over winning the second world war:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/16/brexit-paranoid-fantasy-fintan-otoole

[PeeJay]

From an EU perspective losing the United Kingdom is a massive blow to the raison d'etre of the EU: don't think we (in the EU) should underestimate what it means to lose such a valuable member, this should never have happened and to lay everything at the doorstep of the Brits is simply too short-sighted a view ...

[Keith_M]

Reductions on Workers' Rights, Food Safety Regulations, etc, will mean British companies can increase profits by reducing costs.

You must admit, it's a real bother outsourcing production to other countries to take advantage of cheap labour and falling down factories. Why not just recreate the conditions at home and bring back the work houses (Rees-Mogg would be in favour).

[Lendo]

The UK: the first country in history to impose international sanctions upon itself.

[GlesgaeHibby]

Isnt it blatantly obvious. Of those who could be bothered to vote, xenophobia was the over riding reason. Of course a decent level of stupidity and gullibility helped.

Agree. Years of Tory austerity and a right wing media blaming it on immigrants led to this.

[Killiehibbie]

Deregulating workers rights will allow us to compete globally. We might even win the race to the bottom.

[StevieC]

Reductions on Workers' Rights, Food Safety Regulations, etc, will mean British companies can increase profits by reducing costs.

You must admit, it's a real bother outsourcing production to other countries to take advantage of cheap labour and falling down factories. Why not just recreate the conditions at home and bring back the work houses (Rees-Mogg would be in favour).

I can see your post is tongue in cheek 😏
but I'm sure I read somewhere that reducing costs could only be done on goods that were purely British? If they are imported or exported, or match imported/exported goods, then they would incur tarrifs if deemed to be unfair competition? This would also apply to any goods/businesses that received government subsidies?

[Smartie]

Ending freedom of movement will remove a lot of competition from European individuals. This will be good for many people, especially those who believe they would have reached the top of it weren’t for pesky Europeans taking all the best opportunities / having to be supported with generous unearned benefits.

Baz from Billericay has always had the chance to become the best brain surgeon but previously he’s had to work hard, make sacrifices and learn more to get there ahead of grafting Europeans who are grateful for opportunity. It’s just become a bit easier for him to reach those higher levels. If you’re the one with the brain being operated on it’s probably not good that it’s easier now for him to get to that level.

Better for Baz though. Unless he had ambitions beyond these shores.

[Bostonhibby]

Ending freedom of movement will remove a lot of competition from European individuals. This will be good for many people, especially those who believe they would have reached the top of it weren’t for pesky Europeans taking all the best opportunities / having to be supported with generous unearned benefits.

Baz from Billericay has always had the chance to become the best brain surgeon but previously he’s had to work hard, make sacrifices and learn more to get there ahead of grafting Europeans who are grateful for opportunity. It’s just become a bit easier for him to reach those higher levels. If you’re the one with the brain being operated on it’s probably not good that it’s easier now for him to get to that level.

Better for Baz though. Unless he had ambitions beyond these shores.Very well put.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[goosano]

Agreed, if we ever get a repeat of this virus thing in future we'll be able to close our borders right away... no need to wait on EU permission.... oh wait..

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Something we could have done and should have done. as an island. Nothing to do with Europe.

[Just Alf]

Something we could have done and should have done. as an island. Nothing to do with Europe.Exactly my point :agree

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Onceinawhile]

Can't believe they've patched the erasmus scheme. Just a disaster for those who want to study abroad.

[Ozyhibby]

Can't believe they've patched the erasmus scheme. Just a disaster for those who want to study abroad.

Just another thing that the Indy movement can offer to return.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

Can't believe they've patched the erasmus scheme. Just a disaster for those who want to study abroad.Rees Mogg will be delighted, his children and others like them will be looking forward to returning to the days of the Grand Tours.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[StevieC]

Boris claimed that the fishing quota deal would provide enough fish to get to the South Pole and back ..

Now that we are in full lockdown, and I've a bit of spare time on my hands, I thought I would check if that were the case.

Basing the average size of herring/mackerel to be about 30cm and 500g, and a return trip to the South Pole being about 38,000km, the average price of a tonne of fish costing around £1700 and the UK fishing quota valued at around £850m ...

The 15% increase in the first year would relate to 75,000 extra tonnes of fish, and a distance of 45,000km.

So Boris would indeed be able to get to the South Pole and back on a Scottish mackerel .. however .. if he travels there and back on a slightly heavier English fish then he may find himself stranded somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean.

[stu in nottingham]

Boris claimed that the fishing quota deal would provide enough fish to get to the South Pole and back ..


Worzel's other main trick with a pocket calculator is to type in the numbers 58008, turn it upside down and make the word BOOBS out of it.

[StevieC]

Wurzel's other main trick with a pocket calculator is to type in the numbers 58008, turn it upside down and make the word BOOBS out of it.

More likely to be 58008508 As Bo’s Boobs makes it all about him 😉

[Mr Grieves]

Interesting to see how the foreign media are reporting this deal as most of the British media aren't exactly objective.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/25/world/europe/brexit-britain-european-union.html#click=https://t.co/tNSHuZRhOG

"Britain’s services sector — encompassing not only London’s powerful financial industry, but also lawyers, architects, consultants and others — was largely left out of the 1,246-page deal, despite the sector accounting for 80 percent (https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn02786/)of British economic activity."

"The new trade deal does smooth the flow of goods across British borders. But it leaves financial firms without the biggest benefit of European Union membership: the ability to easily offer services to clients across the region from a single base. This has long allowed a bank in London to provide loans to a business in Venice, or trade bonds for a company in Madrid.


That loss is especially painful for Britain (https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7851/), which ran a surplus of £18 billion, or $24 billion, on trade in financial and other services with the European Union in 2019, but a deficit of £97 billion, or $129 billion, on trade in goods.

“The result of the deal is that the European Union retains all of its current advantages in trading, particularly with goods, and the U.K. loses all of its current advantages in the trade for services,” said Tom Kibasi, the former director of the Institute for Public Policy Research, a research institute. “The outcome of this trade negotiation is precisely what happens with most trade deals: The larger party gets what it wants and the smaller party rolls over.”

[Billy Whizz]

What do they include in Financial services?

[Ozyhibby]

Can't believe they've patched the erasmus scheme. Just a disaster for those who want to study abroad.

https://twitter.com/jackson_carlaw/status/997107303852670976?s=21


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CloudSquall]

https://twitter.com/jackson_carlaw/status/997107303852670976?s=21


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That will be another Scottish Tory line in rhe sand Boris and co walk over.

[Mr Grieves]

https://twitter.com/jackson_carlaw/status/997107303852670976?s=21


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

*****bags, the lot of them.

[ronaldo7]

Does the deal match up to Labour's six tests for Brexit?
Asking for a knight.

[danhibees1875]

SNP voting against it but presumably it'll still pass?

I'd not paid much notice to the weight of approval for the deal but I'd imagine a lot of opposition MPs would be more inclined to abstain rather than vote against - showing they don't support the deal Vs previous EU membership, but acknowledging that the deal not passing would mean a no deal Brexit next week.

[Ozyhibby]

SNP voting against it but presumably it'll still pass?

I'd not paid much notice to the weight of approval for the deal but I'd imagine a lot of opposition MPs would be more inclined to abstain rather than vote against - showing they don't support the deal Vs previous EU membership, but acknowledging that the deal not passing would mean a no deal Brexit next week.

Labour are whipping in favour of the deal anyway. It will sail through.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

Labour are whipping in favour of the deal anyway. It will sail through.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The nationalist community must be lapping up Starmer’s über red wall act. A pathetic stance to take which has no authenticity to it at all. We all know what his actual views on Brexit were...why pretend? Analise Dodds is the most Europhile politician out there, I can’t believe she will vote in support of the deal.

[Ozyhibby]

The nationalist community must be lapping up Starmer’s über red wall act. A pathetic stance to take which has no authenticity to it at all. We all know what his actual views on Brexit were...why pretend? Analise Dodds is the most Europhile politician out there, I can’t believe she will vote in support of the deal.

We’re all English nationalists now.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[danhibees1875]

Labour are whipping in favour of the deal anyway. It will sail through.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ta :aok:

I thought they might have abstained or at least allowed individuals to do so.

[weecounty hibby]

Ta :aok:

I thought they might have abstained or at least allowed individuals to do so.

They are doing in England what they have been trying to do in Scotland. They want to appeal to the British nationalist element and compete with the Tories. Sadly for them they are miles behind the Tories both sides of the border due to bad decision making. By backing the deal they hope they can appeal to the leave voters. They are still behind the worst most corrupt and self serving government in history so they need to try something but trying to be like the Tories seems a bit wrong

[Hibbyradge]

They are doing in England what they have been trying to do in Scotland. They want to appeal to the British nationalist element and compete with the Tories. Sadly for them they are miles behind the Tories both sides of the border due to bad decision making. By backing the deal they hope they can appeal to the leave voters. They are still behind the worst most corrupt and self serving government in history so they need to try something but trying to be like the Tories seems a bit wrong

Isn't it more the case that although this is a poor deal, it a million times better for the country than no deal?

Personally, although the prospect of Johnson and all the Brexiteers suffering from no deal misery, it really would be cutting our noses off.

Or are we back to playing 4D chess again?

[weecounty hibby]

Isn't it more the case that although this is a poor deal, it a million times better for the country than no deal?

Personally, although the prospect of Johnson and all the Brexiteers suffering from no deal misery, it really would be cutting our noses off.

Or are we back to playing 4D chess again?

