National News Brexit - the Deal or No Deal poll

[Gary Baldi]

It's been interesting spending time in workshops at the end of the week with my employer. The participants were from around the world and the range of responses about Brexit have been kind of enlightening. The funniest one was Narrendra Modi looks a more competent leader than anyone you have, and he's a useless self serving old man ?

Thursdays Question Time rather highlighted where Brexit has just paralysed this country. Labour's position of negotiating a good deal with the EU and then asking people to Remain over the good deal they've negotiated completely highlights how collectively incompetent and self serving our politicians are. The fact Thornberry said it was a straight face says a lot. They've lost the plot - from Johnson to Corbyn to Swinson to Blackford. Let alone Remainers like Konnie Huq.

As was pointed out to me this week. If you have an election and the votes don't count because politicians don't agree with it, you're no better than Pakistan.

Over 3 years later, it's electoral larceny to even hear questions about the vote being binding - we all got this in the post. Do Remainers need some reading glasses and comprehension lessons in their old age....

 

[RyanioBirdio]

Amber Rudd has gone now because even she, the most shameful of Tory apologists, just can’t justify this bullshit.

Wake up. It was all a lie.

 

[IsleofWightYellow]

I genuinely don't understand why some leavers are so baffled/angry with people still wanting to remain in the EU.

If Remain had won the vote by 4%, do you really think the likes of Nigel Farage would be calmly sitting back and quietly supporting the EU? No, of course he wouldn't - and wouldn't he be right not to? If you honestly think that one course of action is clearly the right one, and the other is wrong, then you should keep putting your point across. If my tribe voted to travel to some lands I thought were dangerous and infertile, I wouldn't stop objecting just because we'd voted to go there anyway - it's too important a decision for that. Once we got there I'd make the best of it, but in terms of this metaphor we haven't actually left yet...

AND given we're now looking at No Deal, which is a more extreme version of Leave which was not proposed originally, its more like we voted to remain, and then the EU demanded that rather than just keep things as they were, we enter an even closer partnership, paying much more money and potentially causing all kinds of problems. Do you really think Farage and committed leavers would not be kicking up a fuss about that, but would be shrugging and saying 'oh well, remain means remain!'* Seriously?

*Just for the record, I would also be saying wait, that's not what remainers voted for - maybe we should have another referendum where we could decide to leave, remain as we are or 'Super Remain' with all the added costs.

 

[bashamwonderland]

On the flip side, once those pesky EU directives concerning employment regulations get put on a giant bonfire you will be free to exploit the s**t out of your employees. Every cloud etc

You clearly know nothing about EU derived employment regulations ? Like the fact that we already go above and beyond the protections most of them provide of our own free will.

The Swedish derogation under the Agency Worker Regulations 2012 are literally the only piece of employment law in danger in the event of our leaving the EU and frankly that would be a good thing. Even TUPE has been ringfenced.

Which rights in particular do you think will be put on this bonfire??

 

[Navegante]

Which rights in particular do you think will be put on this bonfire??

I would hope the right to paid annual leave for a start. The right to cancel weekends if targets are not met should be considered. And the minimum age for employees should be aligned to the future global power economies of China & India (say 8 years old) if UK is to compete on equal terms.

 

[Manorlounger]

I genuinely don't understand why some leavers are so baffled/angry with people still wanting to remain in the EU.

AND given we're now looking at No Deal, which is a more extreme version of Leave which was not proposed originally, its more like we voted to remain, and then the EU demanded that rather than just keep things as they were, we enter an even closer partnership, paying much more money and potentially causing all kinds of problems. Do you really think Farage and committed leavers would not be kicking up a fuss about that, but would be shrugging and saying 'oh well, remain means remain!'* Seriously?

*Just for the record, I would also be saying wait, that's not what remainers voted for - maybe we should have another referendum where we could decide to leave, remain as we are or 'Super Remain' with all the added costs.

Forgive me but, I seem to recall that the option was leave or remain?

It could be argued that the vote was flawed in it's simplicity but, it was a case of leave or stay. The business of a deal was something that came later after the remain faction realised that that was their best avenue of overturning the result.

