Brexit (1 Viewer)

[Dadsdream]

Any last hopes at stopping BREXIT got buried at the ballot box, it would seem. They're calling it the biggest win since Thatcher.
My only question would be, how does it affect the U.S.?

“We will get Brexit done on time by the 31st of January, no ifs, no buts, no maybes.”
Boris Johnson

"Brexit closure": Johnson wins commanding victory in UK election

Prime Minister Boris Johnson called on Friday for "closure" over the Brexit divisions that have riven the United Kingdom, saying his election victory provided an overwhelming mandate to take Britain out of the European Union on Jan. 31.

www.reuters.com

 

[RobF]

We should have a thread for the ongoing mess that is Brexit.

Current state: Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his government are continuing to insist the UK will leave the EU by October 31st, "do or die", despite Parliament having already passed a law requiring Johnson to request an extension to negotiations with the EU by October 19th if Parliament hasn't approved leaving otherwise. It's unclear how they intend to get around that, or if they're just bluffing wildly in the absence of anything better to do. Johnson's government has no majority at this point, after several of his MPs have switched parties and others have been expelled. He's called for an early General Election, but that requires two-thirds of Parliament to approve it, and, particularly as it wouldn't be possible to have one before October 31st at this point, they're not inclined to do that without an extension to the negotiations with the EU having been approved.

Meanwhile, Johnson is facing calls to resign, after the Supreme Court found he illegally prorogued (suspended) Parliament. He's also facing criticism after dismissing MPs receiving death threats using the same inflammatory language used by him and his supporters as 'humbug'. He's also being investigated for allegedly misusing public funds to support the business of a model 'friend' of his while he was Mayor of London. And he's been accused of groping a journalist in 1999 too.

So, it's all going great.

 

[Beach Friends]

It's happening! Hopefully this is a preview of what's going to happen in the good 'ol US of A in 2020.

This was not only important for Brexit, but it was also a rejection of the socialist movement.

 

[Taurus]

Surely there's some answer as to how absolute shirtbags likes Boris and Donald rise to political power. I mean, at its heart, politics is a popularity contest and these two are the most popular kids on the block? Really?

 

[JimEverett]

I don't understand UK politics all that much but I followed this election as best I could. From my point of view it was a case where the Conservatives had a laser focus on the issue of getting Brexit done while Labour had a weird "we are for Brexit and against it" strategy that had to be confusing to people.

I wonder if one our British posters could answer this: Does a Scottish national referndum have to get approval from Parliament?
It seems clear the Scots do not want Brexit and are willing to leave the UK over it.

 

[Dragon]

Surely there's some answer as to how absolute shirtbags likes Boris and Donald rise to political power. I mean, at its heart, politics is a popularity contest and these two are the most popular kids on the block? Really?

Yes - it is called education and critical thinking....

As I noticed on that liberal or conservative test obedience apperently is a conservative trait and the opposite seem to be a liberal trait.(at least by the makers of that test - I played with it a bit lol)

It is imperative that schools start to focus more on critical thinking/information source evaluation than just base rote learning. With every "fact" available at your fingertips aka smart phone - the ability to evaluate information becomes far more important than just memorizing facts

 

[Sharon]

How are candidates funded? Can they accept corporate money and sign secret pledges?

Politicians can say all the right things, and still not work for the public good. With the system of checks and balances eroded or infiltrated by corporate-bought policy-makers, who can tell what's really going on behind the scenes? Who has the time and access to keep track of the foolishness? I would argue the time involved to decode the "politician talk" is more an obstacle than a person's critical thinking skills. The messages are tailored to certain audiences and 100% believable from the voter's perspective. Big money can afford to flood the airwaves and pinpoint the message to the target.

 

[MT15]

That’s my understanding as well, Jim.

 

[Hatakikomi]

Surely there's some answer as to how absolute shirtbags likes Boris and Donald rise to political power. I mean, at its heart, politics is a popularity contest and these two are the most popular kids on the block? Really?

Johnson didn't lead his party to an election win - he won the Tory Party leadership race on the votes of 66% of 160K members. Only one moderate/centerist made it through the first round, Rory Stewart, and he's just resigned from the party. Johnson is a polarizing candidate, who would be a liability in a normal election, but brexit skews things so far away from normal party lines that he's probably an asset for now, more so with Labour unable to pick a side.

Leadership election results

Rory Stewart quits Tories

 

[Beach Friends]

Just heard that even Joe Biden is saying this should serve as a warning to the Democratic party about moving too far to the left.

 

[JimEverett]

So what is customs border down the irish sea mean? That Northern Ireland no longer has free movement with rest of UK?

 

[brandon]

Hopefully this is a preview of what's going to happen in the good 'ol US of A in 2020.

Personally, I think it’s long past time we leave the European Union.

 

[RobF]

So what is customs border down the irish sea mean? That Northern Ireland no longer has free movement with rest of UK?

Good question. It's not entirely clear.