No, what I'm saying is that by whipping in support it shows that they are just trying to gain some sort of leader vote. It would be better if they abstained or at least have a free vote. Would only have been a token gesture but better that than being seen to agree with and support Johnson. By voting for it they are giving him a slap in the back and a well played old boy! Even some senior Tories are questioning how they are meant to read and understand the minute detail of 1200+ pages of complex document in a few days

[Keith_M]

Isn't it more the case that although this is a poor deal, it a million times better for the country than no deal?

Personally, although the prospect of Johnson and all the Brexiteers suffering from no deal misery, it really would be cutting our noses off.


:agree:

This isn't a vote to approve Brexit, which some posters seem to be equating it to. This is currently the only deal on the table and choice is to accept a poor deal or suffer even worse from a no deal.

I think the SNP are merely engaging in showmanship, knowing that the deal will be passed regardless.

[Ozyhibby]

:agree:

This isn't a vote to approve Brexit, which some posters seem to be equating it to. This is currently the only deal on the table and choice is to accept a poor deal or suffer even worse from a no deal.

I think the SNP are merely engaging in showmanship, knowing that the deal will be passed regardless.

This deal will make Scotland poorer. Why would the SNP vote for that? If the Tories want this or a ‘no deal’ then they should own it. By voting for it, the Labour Party have now joined the Lib Dem’s as pro brexit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Keith_M]

This deal will make Scotland poorer. Why would the SNP vote for that? If the Tories want this or a ‘no deal’ then they should own it. By voting for it, the Labour Party have now joined the Lib Dem’s as pro brexit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


As I said, there is no other deal to vote on, so this one is either 'yes' or 'no', not 'could we have a different option please'.

I don't disapprove of what the SNP are doing, as they're merely making a political point (as is their right) that they're unhappy with both Brexit and the crappy deal we've been lumbered with.

[Just Alf]

As I said, there is no other deal to vote on, so this one is either 'yes' or 'no', not 'could we have a different option please'.

I don't disapprove of what the SNP are doing, as they're merely making a political point (as is their right) that they're unhappy with both Brexit and the crappy deal we've been lumbered with.Abstaining is the 3rd option though?
At least that's how I've always seen it. They (And anyone else that abstains) don't want to endorse leaving but they also don't want to block the deal that's on the table.


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[greenlex]

Abstaining is the 3rd option though?
At least that's how I've always seen it. They (And anyone else that abstains) don't want to endorse leaving but they also don't want to block the deal that's on the table.


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
They regularly abstain from votes that don’t effect Scotland. This one does so I think an abstention would be inappropriate as a tool in this instance.

[Just Alf]

They regularly abstain from votes that don’t effect Scotland. This one does so I think an abstention would be inappropriate as a tool in this instance.Just me I guess.... it effects Scotland, they don't want to support it, they also don't want to be part of blocking it?


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[greenlex]

Just me I guess.... it effects Scotland, they don't want to support it, they also don't want to be part of blocking it?


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
It’s a political stance. Voting against it won’t block it. They know that. If it did they would reluctantly vote for it as the lesser of two evils. Abstention dies nothing from a political stance.

[danhibees1875]

Just me I guess.... it effects Scotland, they don't want to support it, they also don't want to be part of blocking it?


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

I get the impression that if blocking it was a possibility they'd not have voted against it.

I agree that abstaining would seem to have been the easier option but I think you'd have to be pretty anti-snp to suggest their actions were to bring about a no deal Brexit (that last part isn't about you, just something I've seen online quite a bit on this).

[Bristolhibby]

No, what I'm saying is that by whipping in support it shows that they are just trying to gain some sort of leader vote. It would be better if they abstained or at least have a free vote. Would only have been a token gesture but better that than being seen to agree with and support Johnson. By voting for it they are giving him a slap in the back and a well played old boy! Even some senior Tories are questioning how they are meant to read and understand the minute detail of 1200+ pages of complex document in a few days

I think you are underestimating the power BREXIT has over the English (yes I’m generalising). But there are votes to be won and support to be retained by “getting Brexit done”.

It’s a poisoned chalice to oppose it.

Get it done, get it agreed, put it “behind us” and Labour can go after these Bar Stewards in things like Covid, the vaccine roll out, the poverty, etc.

Labour are stuffed in Scotland, they just done realise it. Labour in Scotland needs to be separate from London (won’t happen), as the Unionist line works in England. “Too wee, too poor, too stupid” actually plays well down here in England. It’s blunt, but it works.

J

[Hibbyradge]

It’s a political stance. Voting against it won’t block it. They know that. If it did they would reluctantly vote for it as the lesser of two evils. Abstention dies nothing from a political stance.

That's how I see it. The deal will be passed regardless of how the opposition parties vote.

The decision for Labour and the SNP is what's best for them politically - abstention or supporting it as the only alternative to no deal. The SNP only need to consider how their decision plays in Scotland, Labour must think about it's position in rUk because they know the situation in Scotland is irretrievable in the short term.

I am very relieved that there is a deal. The fact that it's a poor one will hurt the Tories going forward is good to know even if seeing Johnson hailed as a conquering hero sticks in the craw.

[hibsbollah]

That's how I see it. The deal will be passed regardless of how the opposition parties vote.

The decision is what's best for Labour and the SNP, abstention or supporting is as the only alternative to no deal.

I am very relieved that there is a deal. The fact that it's poor will hurt the Tories going forward is good to know even if seeing Johnson hailed as a conquering hero sticks in the craw.

I don’t know how he as an individual can reconcile being the massive advocate for a Second Referendum to overturn the first Brexit out vote, to now voting for the deal AND whipping for it :dunno: It is a clear signal that the #1 priority is placating Mike from Middlesbrough. But Mike from Middlesbrough doesn’t care about empty tokenism. It’s just bad politics on his part. And it will be used against Starmer going forward.

[Hibbyradge]

Labour are stuffed in Scotland, they just done realise it.

J

I think they do.

I agree with your other points though.

[ronaldo7]

Labour’s six tests for Brexit:
Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?

Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?

Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?

Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?

Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

These were Sir Keir, and Labours tests that they said have to be met, to enable them to vote for the deal.

[Hibbyradge]

I don’t know how he as an individual can reconcile being the massive advocate for a Second Referendum to overturn the first Brexit out vote, to now voting for the deal AND whipping for it :dunno: It is a clear signal that the #1 priority is placating Mike from Middlesbrough. But Mike from Middlesbrough doesn’t care about empty tokenism. It’s just bad politics on his part. And it will be used against Starmer going forward.

I really don't read it like that although I don't really understand the need to whip for support.

Maybe it's because if he abstains, he'll be accused of being unable to take the tough decisions, if he allows a free vote, he's accused of not having control of the party. It would also run the risk of Starmer's opponents within the Party running a campaign to vote against which would make Starmer look weak again and Labour look fractured.

It's not an easy decision. I'm sure that many hours have been spent mulling it over and I'm only guessing at the reasons behind it.

[ronaldo7]

I really don't read it like that although I don't really understand the need to whip for support.

Maybe it's because if he abstains, he'll be accused of being unable to take the tough decisions, if he allows a free vote, he's accused of not having control of the party. It would also run the risk of Starmer's opponents within the Party running a campaign to vote against which would make Starmer look weak again and Labour look fractured.

It's not an easy decision. I'm sure that many hours have been spent mulling it over and I'm only guessing at the reasons behind it.

Alternatively he'll have members of his front bench resigning and then voting against the deal.

Not very together are they.

[Radium]

When you tie your colours to the mast in an electronic age

https://twitter.com/rosscolquhoun/status/1343246396116369408?s=21


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Scorrie]

Labour’s six tests for Brexit:
Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?

Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?

Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?

Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?

Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

These were Sir Keir, and Labours tests that they said have to be met, to enable them to vote for the deal.

Fails on number 2 for starters IMHO

[Hibbyradge]

Alternatively he'll have members of his front bench resigning and then voting against the deal.

Not very together are they.

No, they're not.

Whether there are resignations or not is another matter. I guess he'll cope with junior ministers going.

It's a tough political decision. He'll be criticised for whatever he does. His job is to take the least damaging option and I don't have a crystal ball.

The SNP have no such dilemma.

[Hibrandenburg]

They are doing in England what they have been trying to do in Scotland. They want to appeal to the British nationalist element and compete with the Tories. Sadly for them they are miles behind the Tories both sides of the border due to bad decision making. By backing the deal they hope they can appeal to the leave voters. They are still behind the worst most corrupt and self serving government in history so they need to try something but trying to be like the Tories seems a bit wrong

Isn't that exactly what a few Labour supporters on here actually want Labour to do, become a bit more Tory by seeking the middle ground to win more votes to be in the position to then sneak in some progressive policies under the radar? I'd much prefer them to be open and upfront and manifest some progressive policy and persuade the electorate that it's the right thing to do, following the wishes of the electorate hasn't worked out well for us because certain elements of our media and press are doing the jobs of our politicians by convincing the people of what they want.

[Hibbyradge]

Isn't that exactly what a few Labour supporters on here actually want Labour to do, become a bit more Tory by seeking the middle ground to win more votes to be in the position to then sneak in some progressive policies under the radar? I'd much prefer them to be open and upfront and manifest some progressive policy and persuade the electorate that it's the right thing to do, following the wishes of the electorate hasn't worked out well for us because certain elements of our media and press are doing the jobs of our politicians by convincing the people of what they want.

I'd prefer that as well, but it doesn't ever work.

I think I'm right in saying that only 4 Labour leaders have won general elections since the end of WWII.

I want the Tories out of power and for that to happen, the Labour Party has to appeal to the electorate.

Politicians will almost never have as powerful a voice as the media so persuading the electorate that "it's the right thing to do" isn't going to be successful.

Jeremy Corbyn had a couple of elections in which to build his movement but only succeeded in giving labour it's worst ever election result and an emboldened right wing Tory government.