What is tragic is that had the mechanism of leaving been explained before the vote, many leave votes would possibly have changed their mind. Not their conviction that the EU is flawed but, that it would be necessary to fight from within to get a fair and proper union with the rest of the member states. Cameron was a wimp and bottled his job, Boris is taking the other extreme. There is no chance of a favourable or even acceptable deal now. Who would give the UK a deal in it's present political status? Who would even bother turning up to negotiate?
No, the remain factions have done their job and will probably very soon get their way. Remain it will be and under such a poor negotiating status that it will be decades before we can argue anything at Brussels.

 

[Marked Ox]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1169613265988726787

A fair take on the right wing coverage of this week?

 

[Manorlounger]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1169613265988726787

A fair take on the right wing coverage of this week?

No. Just another, very repetitive monologue.

Incidentally, why doesn't Corbyn want an election?

 

[Marked Ox]

No. Just another, very repetitive monologue.

Incidentally, why doesn't Corbyn want an election?

Because, the opposition (Labour, SNP, Lib Dems, ex one nation Tories etc) don't trust the known liar Johnson so have said they are open to an election but not before an extension to A50 is achieved.

They would be right not to trust him as this and what Amber Rudd has said:

Brexit extension: PM to 'test law to limit' to avoid delay

The government won't break the "lousy" new law but will look at how it interprets it, a senior minister says.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Manorlounger]

HOW we leave is now the issue at hand. It seems leaving with no deal will become Illegal when the bill gains royal assent. On the assumption that Boris is not stupid enough to break the law, leaving the EU on 31st October won't happen, and Boris will have failed in his single main objective. Will he resign? I don't think he's honourable enough. Will Corbyn agree to an election once the 31/10/19 deadline is missed? I really hope so. Will Boris then honour his pledge not to enter into a pact with Farage? If he does honour it, it could be a very interesting election. If Boris weakens and joins forces with the Brexit Party, we'll have a very right wing government and will still be in the EU, for a while at least.

I just cannot see any deal offered by the EU being accepted by parliament. The back stop will just not wash.

 

[Manorlounger]

Because, the opposition (Labour, SNP, Lib Dems, ex one nation Tories etc) don't trust the known liar Johnson so have said they are open to an election but not before an extension to A50 is achieved.

They would be right not to trust him as this and what Amber Rudd has said:

Brexit extension: PM to 'test law to limit' to avoid delay

The government won't break the "lousy" new law but will look at how it interprets it, a senior minister says.

www.bbc.co.uk

So, in essence, they are admitting that they would lose an election?

 

[West Oxon U’s]

Incidentally, why doesn't Corbyn want an election?

Because he would lose it?

 

[Marked Ox]

So, in essence, they are admitting that they would lose an election?

No, all of them (including ex Tories and I suspect current moderate Tories as well) don't trust the known liar Johnson as explained.

 

[Manorlounger]

No, all of them (including ex Tories and I suspect current moderate Tories as well) don't trust the known liar Johnson as explained.

Apologies but, I don't get it. If Boris loses an election then the opposition win and can stop any exit. If Boris wins an election then he has the backing of the electorate and a justifiable mandate to do as campaigned.

What is the problem. And please, give it a rest with the liar stuff, Corbyn is hardly a saint himself.

 

[mooro]

Forgive me but, I seem to recall that the option was leave or remain?

It could be argued that the vote was flawed in it's simplicity but, it was a case of leave or stay. The business of a deal was something that came later after the remain faction realised that that was their best avenue of overturning the result.

What is tragic is that had the mechanism of leaving been explained before the vote, many leave votes would possibly have changed their mind. Not their conviction that the EU is flawed but, that it would be necessary to fight from within to get a fair and proper union with the rest of the member states. Cameron was a wimp and bottled his job, Boris is taking the other extreme. There is no chance of a favourable or even acceptable deal now. Who would give the UK a deal in it's present political status? Who would even bother turning up to negotiate?
No, the remain factions have done their job and will probably very soon get their way. Remain it will be and under such a poor negotiating status that it will be decades before we can argue anything at Brussels.

