Brexit again...

[Davebrad]

20 hours ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

I don't think we've been trying to do the two horses thing, I just think we've not taken a side. And even though the referendum was such a binary decision, as a party I don't see why we should need to when trying to sort out the mess. People seem desperate for simple pledges, single line policies, but with such a fragmented country and a complicated process, I don't see why this is so important. We're not trying to pitch a film. It's odd how Corbyn is often portrayed as being an extremist yet on Brexit we have the most sensible and middle-ground policy going.

As for the membership, we've lost around 40,000 out of about 560,000, which is unsurprising given the issues with Brexit. I'm sure we'll be ok, what with still being the second largest political party in Europe.

A bit of a quandary for labour mp's...

.Earlier this month 19 Labour MPs wrote to the European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker saying they “wish to see the British EU referendum result honoured without further delay”. This was despite Jeremy Corbyn saying he believed that no Labour MP could back a Johnson deal.

but they've been given a bit of advice...

The 19 MPs are now coming under intense pressure both from party whips and colleagues not to help Johnson get a deal across the line – something many believe would allow him to enter a general election having defused the threat from the Brexit party and in a strong position to form a majority.

so what to do? vote with their conscience, or their voters wishes, or their  fellow members to get their party into power... party politics raises its ugly head...

Frontbencher Clive Lewis said Labour MPs who backed Johnson would not only be foisting a deal on the country that was bad for jobs and for Britain but would also risk consigning themselves and their party to election defeat.

“I would urge any Labour MP who is considering voting for a Tory deal to think very, very carefully,” Lewis said.

 

 

[Jacko51]

7 minutes ago, Davebrad said:

A bit of a quandary for labour mp's...

.Earlier this month 19 Labour MPs wrote to the European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker saying they “wish to see the British EU referendum result honoured without further delay”. This was despite Jeremy Corbyn saying he believed that no Labour MP could back a Johnson deal.

but they've been given a bit of advice...

The 19 MPs are now coming under intense pressure both from party whips and colleagues not to help Johnson get a deal across the line – something many believe would allow him to enter a general election having defused the threat from the Brexit party and in a strong position to form a majority.

so what to do? vote with their conscience, or their voters wishes, or their  fellow members to get their party into power... party politics raises its ugly head...

Frontbencher Clive Lewis said Labour MPs who backed Johnson would not only be foisting a deal on the country that was bad for jobs and for Britain but would also risk consigning themselves and their party to election defeat.

“I would urge any Labour MP who is considering voting for a Tory deal to think very, very carefully,” Lewis said.

 

 

I suppose it depends on what the deal turns out to be.  Johnson has said little in public about the proposed details so it's difficult for anyone in Parliament to decide one way or the other at the moment.  If, as appears likely, it's May's deal with a few Irish fiddles, why don't Labour support it?  I don't understand why Labour thinks that a possible change in workers' rights or anything else is something that can't be changed by a future Labour government?

[Paul6754]

6 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

Haha that's not even close to true.

Predictions can be lies though surely? What happens if a prediction is known to be inaccurate/untrue?

And either way, if the "predictions" were not lies, why on earth should be believe the "experts" who have got every prediction wrong on this subject?

 

Regal, A prediction is a statement about what you think will happen in the future, a lie is making a statement about something you know is untrue.

Do you call the someone who predicts the weather and gets it wrong a liar?, of course you don't.

[Davebrad]

32 minutes ago, Jacko51 said:

I suppose it depends on what the deal turns out to be.  Johnson has said little in public about the proposed details so it's difficult for anyone in Parliament to decide one way or the other at the moment.  If, as appears likely, it's May's deal with a few Irish fiddles, why don't Labour support it?  I don't understand why Labour thinks that a possible change in workers' rights or anything else is something that can't be changed by a future Labour government?

 This was despite Jeremy Corbyn saying he believed that no Labour MP could back a Johnson deal.  even though a deal has not yet been proposed, and what is being talked about has not been revealed to parliament... seems a bit partisan.

[geosname]

It seems bercow has had an official complaint lodged against him...... citing the supreme court decision 're prorogation  as precident.

[mr.hobblesworth]

28 minutes ago, Davebrad said:

 This was despite Jeremy Corbyn saying he believed that no Labour MP could back a Johnson deal.  even though a deal has not yet been proposed, and what is being talked about has not been revealed to parliament... seems a bit partisan.