[Ozyhibby]

I'd prefer that as well, but it doesn't ever work.

I think I'm right in saying that only 4 Labour leaders have won general elections since the end of WWII.

I want the Tories out of power and for that to happen, the Labour Party has to appeal to the electorate.

Politicians will almost never have as powerful a voice as the media so persuading the electorate that "it's the right thing to do" isn't going to be successful.

Jeremy Corbyn had a couple of elections in which to build his movement but only succeeded in giving labour it's worst ever election result and an emboldened right wing Tory government.

There is nobody more successful at delivering right wing govt for Britain than the left wing of the Labour Party.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

There is nobody more successful at delivering right wing govt for Britain than the left wing of the Labour Party.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:faf:
Nobody? Except for the right wing politicians and the right wing people who vote for them, maybe :rolleyes:
Blame the Left for the immorality of the Right. Absolute illogical pish but it keeps getting trotted out.

[Hibrandenburg]

I'd prefer that as well, but it doesn't ever work.

I think I'm right in saying that only 4 Labour leaders have won general elections since the end of WWII.

I want the Tories out of power and for that to happen, the Labour Party has to appeal to the electorate.

Politicians will almost never have as powerful a voice as the media so persuading the electorate that "it's the right thing to do" isn't going to be successful.

Jeremy Corbyn had a couple of elections in which to build his movement but only succeeded in giving labour it's worst ever election result and an emboldened right wing Tory government.

Then maybe the right thing to do is to persuade the press that progressive policies are the way forward.

The Tories are no different btw, they feign social responsibility to win votes and allow themselves to achieve their true agenda, they're just much better at it than labour.

The UK needs to have a long and hard look at its political system, if you need to lie to get elected, then the system is broken.

[Ozyhibby]

:faf:
Nobody? Except for the right wing politicians and the right wing people who vote for them, maybe :rolleyes:
Blame the Left for the immorality of the Right. Absolute illogical pish but it keeps getting trotted out.

Every time the Labour Party moves to the left the Tories win. Tell me that’s not true?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

Then maybe the right thing to do is to persuade the press that progressive policies are the way forward.

The Tories are no different btw, they feign social responsibility to win votes and allow themselves to achieve their true agenda, they're just much better at it than labour.

The UK needs to have a long and hard look at its political system, if you need to lie to get elected, then the system is broken.

I realise we're just rehashing old circular arguments, and it's the wrong thread on which to do so, but I don't think it is lying. Anyone standing for election for anything has to make themselves attractive. They have to offer something the electorate likes and wants.

If they then want to stay elected, they must continue to provide those things although their ability to persuade will be increased.

The system is undoubtedly broken, but it's the only one we've got and we have to make the best of it.

[Bangkok Hibby]

:faf:
Nobody? Except for the right wing politicians and the right wing people who vote for them, maybe :rolleyes:
Blame the Left for the immorality of the Right. Absolute illogical pish but it keeps getting trotted out.

Absolutely, and the sad thing is there's no logical reason for disillusioned Labour voters to swing 180 degrees to Tory. I'd rather vote Monster raving loony.

[hibsbollah]

Every time the Labour Party moves to the left the Tories win. Tell me that’s not true?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Tories have won 16 elections since Labour became a party. ‘The left’ were only any kind of a political force in two of these defeats in 79 and under Corbyn. What happened the other 14 times? Blaming the left doesn’t stack up.

(The two times were in 1979 socialist Michael Foot was leader but the right of the party rebelled, key ministers walking out to form the SDP which briefly became the most popular party in the country. He never had a chance. And of course Corbyn in 2016, who also led a divided party, was supported by about 20% of his colleagues, and inherited Brexit. The only other true leader from the left, George Lansbury was kicked out by Labour conference in the 30s, when admittedly his pacifism was at odds with what was going on in Europe at the time, and never got to fight an election.)

[neil7908]

Labour’s six tests for Brexit:
Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?

Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?

Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?

Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?

Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

These were Sir Keir, and Labours tests that they said have to be met, to enable them to vote for the deal.

And that's why they need to vote against it or abstain. They can't criticise it and the Government and then vote for it. By supporting the deal they are owning it and the Tories will push back any Labour criticism in the future with "but you voted for it!".

I've given Starmer a chance but I don't think I can back Labour under this leadership. The bill will pass without Labour support. There is no need for them to side with the Government.

[Ozyhibby]

Absolutely, and the sad thing is there's no logical reason for disillusioned Labour voters to swing 180 degrees to Tory. I'd rather vote Monster raving loony.

It’s the people in the centre who have to be persuaded though, not people like yourself who would only vote one party. There are a lot of people who look for competence and stability (I know that’s a joke right now). The reality was that the current govt is in power because people were terrified of Corbyn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

competence and stability (I know that’s a joke right now)

...it’s a joke that doesn’t do your argument any credit. I can construct a stronger argument than yours making the case that throughout the 20thcentury right wing governments have generally resulted in chaos and mismanagement, which have had to be cleared up by increased public spending and more social democracy.

[ronaldo7]

And that's why they need to vote against it or abstain. They can't criticise it and the Government and then vote for it. By supporting the deal they are owning it and the Tories will push back any Labour criticism in the future with "but you voted for it!".

I've given Starmer a chance but I don't think I can back Labour under this leadership. The bill will pass without Labour support. There is no need for them to side with the Government.

Starmer was the Brexit spokesman. These were his tests. As someone has already alluded to, it fails on point two alone.

He can't now ask those who were with him as Brexit spokesman to go against his own policy.

I thought he'd do the usual and abstain.

[Ozyhibby]

...it’s a joke that doesn’t do your argument any credit. I can construct a stronger argument than yours making the case that throughout the 20thcentury right wing governments have generally resulted in chaos and mismanagement, which have had to be cleared up by increased public spending and more social democracy.

A fair chunk of the country own property and have other assets such as pensions. The type of chaos the Tories bring rarely threatens that. Corbyn was seen as a threat to that. Nobody is going to vote for someone who threatens the value of the family home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Colr]

The Tories have won 16 elections since Labour became a party. ‘The left’ were only any kind of a political force in two of these defeats in 79 and under Corbyn. What happened the other 14 times? Blaming the left doesn’t stack up.

(The two times were in 1979 socialist Michael Foot was leader but the right of the party rebelled, key ministers walking out to form the SDP which briefly became the most popular party in the country. He never had a chance. And of course Corbyn in 2016, who also led a divided party, was supported by about 20% of his colleagues, and inherited Brexit. The only other true leader from the left, George Lansbury was kicked out by Labour conference in the 30s, when admittedly his pacifism was at odds with what was going on in Europe at the time, and never got to fight an election.)

Foot was 1983.

[hibsbollah]

Nobody is going to vote for someone who threatens the value of the family home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I don’t disagree. What you are talking about is messaging.

You seem to be avoiding the question as to why the Tories win overwhelmingly more often against moderates than they do against the Left. Youre also diverting away from ‘There is nobody more successful at delivering right wing govt for Britain than the left wing of the Labour Party’. Because it doesn’t stand up to historical scrutiny.

[hibsbollah]

Foot was 1983.

Yes, apologies. 1979 always jumps out as a date in my brain because of Thatchers election win in that year.

[Hibbyradge]

The Tories have won 16 elections since Labour became a party. ‘The left’ were only any kind of a political force in two of these defeats in 79 and under Corbyn. What happened the other 14 times? Blaming the left doesn’t stack up.

(The two times were in 1979 socialist Michael Foot was leader but the right of the party rebelled, key ministers walking out to form the SDP which briefly became the most popular party in the country. He never had a chance. And of course Corbyn in 2016, who also led a divided party, was supported by about 20% of his colleagues, and inherited Brexit. The only other true leader from the left, George Lansbury was kicked out by Labour conference in the 30s, when admittedly his pacifism was at odds with what was going on in Europe at the time, and never got to fight an election.)

Foot was 83. He led Labour to their worst defeat.

Corbyn had 2 elections lost the first one but did well and went into the next one with the Tories in total disarray and split down the middle over Brexit. Johnson was held in general disregard by many. It was Labour's worst performance ever. An absolute disgrace.

Tony Blair won 3 elections in a row.

In my life as an elector, there have been 11 elections. On both occasions when Labour offered the public recognised left wing candidates, they returned disastrous results.

Labour were no more split than the Tories last time under Corbyn, but the country chose a proven list and philanderer over a supposedly "decent, principled man".

The lesson does seem obvious to me, but the left understandably can't learn it so they blame someone else.

Get power, get the Tories out and start taking care of the people we're supposed to care about.

[G B Young]

Starmer was the Brexit spokesman. These were his tests. As someone has already alluded to, it fails on point two alone.

He can't now ask those who were with him as Brexit spokesman to go against his own policy.

I thought he'd do the usual and abstain.

Who, apart from political nerds, could name even one of Labour's Brexit 'tests'?! Even Corbyn failed to do so when asked (although that's maybe no real surprise).

Labour's Brexit 'policy' was a catastrophe and I'm not surprised Starmer is trying to draw a line under it. It may not be his preferred choice, but Labour need to reconcile themselves to Brexit and those who voted for it. When all's said and done, his party won't be the ones blamed for any negative consequences of us leaving the EU.

[hibsbollah]

Foot was 83. He led Labour to their worst defeat.

Corbyn had 2 elections lost the first one but did well and went into the next one with the Tories in total disarray and split down the middle over Brexit. Johnson was held in general disregard by many. It was Labour's worst performance ever. An absolute disgrace.

Tony Blair won 3 elections in a row.

In my life as an elector, there have been 11 elections. On both occasions when Labour offered the public recognised left wing candidates, they returned disastrous results.

Labour were no more split than the Tories last time under Corbyn, but the country chose a proven list and philanderer over a supposedly "decent, principled man".