...and with only c650k voters needing to have gone the other way for Remain to win, then to me it is pretty clear that if the Remain campaign had just put in an ounce of effort in explaining the mechanism, let alone some detail on the actual issues involved, rather than just complacence, then the last three years of farce would not have happened, and we certainly wouldnt be where we are now.

True, much of the information on most issues was out there somewhere, but it seemed to me that the Remain camp failed to bring the detail of many of the main issues into open discussion, and let's be honest, a large chunk of the electorate are not going to bother going to look for anything themselves, relying instead on what is placed right in front of them.

Hence, the whole thing was played out using the Leave campaign agenda, which cynically/cleverly (delete as appropriate) focused on the main rabble-rousing elements of immigration and straight bananas, with the Remain team seemingly unable to even discredit the most outlandish of claims made (on the sides of buses), let alone get some of the more sobering elements onto the table.

It is hardly beyond the realms of possibility that a minimum of 650k leave voters have, on reflection now that the void of information has been filled would have voted differently.

So, are we really sure that we want to press ahead with a decision that was only made because one side was willing to push the boundaries of campaigning/reality (delete as appropriate) while the other team wasn't even willing to push back the duvet to get out of bed??

 

[windmill]

Apologies but, I don't get it. If Boris loses an election then the opposition win and can stop any exit. If Boris wins an election then he has the backing of the electorate and a justifiable mandate to do as campaigned.

What is the problem. And please, give it a rest with the liar stuff, Corbyn is hardly a saint himself.

St. Jeremy. Patron Saint of Lost Causes.

 

[Marked Ox]

Apologies but, I don't get it. If Boris loses an election then the opposition win and can stop any exit. If Boris wins an election then he has the backing of the electorate and a justifiable mandate to do as campaigned.

What is the problem. And please, give it a rest with the liar stuff, Corbyn is hardly a saint himself.

It is to do with the dates. The opposition group need the election date to be after the date that the "stop no deal" legislation kicks in, preferably after October 31st to be sure, so that Johnson can't ignore the legislation.

If the opposition group voted at the last vote or on Monday for a new election before the legislation kicks in (iirc, Johnson put October 15th to the HoC), Johnson as PM can unilaterally delay the GE until after the 31st so he wouldn't be bound by the "stop no deal" legislation and we'd fall out of the EU by default on October 31st.

Johnson has already shown he is willing to do things like this (the use/timing of proroguing Parliament etc) and has further demonstrated his willingness to try to ignore Parliament by the link I gave above. Also, his rhetoric such as "dead in a ditch" etc.

That Opposition/Rebel Tory MPs are prepping to go to court just in case Johnson tries to ignore the "stop no deal" legislation, sums up how far they don't trust him based on his actions.

Amber Rudd's comments about the efforts for a new deal with the EU is also telling and basically Johnson is set on a No Deal Brexit but isn't being honest about it:

Amber Rudd quits cabinet blaming Brexit inaction

Up to 90% of government effort is on no-deal, with no evidence of any formal negotiations to get an EU deal, she says.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sajid Javid's comeback, they've had meetings, and he mentions meetings a lot! Here is his interview:

Chancellor defends government Brexit deal efforts

Sajid Javid responds to Amber Rudd's criticism that the UK isn't working enough on securing a deal.

www.bbc.co.uk

The above is why Johnson being a liar is very relevant in this case.

And just to be clear, Corbyn is as bad. An awful leader and if Labour were any good they'd be wiping the floor with the Tories.

Also, it is in the Opposition group's interest based on polling* I've seen to delay the election until after 31st October. Johnson's support drops a fair bit after the 31st compared to before.

So I think we will see a GE but after October 31st.

*With the obvious caveat that polling can be utterly wrong and has been a lot in recent years.

 

[Sarge]

It is to do with the dates. The opposition group need the election date to be after the date that the "stop no deal" legislation kicks in, preferably after October 31st to be sure, so that Johnson can't ignore the legislation.