Which is why I think that Labour should maybe agree to any deal with the proviso that it's put to the general public in the form of a second referendum, Johnson's deal vs remain. Only issue would be that if it's a bad deal we're opening up the prospect of the public voting for it and the country getting lumbered with it.

[Davebrad]

7 minutes ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

Which is why I think that Labour should maybe agree to any deal with the proviso that it's put to the general public in the form of a second referendum, Johnson's deal vs remain. Only issue would be that if it's a bad deal we're opening up the prospect of the public voting for it and the country getting lumbered with it.

well if we did have a second referendum, and the great British public voted for the deal, then parliament could do all they could to fight the result saying the voters didn't know what they were voting for... a second time.

[mr.hobblesworth]

I think any 2nd vote should be backed up with legislation (if that's possible) so the result has to be enacted rather than just being advisory like the last one. 

[Davebrad]

if a British prime minister says of a vote "we will abide by the result" and that brought out a higher turnout for years, that must be more credible...

now our Nicola is making plans for a second independence vote, even though the last was a "once in a lifetime vote", see the can of worms that we've opened by arguing our referendum result.

and I've  seen it reported that Jeremy  has rejected the idea of a second vote based on the pm's deal, if he gets one that is...

[Fosse69]

25 minutes ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

I think any 2nd vote should be backed up with legislation (if that's possible) so the result has to be enacted rather than just being advisory like the last one. 

As far as I know a mandatory referendum needs to have a threshold of 2/3 majority, why it was not used is open to conjecture that Cameron knew that Leave would not reach that level, I did say conjecture. I believe the AV vote referendum was mandatory.

[Andyregs]

3 hours ago, Paul6754 said:

Regal, A prediction is a statement about what you think will happen in the future, a lie is making a statement about something you know is untrue.

Do you call the someone who predicts the weather and gets it wrong a liar?, of course you don't.

Depends if they’ve got a sharpie. 

[Davebrad]

20 minutes ago, Nofinikea said:

We have been trying to leave for 3 years.  Sadly the leave campaign had no idea how it could be achieved when promising utopia.  Westminster is as split as the country on the issue and yet people seem surprised.

We now have chief Leave campaigner Boris in charge, so no need to worry as surely he has known for years how to do this deal given his string of "promises"

perhaps if he had been pm back then instead of may, we would have been out by now...

[Davebrad]

29 minutes ago, Nofinikea said:

What a load of twaddle.  Nicola Sturgeon announced on the 24th June 2016 that the UK vote to leave the EU was a constitutional change and a second independence referendum was on the cards.  That was the day after the EU Referendum so to claim that arguing the EU referendum result which Scotland was part of by the way, has led to her arguing for another Scottish vote is quite frankly embarrassing. 

or is she spotting her chance with all the toing and froing, but as she said "we will do it at the appropriate moment" sounds abit like Jeremy's "we want a election, when we think the times right".

we should save her the trouble and free them of the union, then see how she gets on...

[geosname]

5 hours ago, Nofinikea said:

What a load of twaddle.  Nicola Sturgeon announced on the 24th June 2016 that the UK vote to leave the EU was a constitutional change and a second independence referendum was on the cards.  That was the day after the EU Referendum so to claim that arguing the EU referendum result which Scotland was part of by the way, has led to her arguing for another Scottish vote is quite frankly embarrassing. 

The only way she could get a 2nd ref in 2016 was by consent of whoever was PM..... The difference now is leverage...... she could hang a big sign outside hollyrood ..... VOTES FOR SALE.....

It does put the buyer in some jeopardy as Scottish mps can't vote on English only law.

It would be a temptation to agree to another ref then announce the divorce costs just before it took place.... if we have left the EU of course..... which would kill it deader than a dodo ..... could be why they are restricting buyers

[Andyregs]

3 hours ago, geosname said:

The only way she could get a 2nd ref in 2016 was by consent of whoever was PM..... The difference now is leverage...... she could hang a big sign outside hollyrood ..... VOTES FOR SALE.....

It does put the buyer in some jeopardy as Scottish mps can't vote on English only law.

It would be a temptation to agree to another ref then announce the divorce costs just before it took place.... if we have left the EU of course..... which would kill it deader than a dodo ..... could be why they are restricting buyers

You mean like the DUP?