The lesson does seem obvious to me, but the left understandably can't learn it so they blame someone else.

Get power, get the Tories out and start taking care of the people we're supposed to care about.


The historical facts are clear, that the two times the UK electorate were presented with a Left wing candidate, he was rejected. Nobody is denying that. There were other factors at work in 83 (whoops!) and 2019 which I’ve pointed out already. Whether the UK will ever change sufficiently to vote for a Leftie, is like everything else, a matter of opinion. Being aware of those facts doesn’t change the fact that Ozys original claims are wrong to the point of being nonsensical.

[Hibbyradge]

Starmer was the Brexit spokesman. These were his tests. As someone has already alluded to, it fails on point two alone.

He can't now ask those who were with him as Brexit spokesman to go against his own policy.

I thought he'd do the usual and abstain.

Brexit is arguably the most important issue the country has faced since WW2. Abstaining isn't a good look for a party which wants to be seen as credible when it comes to making big decisions. I seem to remember criticising Corbyn for doing that although I can't remember the exact circumstances. See where that got him.

So, that being the case, the choice is for or against. The vast majority of people would rather we had any deal rather than no deal. Voting against would allow the Tories to say that Starmer would have plunged the country off the abyss into chaos etc etc etc.

[hibsbollah]

Who, apart from political nerds, could name even one of Labour's Brexit 'tests'?! Even Corbyn failed to do so when asked (although that's maybe no real surprise).

Labour's Brexit 'policy' was a catastrophe and I'm not surprised Starmer is trying to draw a line under it. It may not be his preferred choice, but Labour need to reconcile themselves to Brexit and those who voted for it. When all's said and done, his party won't be the ones blamed for any negative consequences of us leaving the EU.

Labours Brexit policy for the election was Starmers responsibility, he was the minister in charge, so he’s not ‘drawing a line’ under Corbyn, he’s drawing a line under his own policy :faf: Which is something you seem to be blissfully unaware of.

Starmers current policy is to accept a deal a baw hair away from no deal. The policy during the election was to campaign for a second referendum. I think it’s obvious some people have a problem with the policy because of the individual at the top of the party, not because of the policy itself. Essentially, Labour has become a hard Brexit party but europhiles acccept that now because the bogeymans gone and someone has arrived who looks good in a suit. Disappointed doesn’t come close.

[ronaldo7]

Who, apart from political nerds, could name even one of Labour's Brexit 'tests'?! Even Corbyn failed to do so when asked (although that's maybe no real surprise).

Labour's Brexit 'policy' was a catastrophe and I'm not surprised Starmer is trying to draw a line under it. It may not be his preferred choice, but Labour need to reconcile themselves to Brexit and those who voted for it. When all's said and done, his party won't be the ones blamed for any negative consequences of us leaving the EU.

I'd have thought that most people would a least give it a go...oogle :wink:

As I've said, it's Starmers baby, he made the rules, which he now wants to whip his MP's to vote against.

The bit in bold...The tory party and their press barons will paint this as Starmer having flip flopped, and he'll have to own the deal. If he votes for it, it's his and the Tories.

[Colr]

Foot was 83. He led Labour to their worst defeat.

Corbyn had 2 elections lost the first one but did well and went into the next one with the Tories in total disarray and split down the middle over Brexit. Johnson was held in general disregard by many. It was Labour's worst performance ever. An absolute disgrace.

Tony Blair won 3 elections in a row.

In my life as an elector, there have been 11 elections. On both occasions when Labour offered the public recognised left wing candidates, they returned disastrous results.

Labour were no more split than the Tories last time under Corbyn, but the country chose a proven list and philanderer over a supposedly "decent, principled man".

The lesson does seem obvious to me, but the left understandably can't learn it so they blame someone else.

Get power, get the Tories out and start taking care of the people we're supposed to care about.
Blair with Brown implemented many, many left policies but they didn’t wear it on their sleeves. Many were unrolled by the Tories and you can be sure others like the minimum wage are in their sights.

The left hate it but to get socialist policies in the UK you cannot present as socialists. You need to be much more nuanced.

[Hibbyradge]

I'd have thought that most people would a least give it a go...oogle :wink:

As I've said, it's Starmers baby, he made the rules, which he now wants to whip his MP's to vote against.

The bit in bold...The tory party and their press barons will paint this as Starmer having flip flopped, and he'll have to own the deal. If he votes for it, it's his and the Tories.

I don't think anyone other than politicos are going to credit/blame Starmer for this deal.

[ronaldo7]

I don't think anyone other than politicos are going to credit/blame Starmer for this deal.

Oh, I don't know about that. Some are still trying to pin the blame on the SNP for Thatcher coming to power. 😂

[Hibbyradge]

Oh, I don't know about that. Some are still trying to pin the blame on the SNP for Thatcher coming to power. 😂

Whit? Non politicos? As if.

[G B Young]

I'd have thought that most people would a least give it a go...oogle :wink:

As I've said, it's Starmers baby, he made the rules, which he now wants to whip his MP's to vote against.

The bit in bold...The tory party and their press barons will paint this as Starmer having flip flopped, and he'll have to own the deal. If he votes for it, it's his and the Tories.

Arguably, but with Brexit now a reality what is to be gained from abstaining (or even voting against) the deal now? It would just confirm the view of many leave voters (ie those Starmer needs to win over) that he remains part of the so-called metropolitan elite who regard themselves as too noble to vote for ANYTHING that acknowledges Brexit and see those who voted for it as too stupid to understand what they were voting for.

Seems to me Starmer knows it's time to ditch the political snobbery and gesture politics and get real when it comes to his party's stance on Brexit. Continuing just to snipe from the sidelines will get Labour nowhere.

[hibsbollah]

Arguably, but with Brexit now a reality what is to be gained from abstaining (or even voting against) the deal now? It would just confirm the view of many leave voters (ie those Starmer needs to win over) that he remains part of the so-called metropolitan elite who regard themselves as too noble to vote for ANYTHING that acknowledges Brexit and see those who voted for it as too stupid to understand what they were voting for.

Seems to me Starmer knows it's time to ditch the political snobbery and gesture politics and get real when it comes to his party's stance on Brexit. Continuing just to snipe from the sidelines will get Labour nowhere.

It’s not politically smart to vote in the polar opposite direction of your true beliefs, beliefs which anyone with the tiniest interest in politics will be well aware of. Unless you think voters are ‘too stupid to understand’ these things.

Your last paragraph there is meaningless, I’ve read it twice and it’s just a piece of cliche bingo. No idea what it’s supposed to be about.

[G B Young]

It’s not politically smart to vote in the polar opposite direction of your true beliefs, beliefs which anyone with the tiniest interest in politics will be well aware of. Unless you think voters are ‘too stupid to understand’ these things.

Your last paragraph there is meaningless, I’ve read it twice and it’s just a piece of cliche bingo. No idea what it’s supposed to be about.

Are cliches (and indeed compromise) not the daily fuel for politics?

All I mean is that after the fiasco of Labour's Brexit policy under Corbyn (I don't think anyone even now knows where Corbyn stood on the issue) and the fact that Brexit is now a reality he seems to have realised that he's as well to back the deal and focus his energies on holding the government to account in a post-Brexit world rather than to keep fighting long lost battles.

[G B Young]

Labours Brexit policy for the election was Starmers responsibility, he was the minister in charge, so he’s not ‘drawing a line’ under Corbyn, he’s drawing a line under his own policy :faf: Which is something you seem to be blissfully unaware of.

Starmers current policy is to accept a deal a baw hair away from no deal. The policy during the election was to campaign for a second referendum. I think it’s obvious some people have a problem with the policy because of the individual at the top of the party, not because of the policy itself. Essentially, Labour has become a hard Brexit party but europhiles acccept that now because the bogeymans gone and someone has arrived who looks good in a suit. Disappointed doesn’t come close.

Sorry, I didn't spot this earlier.

So Corbyn, the leader of the Labour party at the time, didn't bear ultimate responsibility for their Brexit policy? You're right, I was blissfully unaware that was the case.

[Keith_M]

Sorry, I didn't spot this earlier.

So Corbyn, the leader of the Labour party at the time, didn't bear ultimate responsibility for their Brexit policy? You're right, I was blissfully unaware that was the case.


Yeah, that's total nonsense.

As far as campaigning against Brexit goes, Corbyn was worse than useless. He was practically silent on it for so long and then, when he finally gave in and 'opposed' it, it was so half-hearted.

Presumably this was because Corbyn had long argued against membership of the EU, "The great Frankenstein machine" (a quote from Corbyn himself).

[bigwheel]

Yeah, that's total nonsense.

As far as campaigning against Brexit goes, Corbyn was worse than useless. He was practically silent on it for so long and then, when he finally gave in and 'opposed' it, it was so half-hearted.

Presumably this was because Corbyn had long argued against membership of the EU, "The great Frankenstein machine" (a quote from Corbyn himself).

Agreed. Corbyn was pro brexit, it was one of the reasons the Labour Party never really fully mobilised against Brexit during his tenure. He was a long time anti EU political figure

[hibsbollah]

Sorry, I didn't spot this earlier.

So Corbyn, the leader of the Labour party at the time, didn't bear ultimate responsibility for their Brexit policy? You're right, I was blissfully unaware that was the case.

You are squirming, it’s the same old straw man from you, that’s not what I said and you know it. I’m talking about Starmers role in the Labour Party’s policy under Corbyns administration. You’re not addressing the point because it doesn’t suit your narrative. It’s just convenient for you to bang on about a politically irrelevant old geezer who now spends most of his time in an allotment while your Tory pals are busy screwing up the country and breaking up your precious Union.