To briefly recap, one of the many problems with Brexit is that both the UK and the EU agree there should be no return to a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland. A problem with this is that if the UK and EU have different regulations, then there by necessity has to be a border between them. The UK doesn't want to have the same regulations as the EU, because freedom, but also doesn't want to be seen to be putting a border back, and so has spent a significant amount of time repeatedly proposing fantasy solutions of invisible borders powered by magic technology. The EU's offer - of a backstop of temporary regulatory alignment until someone invents all this magic technology - was rejected, because the same people who claimed we already have the magic technology also saw that as a trick to keep the UK aligned to EU regulations indefinitely. Go figure.

One of the things the EU also suggested considering early on was having a border not between Ireland and Northern Ireland, but down the Irish Sea instead. This was rejected, because Unionists saw it as separating Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK and hence unacceptable. But now it seems it's somehow back.

What this would involve is the UK enforcing EU customs rules and tariffs on goods going from Britain to Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland would technically have left the EU customs union along with the rest of the UK in this proposal, and yet, it would still be effectively in the EU customs union because all goods entering it from the rest of the UK would be compliant. Presumably goods produced in Northern Ireland would also have to be compliant with EU regulations, but I haven't seen this explicitly stated anywhere.

It's not completely clear what this would mean for freedom of movement of people, but when the discussion was about a border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, the insistence was that the Common Travel Area between Ireland and Northern Ireland would be maintained. That's an open borders agreement with minimal checks (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Travel_Area). So my best guess is that's also the intent here, i.e. the border in the Irish Sea would only apply to goods, and movement of people would continue between NI and the UK as now.

Brexiters may not be happy with that. But Unionists wouldn't be happy with any additional restrictions. It strikes me as yet another kludge that will cause a lot more problems than it solves, and that no-one will be particularly happy with. It remains to be seen whether enough MPs are daft enough to vote it through.

 

[Archies Ghost]

I don't understand UK politics all that much but I followed this election as best I could. From my point of view it was a case where the Conservatives had a laser focus on the issue of getting Brexit done while Labour had a weird "we are for Brexit and against it" strategy that had to be confusing to people.

I wonder if one our British posters could answer this: Does a Scottish national referndum have to get approval from Parliament?
It seems clear the Scots do not want Brexit and are willing to leave the UK over it.

I think it is the other way round. The Scots want independence and the EU is seen as the path to that independence.

Brexit makes it harder for Scotland to break away.

Historically, the Scots have wanted Home Rule more than complete independence.

 

[JimEverett]

I keep reading that the EU will probably not agree to an extension of the October 31st deadline.

Does that mean if this new deal is not approved by Parliament that there is essentially a "no deal" Brexit?

I understand Junker's statements might just be posturing to put pressure on PArliament to approve this deal, but assuming he is correct.

 

[JimEverett]

I think it is the other way round. The Scots want independence and the EU is seen as the path to that independence.

Brexit makes it harder for Scotland to break away.

Historically, the Scots have wanted Home Rule more than complete independence.

I do think I made too strong of a point. I don't think it is "clearly" the case Scots are willing to leave the UK over Brexit. But the vote seems to strengthen the hand of those who want another referendum.

 

[RobF]

I keep reading that the EU will probably not agree to an extension of the October 31st deadline.

Does that mean if this new deal is not approved by Parliament that there is essentially a "no deal" Brexit?

I understand Junker's statements might just be posturing to put pressure on PArliament to approve this deal, but assuming he is correct.

Talking hypothetically, no. If the 'new' deal isn't approved and the EU wouldn't agree to an extension, Parliament would be faced with a choice of leaving with no deal or remaining in the EU via revoking article 50.

But it is hypothetical, because it's highly unlikely that's anything other than posturing. If, for example, Parliament passes the deal subject to a confirmatory referendum, it's very hard to see the EU rejecting the extension necessary for that to take place. Or if Parliament rejects the deal and requests an extension while a General Election takes place, again, it's hard to see the EU rejecting that.

 

[RobF]

They're calling it the biggest win since Thatcher.

No, they're calling it the biggest win for the Conservatives since Thatcher (which isn't saying much, as since then, they had one narrow majority under John Major in 1992, lost in 1997, 2001, and 2005, were short of a majority in 2010, had a very small majority in 2015, and were short of a majority again in 2017).

Labour had a substantially larger majority in 1997. And in 2001 for that matter.

My only question would be, how does it affect the U.S.?

“We will get Brexit done on time by the 31st of January, no ifs, no buts, no maybes.”
Boris Johnson

Well, he's not going to 'get Brexit done' by then, he's just going to (probably) get the step into the transition period done. The next bit of Brexit will be negotiating a deal with the EU. And that has some relevance to the US, since the terms we negotiate with the EU will directly impact on what the nature of any deal the US and the UK might be able to reach could be.

This was not only important for Brexit, but it was also a rejection of the socialist movement.

No, it wasn't. Good grief. Every party, including the winning one, supports our healthcare system which is as socialist as anything in the manifestos of any of the defeated parties.

Seriously, do you think every time a party loses an election, it's a rejection of the entire principle of any movement they might represent? Come on.