If the opposition group voted at the last vote or on Monday for a new election before the legislation kicks in (iirc, Johnson put October 15th to the HoC), Johnson as PM can unilaterally delay the GE until after the 31st so he wouldn't be bound by the "stop no deal" legislation and we'd fall out of the EU by default on October 31st.

Johnson has already shown he is willing to do things like this (the use/timing of proroguing Parliament etc) and has further demonstrated his willingness to try to ignore Parliament by the link I gave above. Also, his rhetoric such as "dead in a ditch" etc.

That Opposition/Rebel Tory MPs are prepping to go to court just in case Johnson tries to ignore the "stop no deal" legislation, sums up how far they don't trust him based on his actions.

Amber Rudd's comments about the efforts for a new deal with the EU is also telling and basically Johnson is set on a No Deal Brexit but isn't being honest about it:

Amber Rudd quits cabinet blaming Brexit inaction

Up to 90% of government effort is on no-deal, with no evidence of any formal negotiations to get an EU deal, she says.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sajid Javid's comeback, they've had meetings, and he mentions meetings a lot! Here is his interview:

Chancellor defends government Brexit deal efforts

Sajid Javid responds to Amber Rudd's criticism that the UK isn't working enough on securing a deal.

www.bbc.co.uk

The above is why Johnson being a liar is very relevant in this case.

And just to be clear, Corbyn is as bad. An awful leader and if Labour were any good they'd be wiping the floor with the Tories.

Also, it is in the Opposition group's interest based on polling* I've seen to delay the election until after 31st October. Johnson's support drops a fair bit after the 31st compared to before.

So I think we will see a GE but after October 31st.

*With the obvious caveat that polling can be utterly wrong and has been a lot in recent years.

decent assesment and spot on explanation/ clarification that ^ IMO

 

[Manorlounger]

decent assesment and spot on explanation/ clarification that ^ IMO

It is to do with the dates. The opposition group need the election date to be after the date that the "stop no deal" legislation kicks in, preferably after October 31st to be sure, so that Johnson can't ignore the legislation.

If the opposition group voted at the last vote or on Monday for a new election before the legislation kicks in (iirc, Johnson put October 15th to the HoC), Johnson as PM can unilaterally delay the GE until after the 31st so he wouldn't be bound by the "stop no deal" legislation and we'd fall out of the EU by default on October 31st.

Johnson has already shown he is willing to do things like this (the use/timing of proroguing Parliament etc) and has further demonstrated his willingness to try to ignore Parliament by the link I gave above. Also, his rhetoric such as "dead in a ditch" etc.

That Opposition/Rebel Tory MPs are prepping to go to court just in case Johnson tries to ignore the "stop no deal" legislation, sums up how far they don't trust him based on his actions.

Amber Rudd's comments about the efforts for a new deal with the EU is also telling and basically Johnson is set on a No Deal Brexit but isn't being honest about it:

Amber Rudd quits cabinet blaming Brexit inaction

Up to 90% of government effort is on no-deal, with no evidence of any formal negotiations to get an EU deal, she says.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sajid Javid's comeback, they've had meetings, and he mentions meetings a lot! Here is his interview:

Chancellor defends government Brexit deal efforts

Sajid Javid responds to Amber Rudd's criticism that the UK isn't working enough on securing a deal.

www.bbc.co.uk

The above is why Johnson being a liar is very relevant in this case.

And just to be clear, Corbyn is as bad. An awful leader and if Labour were any good they'd be wiping the floor with the Tories.

Also, it is in the Opposition group's interest based on polling* I've seen to delay the election until after 31st October. Johnson's support drops a fair bit after the 31st compared to before.

So I think we will see a GE but after October 31st.

*With the obvious caveat that polling can be utterly wrong and has been a lot in recent years.

So, it is all based on the supposition that Boris would indulge in some underhand tactics. (that never happens at Westminster, surely?)

I would be greatly reassured to hear exactly what the no deal protesters would actually put up as acceptable terms for a deal. At the very minimum a solution to the "Back stop" issue. Or, is it more a case of delay everything until they get a remain vote?

 

[Yellow River]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1170688363147538432

No surprise that Labour are scared of a General Election.