[ronaldo7]

You are squirming, it’s the same old straw man from you, that’s not what I said and you know it. I’m talking about Starmers role in the Labour Party’s policy under Corbyns administration. You’re not addressing the point because it doesn’t suit your narrative. It’s just convenient for you to bang on about a politically irrelevant old geezer who now spends most of his time in an allotment while your Tory pals are busy screwing up the country and breaking up your precious Union.

He knows, and we know he knows, and he knows we know he knows.:aok:

[G B Young]

You are squirming, it’s the same old straw man from you, that’s not what I said and you know it. I’m talking about Starmers role in the Labour Party’s policy under Corbyns administration. You’re not addressing the point because it doesn’t suit your narrative. It’s just convenient for you to bang on about a politically irrelevant old geezer who now spends most of his time in an allotment while your Tory pals are busy screwing up the country and breaking up your precious Union.

What you said was: "Labours Brexit policy for the election was Starmers responsibility, he was the minister in charge, so he’s not ‘drawing a line’ under Corbyn, he’s drawing a line under his own policy."

I think it's reasonable to interpret that as implying Starmer, not Corbyn, was in charge of Labour's Brexit policy.

There's no narrative here, just a commonly shared view that Labour handled their Brexit response disastrously. They were arguably trumped only by Jo Swinson standing on a 'cancel Brexit' policy and destorying her fledgling political career in the process. As for Labour's backing for a 'people's vote', it was daft at the time and just looks even sillier now. Those who voted for Brexit were utterly unmoved, correctly pointing out that there had already been a people's vote...and duly delivered a Tory landslide at the ballot box.

[lapsedhibee]

As for Labour's backing for a 'people's vote', it was daft at the time and just looks even sillier now. Those who voted for Brexit were utterly unmoved, correctly pointing out that there had already been a people's vote...and duly delivered a Tory landslide at the ballot box.

Can it have been the issue of Brexit that delivered a Tory landslide, when at the time of the GE polls showed more people against Brexit than for it? I thought the landslide was something to do with the previous Labour leader? :confused:

[hibsbollah]

What you said was: "Labours Brexit policy for the election was Starmers responsibility, he was the minister in charge, so he’s not ‘drawing a line’ under Corbyn, he’s drawing a line under his own policy."

I think it's reasonable to interpret that as implying Starmer, not Corbyn, was in charge of Labour's Brexit policy.

There's no narrative here, just a commonly shared view that Labour handled their Brexit response disastrously. They were arguably trumped only by Jo Swinson standing on a 'cancel Brexit' policy and destorying her fledgling political career in the process. As for Labour's backing for a 'people's vote', it was daft at the time and just looks even sillier now. Those who voted for Brexit were utterly unmoved, correctly pointing out that there had already been a people's vote...and duly delivered a Tory landslide at the ballot box.

Yes, I stand by that bit in bold, because it is incontrovertible fact. It doesn’t matter whether you think the leader of the party or the shadow minister of that policy area bears ultimate responsibility. They clearly both drew up, signed up and campaigned for that policy. Starmer obviously is defined by the policy of his own department, you know that because you are not an idiot.

What you said was that you can understand why Starmer wanted to ‘draw a line’ under Labours disastrous policy. You failed to mention that he was minister in charge of that very policy. It’s a contradiction that bears repeating, partly because you are studiously avoiding it but also because no one else seems to be talking about it either. Strange, because It’s a volte face that even Boris would be proud of.

[bigwheel]

Can it have been the issue of Brexit that delivered a Tory landslide, when at the time of the GE polls showed more people against Brexit than for it? I thought the landslide was something to do with the previous Labour leader? :confused:

I suspect due to their wish to not lose pro Brexit votes , Labour never came out as either pro Brexit or anti Brexit. It left them in no mans land. It was such a Misty and unclear position to take . One of the many poor decisions of a leadership who had some strong thinking ..

[bigwheel]

Yes, I stand by that bit in bold, because it is incontrovertible fact. It doesn’t matter whether you think the leader of the party or the shadow minister of that policy area bears ultimate responsibility. They clearly both drew up, signed up and campaigned for that policy. Starmer obviously is defined by the policy of his own department, you know that because you are not a idiot.

What you said was that you can understand why Starmer wanted to ‘draw a line’ under Labours disastrous policy. You failed to mention that he was minister in charge of that very policy. It’s a contradiction that bears repeating, partly because you are studiously avoiding it but also because no one else seems to be talking about it either. Strange, because It’s a volte face that even Boris would be proud of.

Aren’t Labour’s key policy decisions made by their National Policy Forum??

[hibsbollah]

Aren’t Labour’s key policy decisions made by their National Policy Forum??

Well in theory they are made by Conference but those days seem to be long gone :greengrin Since Blair you are right about that body technically, but of course the minister or shadow minister in charge always bears ultimate responsibility for his or her policy area. That’s why they sometimes get the sack.

[Keith_M]

Well in theory they are made by Conference but those days seem to be long gone :greengrin Since Blair you are right about that body technically, but of course the minister or shadow minister in charge always bears ultimate responsibility for his or her policy area. That’s why they sometimes get the sack.


OK, just to clarify, then; Do you think Corbyn shares any of the blame for Labour's disastrous Brexit 'opposition'?

[hibsbollah]

OK, just to clarify, then; Do you think Corbyn shares any of the blame for Labour's disastrous Brexit 'opposition'?

Oh yeah, massively. I was vocal about it on here at the time, I was hugely disappointed that he continued to wear two hats at the same time. I remember trying to persuade Hibbyradge that he would eventually flop to the 2nd referendum side and I was wrong about that. It is over simplistic to say he was a committed anti European, he was in the same position as a lot of socialists who like the idea of cross border solidarity and more social democracy than is normal in the U.K., and antipathy towards what is at its roots a capitalist project. It’s complicated. But I’m a committed pro European and I wrongly thought he would make the ‘right’ choice.

But thats off topic, it’s going down a historical rabbit hole and not as relevant to the issue at hand, the current deal, and Starmer is the man in opposition right now.

[Kato]

Oh yeah, massively. I was vocal about it on here at the time, I was hugely disappointed that he continued to wear two hats at the same time.


Three if you include the Russian one.

[hibsbollah]

Three if you include the Russian one.

Ah yes, good old BBC Newsnight. Just as well Boris and the Tories won the election and the danger of nefarious Russian interference in the British political system died with Corbyn. Ma sides.

[Bristolhibby]

I suspect due to their wish to not lose pro Brexit votes , Labour never came out as either pro Brexit or anti Brexit. It left them in no mans land. It was such a Misty and unclear position to take . One of the many poor decisions of a leadership who had some strong thinking ..

Plus as has been proven, Corbyn was a massive turn off for middle England. Labour lost votes (where it counted in swing seats).

I know people who hated Brexit, but couldn't vote for Labour because of Corbyn.

Moving a majority in a safe Labour seat from 40% to 60% in Bristol East, doesn’t cut it.

That doesn’t win in Surrey, Plymouth or Blackpool.

J

[bigwheel]

Plus as has been proven, Corbyn was a massive turn off for middle England. Labour lost votes (where it counted in swing seats).

I know people who hated Brexit, but couldn't vote for Labour because of Corbyn.

Moving a majority in a safe Labour seat from 40% to 60% in Bristol East, doesn’t cut it.

That doesn’t win in Surrey, Plymouth or Blackpool.

J

Yes, whilst Corbyn got strong support from
Those looking for a deeper social equality agenda , he was never going to win those middle England seats that are critical to win power ..

He wasn’t much of a leader tbh. Never really brought his party together , let alone the swing voters ..

[Callum_62]

Sunlit uplands on the Horizon says Leadsom. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201229/e9983478c786bcbe9ade784ffdd3d985.jpg

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

Sunlit uplands on the Horizon says Leadsom. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201229/e9983478c786bcbe9ade784ffdd3d985.jpg

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

But you'll need Netscape to get there......

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55475433

[Keith_M]

Oh yeah, massively. I was vocal about it on here at the time, I was hugely disappointed that he continued to wear two hats at the same time. I remember trying to persuade Hibbyradge that he would eventually flop to the 2nd referendum side and I was wrong about that. It is over simplistic to say he was a committed anti European, he was in the same position as a lot of socialists who like the idea of cross border solidarity and more social democracy than is normal in the U.K., and antipathy towards what is at its roots a capitalist project. It’s complicated. But I’m a committed pro European and I wrongly thought he would make the ‘right’ choice.

But thats off topic, it’s going down a historical rabbit hole and not as relevant to the issue at hand, the current deal, and Starmer is the man in opposition right now.



Fair enough, cheers.

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201229/a020fbcdbaf945ffb4147f0ba1696382.jpg

Scottish Labour after spending the last couple of days attacking the SNP for not backing the deal.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201229/a020fbcdbaf945ffb4147f0ba1696382.jpg

Scottish Labour after spending the last couple of days attacking the SNP for not backing the deal.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wonder what Ian Murray will do at Westminster. He's been very vocal in the last few days. Is he Scottish Labour or British Labour?

[hibsbollah]

I wonder what Ian Murray will do at Westminster. He's been very vocal in the last few days. Is he Scottish Labour or British Labour?

Hes busy having a fight with Joanna Cherry on Twitter. Say what you like about him, he’s not lazy about fannying about on social media.

[ronaldo7]

Hes busy having a fight with Joanna Cherry on Twitter. Say what you like about him, he’s not lazy about fannying about on social media.

His constituency voted over 70% to remain. How's he going to square his voting for the deal alongside the ERG? :greengrin

[ronaldo7]

David Martin ex MEP. The voice of reason in Labour ranks.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/why-labour-should-vote-against-brexit-deal-david-martin-and-glyn-ford-3080646

[hibsbollah]

His constituency voted over 70% to remain. How's he going to square his voting for the deal alongside the ERG? :greengrin

I won’t vote for No Deal. Will you Joanna? Is that what your constituents expect?

Hes still suffering from that penalty shoot out catastrophe. But he could livestream himself battering a Labrador to death on bruntsfield links and still get a majority.

[Peevemor]

Hes busy having a fight with Joanna Cherry on Twitter. Say what you like about him, he’s not lazy about fannying about on social media.From what I gather he's quite a good constituency MP. He should stick to that because he's nowhere near Cherry's level if it comes to an intellectual scrap.

[degenerated]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201229/a020fbcdbaf945ffb4147f0ba1696382.jpg

Scottish Labour after spending the last couple of days attacking the SNP for not backing the deal.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkNeil Findlay is going to be feeling a bit of a tit, again.

[G B Young]

His constituency voted over 70% to remain. How's he going to square his voting for the deal alongside the ERG? :greengrin

I'd guess that because remain is no longer an option he sees a deal as better than no deal, same as Starmer. As Labour's only Scottish MP (who won his seat last time round by a huge margin) he probably reckons the majority of his constituents would back that stance too.

Leaving aside who was actually responsible for Labour's Brexit policy under Corbyn, I'm not sure Starmer can be accused of a U-turn on this. The 'second referendum' policy is no longer valid and he has been pretty consistent since being elected leader in saying that a deal is crucial when set against a no deal exit.

[CloudSquall]

https://twitter.com/lukecooper100/status/1343517157318078465


A twitter thread (from a Labour member) explaining why the deal vs no deal argument from Labour regarding the vote in parliament is constitutionally meaningless.

[ronaldo7]

I'd guess that because remain is no longer an option he sees a deal as better than no deal, same as Starmer. As Labour's only Scottish MP (who won his seat last time round by a huge margin) he probably reckons the majority of his constituents would back that stance too.

Leaving aside who was actually responsible for Labour's Brexit policy under Corbyn, I'm not sure Starmer can be accused of a U-turn on this. The 'second referendum' policy is no longer valid and he has been pretty consistent since being elected leader in saying that a deal is crucial when set against a no deal exit.

They're voting on the deal. That's the only thing on the order paper.

Is the deal good enough or not.

[Ozyhibby]

They're voting on the deal. That's the only thing on the order paper.

Is the deal good enough or not.

That’s exactly it. If you think it’s a better deal than we have now then vote for it, if not don’t.
If the Tories then take the no deal option then that’s on them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ballengeich]

Sunlit uplands on the Horizon says Leadsom. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201229/e9983478c786bcbe9ade784ffdd3d985.jpg

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk
Are these deals anything more than countries agreeing to roll over existing arrangements with the EU now the UK is separate?

[Ozyhibby]

Are these deals anything more than countries agreeing to roll over existing arrangements with the EU now the UK is separate?

That’s exactly what they are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[G B Young]

They're voting on the deal. That's the only thing on the order paper.

Is the deal good enough or not.

Then I guess he must think it's good enough. 'Thin but better than no deal' was the gist of what Starmer said I think.

[hibsbollah]

Then I guess he must think it's good enough. 'Thin but better than no deal' was the gist of what Starmer said I think.

What does ‘thin’ even mean? 10% thinner than what we have now as part of the EU, 90% thinner, just a baw hair, what? If you’re whipping every Labour MP to vote for the deal then that suggests partisan enthusiasm towards Bungling Boris, from the chief cheerleader for a second referendum just two years ago :dunno: It’s baffling, unprecedented.

[ronaldo7]

Then I guess he must think it's good enough. 'Thin but better than no deal' was the gist of what Starmer said I think.

If he votes for the deal, he breaks his 6 tests rule. It's up to him, but if he votes for it, he has to own it.

[hibsbollah]

If he votes for the deal, he breaks his 6 tests rule. It's up to him, but if he votes for it, he has to own it.

Its not just how he votes, it’s how he’s instructing others to vote, on a matter of conscience that divides the country and the party. Unifying and an end to factionalism was the promise when he was elected, Stalinism and power from the centre is the reality. Rayner and Dodds seem to be going along with the procession.

[Smartie]

They’ve been all over the shop on Brexit from the beginning.

Ravaged with fear over alienating and losing voters they’ve lost sight of what decisive leadership, a chosen direction and a bit of “are you with me or not” can gain.

I understand their concerns over the “red wall” areas but their stance here is just plain bizarre.

They have a chance to put a fairly inglorious period behind them and pick their direction going forward, but they seem intent on repeating the same mistakes.

The biggest problem I think they’ve had since Blair has been a lack of callousness and opportunism. There’s a chance to make Boris very uncomfortable and isolated here - I think it’s unforgivable to miss that opportunity.

[ronaldo7]

Its not just how he votes, it’s how he’s instructing others to vote, on a matter of conscience that divides the country and the party. Unifying and an end to factionalism was the promise when he was elected, Stalinism and power from the centre is the reality. Rayner and Dodds seem to be going along with the procession.

Yup, whipping the party to fall in behind Boris and co. Abstention or a free vote are still his options, but he doesn't seem to want to take that route.

The better together gang are back. 😆

[greenlex]

The EU have all along said they are there to negotiate as long as it takes. The cliff edge for no deal is a making of the UK government. They have manufactured this situation . Expertly leaving it to Christmas eve to save the day with a deal however ****. Like the last one it should be rejected and an extension to membership and negotiations resumed without the cliff edge. Won’t happen tho.

[ronaldo7]

The EU have all along said they are there to negotiate as long as it takes. The cliff edge for no deal is a making of the UK government. They have manufactured this situation . Expertly leaving it to Christmas eve to save the day with a deal however ****. Like the last one it should be rejected and an extension to membership and negotiations resumed without the cliff edge. Won’t happen tho.

And this is exactly where starmer should have led his troops.

[weecounty hibby]

And this is exactly where starmer should have led his troops.

Overall though with an eighty seat majority the modern day BNP would win the vote regardless of how all the opposition parties vote. It is though a matter of conscience. All this bull**** that the tory/labour/unionists have started about no deal Nicola is just trying to divert from the fact that they have a deal but it is pretty pathetic when compared to what we had.

[G B Young]

The EU have all along said they are there to negotiate as long as it takes. The cliff edge for no deal is a making of the UK government. They have manufactured this situation . Expertly leaving it to Christmas eve to save the day with a deal however ****. Like the last one it should be rejected and an extension to membership and negotiations resumed without the cliff edge. Won’t happen tho.

Just what the nation would welcome at a time like this. More Brexit negotiations.

[G B Young]

Overall though with an eighty seat majority the modern day BNP would win the vote regardless of how all the opposition parties vote. It is though a matter of conscience. All this bull**** that the tory/labour/unionists have started about no deal Nicola is just trying to divert from the fact that they have a deal but it is pretty pathetic when compared to what we had.

Is it really a pretty pathetic deal compared to what we had? I haven't waded through it so I don't actually know how it stacks up overall. If we are to believe the SNP then yes everything about it will be a disaster, but can anyone say for sure it won't work out better than the doom mongers predict? It's certainly not something that we'll know overnight.

Personally I wish the Brexit referendum had never occurred. The rancour and division it has caused across the UK over the last four and a half years has been depressing and mind-numbing as hell (oh, and the fact it threw the SNP a lifeline after their independence referendum defeat didn't help either). However, it seems to me there's a big difference between not wanting Brexit to have happened and wanting the deal we have eventually secured to fail because it doesn't suit your political outlook. Now that Brexit is a reality it seems logical to me to hope for the best.

[Jack]

Is it really a pretty pathetic deal compared to what we had? I haven't waded through it so I don't actually know how it stacks up overall. If we are to believe the SNP then yes everything about it will be a disaster, but can anyone say for sure it won't work out better than the doom mongers predict? It's certainly not something that we'll know overnight.

Personally I wish the Brexit referendum had never occurred. The rancour and division it has caused across the UK over the last four and a half years has been depressing and mind-numbing as hell (oh, and the fact it threw the SNP a lifeline after their independence referendum defeat didn't help either). However, it seems to me there's a big difference between not wanting Brexit to have happened and wanting the deal we have eventually secured to fail because it doesn't suit your political outlook. Now that Brexit is a reality it seems logical to me to hope for the best.

You might not have waded through it but plenty have, not just the SNP, and the one thing they agree on is that it's a disaster on every level.

And its not just the media. Education, security, food, fishing, car, manufacturing industries etc. all say its a disaster.

This doesn't include the cheerleaders at the BBC, the Express of Mail obviously.

Have you come across anything that could be even vaguely be described as a success?

[heretoday]

Is it really a pretty pathetic deal compared to what we had? I haven't waded through it so I don't actually know how it stacks up overall. If we are to believe the SNP then yes everything about it will be a disaster, but can anyone say for sure it won't work out better than the doom mongers predict? It's certainly not something that we'll know overnight.

Personally I wish the Brexit referendum had never occurred. The rancour and division it has caused across the UK over the last four and a half years has been depressing and mind-numbing as hell (oh, and the fact it threw the SNP a lifeline after their independence referendum defeat didn't help either). However, it seems to me there's a big difference between not wanting Brexit to have happened and wanting the deal we have eventually secured to fail because it doesn't suit your political outlook. Now that Brexit is a reality it seems logical to me to hope for the best.

You're absolutely right. There's nothing worse than folk crying "stinking fish" in their own back yard.

[Hibbyradge]

You might not have waded through it but plenty have, not just the SNP, and the one thing they agree on is that it's a disaster on every level.

And its not just the media. Education, security, food, fishing, car, manufacturing industries etc. all say its a disaster.

This doesn't include the cheerleaders at the BBC, the Express of Mail obviously.

Have you come across anything that could be even vaguely be described as a success?

It seems to me that there are actually 2 questions which the Labour Party needs to answer and act upon.

1. Which is better for the public, Johnson's deal or leaving the EU without a deal?

2. What's the best thing to do politically once you've answered question 1.

It's much more straightforward for the SNP who can ignore Q1 and move directly to the first part of Q2. The answer for them is obvious and they'll rightly vote against and make as much capital of it as they can. Roll on Indy 2, I say.

My initial thoughts were that Labour would abstain, but I guess they must think that it's easier to shrug off attempts to blame them for the deal, than the harm caused by the accusations that they bottled such an important decision. And, as has been mentioned already, they've got one eye on the Brexit supporters who were previously Labour voters.

One thing's for certain, Jezza won't defy the Labour whip this time! (I know, nae need).

[Bristolhibby]

Tories = vote for it bar the ERG purist, disaster capitalist nutters.

Labour = vote for it. Other option being no deal (which they will be tarred with if it fails). Too risky (politically) not to vote for it.

Lib Dem’s = Against but irrelevant.

DUP = Dead against, keep Ulster British, etc. They have been shafted. Their country will be part of the Republic soon. They will be the ones that need assurances that they can keep their blue British passports. (Should have gone with Mays deal).

SNP = Against. Let the Tories (and England) stew in their own juice. Continues the narrative that what Scotland wants it never gets. Also, in the grand scheme of things the way the SNP votes is also irrelevant.

England = votes and gets Brexit
Wales = votes and gets Brexit
Northern Ireland = votes against Brexit and gets a beat of both worlds deal.
Gibraltar = votes against Brexit (by 98%) gets its own special deal in the Schengen.
Scotland = votes against Brexit. Suck it up buttercup, we voted as one U.K., wee Jimmy Krankie stirring things, too wee, too poor, too stupid.

J

[Jack]

It seems to me that there are actually 2 questions which the Labour Party needs to answer and act upon.

1. Which is better for the public, Johnson's deal or leaving the EU without a deal?

2. What's the best thing to do politically once you've answered question 1.

It's much more straightforward for the SNP who can ignore Q1 and move directly to the first part of Q2. The answer for them is obvious and they'll rightly vote against and make as much capital of it as they can. Roll on Indy 2, I say.

My initial thoughts were that Labour would abstain, but I guess they must think that it's easier to shrug off attempts to blame them for the deal, than the harm caused by the accusations that they bottled such an important decision. And, as has been mentioned already, they've got one eye on the Brexit supporters who were previously Labour voters.

One thing's for certain, Jezza won't defy the Labour whip this time! (I know, nae need).

The vote is going to succeed whatever other parties do and its not a choice of this or a no deal as the government already have executive powers, this vote will just give them more.

The other parties, IMO, should all vote against. The torys own Brexit lock, stock and barrel.

Let them wallow in their own stink.

When it becomes apparent that Brexit has failed the torys won't be slow in pointing at Labour voting for it and will ensure they are guilty by association.

[Bristolhibby]

The vote is going to succeed whatever other parties do and its not a choice of this or a no deal as the government already have executive powers, this vote will just give them more.

The other parties, IMO, should all vote against. The torys own Brexit lock, stock and barrel.

Let them wallow in their own stink.

When it becomes apparent that Brexit has failed the torys won't be slow in pointing at Labour voting for it and will ensure they are guilty by association.

I know. But Labour have to be seen not to frustrate the Darling that is Brexit. That will hurt them more.

Bizarrely if they vote against it the Tories can is some strange way say that the failure of Brexit is because they “didn’t get behind UK PLC”, they frustrated the “will of the people”. It’s mental, but I can see the Tories painting that picture quite successfully.

“I would have gotten away with it if it wasn’t for you pesky remoner Labour Party”.

J

[G B Young]

The vote is going to succeed whatever other parties do and its not a choice of this or a no deal as the government already have executive powers, this vote will just give them more.

The other parties, IMO, should all vote against. The torys own Brexit lock, stock and barrel.

Let them wallow in their own stink.

When it becomes apparent that Brexit has failed the torys won't be slow in pointing at Labour voting for it and will ensure they are guilty by association.

At what point would that be? It seems to me that the deal we have was primarily about ensuring the UK and the EU can continue to trade without extra taxes being put on goods. Now that this has been established it will allow the UK government to (finally) roll out its policies for a post-Brexit world. When he was interviewed about these last weekend, the PM implied that he'd held off on unveiling these plans because they might have scared the EU off when it came to signing the deal.

On that basis I'm unclear how there can be any certainty that Brexit will 'fail'. We are only now going to start of finding out how its aftermath will play out for the UK - hence the SNP's determination to try and throw an independence referendum into the midst of a pandemic, lest (whisper it) the government's post-Brexit plans actually prove to be quite popular.

[Kato]

lest (whisper it) the government's post-Brexit plans actually prove to be quite popular.


By "popular" do you mean "a success"?


Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[G B Young]

Tories = vote for it bar the ERG purist, disaster capitalist nutters.

Labour = vote for it. Other option being no deal (which they will be tarred with if it fails). Too risky (politically) not to vote for it.

Lib Dem’s = Against but irrelevant.

DUP = Dead against, keep Ulster British, etc. They have been shafted. Their country will be part of the Republic soon. They will be the ones that need assurances that they can keep their blue British passports. (Should have gone with Mays deal).

SNP = Against. Let the Tories (and England) stew in their own juice. Continues the narrative that what Scotland wants it never gets. Also, in the grand scheme of things the way the SNP votes is also irrelevant.

England = votes and gets Brexit
Wales = votes and gets Brexit
Northern Ireland = votes against Brexit and gets a beat of both worlds deal.
Gibraltar = votes against Brexit (by 98%) gets its own special deal in the Schengen.
Scotland = votes against Brexit. Suck it up buttercup, we voted as one U.K., wee Jimmy Krankie stirring things, too wee, too poor, too stupid.

J

Like it or not, that remains the bottom line.

It's also worth remembering that over a million Scottish voters voted for Brexit, not far short of 40% of the turnout, which is hardly the insignificant minority of the 'people of Scotland' the SNP would have us believe. Needless to say they didn't brush off the 45% who voted for independence with such disdain.

[Ozyhibby]

Like it or not, that remains the bottom line.

It's also worth remembering that over a million Scottish voters voted for Brexit, not far short of 40% of the turnout, which is hardly the insignificant minority of the 'people of Scotland' the SNP would have us believe. Needless to say they didn't brush off the 45% who voted for independence with such disdain.

But they accepted the result.
And the result in the brexit vote was a majority in favour of remain in Scotland. That result is not being accepted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

At what point would that be? It seems to me that the deal we have was primarily about ensuring the UK and the EU can continue to trade without extra taxes being put on goods. Now that this has been established it will allow the UK government to (finally) roll out its policies for a post-Brexit world. When he was interviewed about these last weekend, the PM implied that he'd held off on unveiling these plans because they might have scared the EU off when it came to signing the deal.

On that basis I'm unclear how there can be any certainty that Brexit will 'fail'. We are only now going to start of finding out how its aftermath will play out for the UK - hence the SNP's determination to try and throw an independence referendum into the midst of a pandemic, lest (whisper it) the government's post-Brexit plans actually prove to be quite popular.

Sounds like the former East German leader Erich Mielke, "When the imperialists claim we have no marmalade, of course we have marmalade, we just don't want to show it to them".

[Jack]

At what point would that be? It seems to me that the deal we have was primarily about ensuring the UK and the EU can continue to trade without extra taxes being put on goods. Now that this has been established it will allow the UK government to (finally) roll out its policies for a post-Brexit world. When he was interviewed about these last weekend, the PM implied that he'd held off on unveiling these plans because they might have scared the EU off when it came to signing the deal.

On that basis I'm unclear how there can be any certainty that Brexit will 'fail'. We are only now going to start of finding out how its aftermath will play out for the UK - hence the SNP's determination to try and throw an independence referendum into the midst of a pandemic, lest (whisper it) the government's post-Brexit plans actually prove to be quite popular.

I take it you still haven't waded through the deal or found any credible source pointing at anything that looked like it won't be a disaster then?

Pinning your hopes on something the PM implied is a flipping beauty given he's only ever lied in the past.

[Radium]

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/uk-eu-agreement-parliament/

There is a lot of talk of today’s vote but it will have no impact on the deal. The government does not need permission to sign trade deals as was seen with the Japanese and Australian ones in recent months.

It is good political theatre but that is all it is.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201230/eb26ac7dc00149befa57d2a9b4727cf7.png


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

I take it you still haven't waded through the deal or found any credible source pointing at anything that looked like it won't be a disaster then?

Pinning your hopes on something the PM implied is a flipping beauty given he's only ever lied in the past.

:agree: The Express says Boris has some magic beans for sale. All you’ll need to give up is that magic cow.

[RyeSloan]

I take it you still haven't waded through the deal or found any credible source pointing at anything that looked like it won't be a disaster then?

Pinning your hopes on something the PM implied is a flipping beauty given he's only ever lied in the past.

Define ‘disaster’.

It seems to me that there has been very little evidence of it promoting a disaster put forward despite the detail being out there for quite a few days.

Indeed we had the CEO of Tesco saying it actually prevented any rises in food prices.

It also appears to defend existing food and working standards.

I’ve not read the detail (doubt any of us on here will take the trouble to read the full text!) but what I have seen reported certainly does not seem to predicate impending disaster or indeed many of the Armageddon type scenarios that Brexit was supposedly meant to bring.

Does it mean the UK will be better or worse for being out of the EU over the next 5 - 10 years or so (which would be a sensible time frame to measure the outcomes on) I have no real idea...but then few actually do.

I get those that were wedded to the concept of being part of the EU will forever see negatives and suggest anything that replaces that scenario as being a ‘disaster’ but the deal done with the EU (on physical goods at least) suggests that may not entirely be the case.

Finally it’s quite funny seeing the ending of the CFP and the CAP in the UK being heralded as something bad. There can surely have been few things created that restricted trade, increased prices, pandered to vested interests and contained perverse incentives than those two policies!

CAP alone accounted for 35% - 40% of the EU budget. Here’s a great article on just how this money is spent and where it goes:


https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/11/03/world/europe/eu-farm-subsidy-hungary.amp.html

[G B Young]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-55479851?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=5fec8b2fc22e7e02e5d586d5%26%27No%20way %20I%20am%20choosing%20to%20drink%20this%20excreme nt%2C%27%20says%20SNP%20MP%262020-12-30T14%3A17%3A15.023Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:f341d376-663f-4469-971a-585ba89075e8&pinned_post_asset_id=5fec8b2fc22e7e02e5d586d5&pinned_post_type=share

Charming rhetoric.

[G B Young]

By "popular" do you mean "a success"?


Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

They're often one and the same when it comes to politics.

[DaveF]

They're often one and the same when it comes to politics.

What's wrong with that? At least she is being truthful unlike many in your party who lie on a regular basis.

[lapsedhibee]

What's wrong with that? At least she is being truthful unlike many in your party who lie on a regular basis.

Personally more concerned that the BBC thinks she said "whiskey". Ignorant *******. :grr: :panic:

[G B Young]

But they accepted the result.
And the result in the brexit vote was a majority in favour of remain in Scotland. That result is not being accepted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's arguable that the SNP have ever 'accepted' the 2014 result...

If we had become an independent country we wouldn't have been part of the Brexit vote. But we didn't and we were - and we have left EU as part of the UK (as have the other parts of UK which voted remain). I voted remain and was pretty shocked by the result, but I found the 'Stop Brexit' movement just plain daft.

How much respect would the SNP have accorded a movement which attempted to cancel independence had the result gone the other way in 2014?

[G B Young]

I take it you still haven't waded through the deal or found any credible source pointing at anything that looked like it won't be a disaster then?

Pinning your hopes on something the PM implied is a flipping beauty given he's only ever lied in the past.

No, I haven't read it, nor do I plan to. Far too boring and I'm probably not smart enough to assess whether much of what it contains constitutes a good or a bad thing. Have you read it? If so then fair dos, you know more about what you're talking about than I do.

My point is not really about proving Brexit will be a success. I'm just questioning whether the fact a number of industries/politicians etc are telling us it will be a failure makes that assessment unarguable.

However, if you're asking for anything positive from a 'credible source', this from the Times indicates that a few respected think tanks think we can do just fine post-Brexit (I can't seem to post more than the first few paragraphs due to the paywall):

Britain’s economy will outperform European rivals such as France over the next 15 years, according to forecasts published in the wake of the Government's Brexit trade deal with Brussels.
A new ranking shows the UK remaining the world’s 5th biggest economy next year. From 2025 it slips one place, but still performs better than many peer western economies. The UK’s economy will be 23pc larger than that of France by 2035, the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) predicts.
Historically, French output was higher than the UK’s for much of the postwar period, until the situation was reversed in recent decades.
“The UK economy continues to be one of the better performers in Europe despite Brexit,” a spokesperson for the CEBR said.
“It is forecast to be overtaken only by India during the period to 2035.”
After four and a half years of political uncertainty surrounding trade conditions around Brexit, which many economists blame for weak business investment and tepid GDP growth, the Government sealed a trade agreement on Christmas Eve. The deal was described as a “huge relief” by Britain’s biggest business group.
The CBI added: “The UK has a bright future outside the EU and with a deal secured we can begin our new chapter on firmer ground.”
The Institute of Directors said the deal “can draw a line under what has been a tumultuous few years”.
The UK’s burgeoning technology sector is one factor supporting the country’s growth. The CEBR sees tech-based jobs rising from 10pc of total British employment in 2010 to 18pc in 2025.

[ronaldo7]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-55479851?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=5fec8b2fc22e7e02e5d586d5%26%27No%20way %20I%20am%20choosing%20to%20drink%20this%20excreme nt%2C%27%20says%20SNP%20MP%262020-12-30T14%3A17%3A15.023Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:f341d376-663f-4469-971a-585ba89075e8&pinned_post_asset_id=5fec8b2fc22e7e02e5d586d5&pinned_post_type=share

Charming rhetoric.

You'll be happy with D Ross' pint of sick comment though.

Obvs

[Bristolhibby]

Like it or not, that remains the bottom line.

It's also worth remembering that over a million Scottish voters voted for Brexit, not far short of 40% of the turnout, which is hardly the insignificant minority of the 'people of Scotland' the SNP would have us believe. Needless to say they didn't brush off the 45% who voted for independence with such disdain.

Still short of 40%.

When Scotland is Independent one of the first votes will be whether to rejoin the EU. That may come in the form of a plebiscite, or as part of an election manifesto.

Indy vote is a democratic certainty. It will soon become untenable to deny it. Things have moved on since 2014.

Similarly post independence of a party stands on the reunification ticket and is elected, then press on with rejoining the rump of the U.K.

The votes will happen and everyone’s vote will be counted. It’s democracy in action.

Live or die by your own decisions. Not having to do what your Southern neighbour thinks is good for them.

J

[Kato]

They're often one and the same when it comes to politics.What a rotten answer.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

Patrick Harvie nailed Ruth to the cross today, but Mike Russell was simply fantastic.

[Glory Lurker]

I take it that as Brexit can be a success and not something to worry about after all independence for Scotland is no longer seen in unionist quarters as a major economic risk?

[Callum_62]

I take it that as Brexit can be a success and not something to worry about after all independence for Scotland is no longer seen in unionist quarters as a major economic risk?

Course not - no way can it be a success using the skootish poond

[StevieC]

Patrick Harvie nailed Ruth to the cross today, but Mike Russell was simply fantastic.

Where and when?

[StevieC]

Boris claimed that the fishing quota deal would provide enough fish to get to the South Pole and back ..

Now that we are in full lockdown, and I've a bit of spare time on my hands, I thought I would check if that were the case.

Basing the average size of herring/mackerel to be about 30cm and 500g, and a return trip to the South Pole being about 38,000km, the average price of a tonne of fish costing around £1700 and the UK fishing quota valued at around £850m ...

The 15% increase in the first year would relate to 75,000 extra tonnes of fish, and a distance of 45,000km.

So Boris would indeed be able to get to the South Pole and back on a Scottish mackerel .. however .. if he travels there and back on a slightly heavier English fish then he may find himself stranded somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean.

Turns out he won’t even make it out of the English Channel on the back of a North Sea cod ..

https://www.gov.scot/news/brexit-deal-means-drop-in-key-fishing-stocks/

Is anyone surprised that Boris’s claims of a 25% increase in fishing quotas turns out to be nothing of the sort?

[degenerated]

Where and when?Yesterday in holyrood debate

https://twitter.com/Ross_Greer/status/1344314976606035969?s=19

And Mike russell here giving his excellent closing speech, he really will be a loss to the SNP in Parliament next time. https://youtu.be/mTaha3SzrXw

Just for completeness, davidson helped nail herself to the cross with an embarrassing performance.

https://twitter.com/AngusSouthSNP/status/1344282541440856066?s=09

[ronaldo7]

Yesterday in holyrood debate

https://twitter.com/Ross_Greer/status/1344314976606035969?s=19

And Mike russell here giving his excellent closing speech, he really will be a loss to the SNP in Parliament next time. https://youtu.be/mTaha3SzrXw

Just for completeness, davidson helped nail herself to the cross with an embarrassing performance.

https://twitter.com/AngusSouthSNP/status/1344282541440856066?s=09

Thanks. Still reeling from last night's result to look it out.

[greenlex]

Peter Vardy pulling out of new car sales. Partly because importing post Brexit will be too much hassle.

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/business/business-news/1851835/vauxhall-dealerships-across-tayside-and-fife-to-close/?utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR1J3mScGB-Yrc-_osDnlAsoRXV9Wt1ZXgyFIzJ0CnyYv1tIXJqlrHhv98E

[ronaldo7]

You're absolutely right. There's nothing worse than folk crying "stinking fish" in their own back yard.

Smokies, why do you hate the smokies.

[CloudSquall]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-45856784


Will Davidson and Mundell follow through on their 2018 stance regarding a different deal for Northern Ireland?

[Callum_62]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-45856784


Will Davidson and Mundell follow through on their 2018 stance regarding a different deal for Northern Ireland?Ofcourse they wont

That would take integrity

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

Spain reach a deal with Gibraltar for no hard border. Are you watching Scotland.

[CloudSquall]

Something I picked up in the Argentine press was that the Falkland Islands were left out of the deal which Boris Johnson put down to EU pressure during negotiations.

https://polarjournal.ch/en/2020/12/28/eu-uk-agreement-without-falkland-islands/

It means Falkland Island fisheries could face tariffs of between 8 and 18 % which would be very damaging to their economy.

While Boris is acting like Churchill due to the deal he got he's very much Chamberlain in his communication to the islands, basically admitting defeat in negotiations,

https://www.fis.com/fis/worldnews/worldnews.asp?country=0&monthyear=&l=e&id=110975&ndb=1&df=0


There was much celebration amongst the Argentine press with this one, much like lions circling a much weakened pray.

[greenlex]

Spain reach a deal with Gibraltar for no hard border. Are you watching Scotland.
Near as dammit Schengen deal. The Union is not going to last. Hopefully the remaining sceptical folk against independence come to their senses sooner rather than later.