|
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
johnhemming2
Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 2160
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:13 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| UndercoverElephant wrote: | | johnhemming2 wrote: |
Remember, however: Brexit is Brexit.
|
That is meaningless.
|
I don't necessarily disagree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
johnhemming2
Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 2160
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| UndercoverElephant wrote: | | Well, I am not sure where I stand with respect to this. For me, the bottom line is the ending of freedom of movement. Any "brexit" that doesn't include this might as well not be brexit at all. If we can't get rid of freedom of movement, I do not want the UK to leave the EU. Same goes for control of fisheries - if we can't get that back, then there's no point in leaving. |
CAP and CFP are not part of the EEA, but I would expect the CFP issue to be part of any negotiations.
What is key in respect of FoM is the tax and benefits rules. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Little John
Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 6665
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| UndercoverElephant wrote: | | ...For me, the bottom line is the ending of freedom of movement. Any "brexit" that doesn't include this might as well not be brexit at all. If we can't get rid of freedom of movement, I do not want the UK to leave the EU. Same goes for control of fisheries - if we can't get that back, then there's no point in leaving. |
For me, the bottom line is that we get these things back under sovereign control or we walk. By that I mean, even, I am not averse to any given UK government making a deal, including one I may personally not like, with the EU on any of the above. But, that deal should be reversible by parliament. So, for example, I may dislike, but could democratically live with, a government being elected on a ticket of continued mass immigration, so long as any future government could be elected on a ticket to reverse such a policy. Thus, any policy that is not democratically reversible by act of UK parliament is not acceptable because this goes to the heart of the issue for me.
I am a nation state democrat and, the more fundamental the issue vis a vis the nation state, the more nation state democratically inclined I am. There is clearly nothing more fundamental than who gets to decide who makes the laws that govern us. It's as a simple as that for me, in the end.
I also suspect my position on this is not too dissimilar to the vast majority of those Labour voters, certainly from the North, who have just come back to Labour. But, their loyalty can now no longer be assured. I think Corbyn understands this well enough. Hence his public acceptance of Brexit. But, in any event, whatever else is true, in the period leading up to and including another election, assuming it comes in the next 6 to 12 months, the territory of debate needs to remain firmly on internal political issues because, on those, Labour will win hands down with the electorate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RenewableCandy
Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Posts: 12654
Location: York
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2017 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I do believe there are options to have freedom-of-movement restrictions while we're still in the EU. It's just that HMG has chosen not to use them! Same as we qualified for a lot of money for flood relief but they never claimed it, the bastards.
We could have really done with it here at York-by-the-sea.
_________________
Soyez réaliste. Demandez l'impossible.
Stories
The Price of Time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UndercoverElephant
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 9452
Location: south east England
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2017 12:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RenewableCandy wrote: | | I do believe there are options to have freedom-of-movement restrictions while we're still in the EU. |
The key question is the relationship between freedom of movement and membership of the single market. And it is the tories who have the biggest problem with regard to this, so as M. Bonaparte put it - "never interfere with an enemy while he's in the process of destroying himself."
Even before the tories were beholden to the DUP and the Tartan Tories, they were beholden to both financial interests desperate to stay in the single market, and overwhelming support of all types commited to ending freedom of movement at any cost. The EU says you can't have one without the other.
Corbyn should concentrate on organising his own forces with regard to other things than brexit. Let the tories destroy themselves, and then let their enemies discuss brexit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Little John
Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 6665
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2017 12:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| UndercoverElephant wrote: | | .....Corbyn should concentrate on organising his own forces with regard to other things than brexit. Let the tories destroy themselves, and then let their enemies discuss brexit. |
Exactly so |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Potemkin Villager
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1102
Location: Narnia
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2017 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Can someone explain how Peter Mandelson remains a member of the labour party? In the Daily Mail his lordship says:-
" Mainstream Labour MPs, who worry about the impact of the continuing Corbyn revolution on centrist voters, should be prepared to stand by the wounded PM, and likewise she should welcome their approach in the national interest.
If she gives in to the Brexit headbangers, on the other hand, she will only have herself to blame when the awful reality of our position dawns and she is forced into retreat by Parliament."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4592416/Peter-Mandelson-says-party-moderates-stand-PM.html
_________________
"There's always been some bullshit product for farmers. And the people selling it are usually from out of town." David Friedberg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Little John
Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 6665
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2017 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| He should be thrown out of the Labour party immediately |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UndercoverElephant
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 9452
Location: south east England
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2017 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
There's a deathly silence coming from the tory euroskeptics. After months of sabre-rattling about how Theresa May should not "row back on hard brexit", there is now nothing. The other side are making public statements - clearly there is a hard push from europhile tories to force a change. Meanwhile the Queen's Speech is delayed?
Is it possible a full-blown civil war has broken out behind the scenes, but that it is in all their interests to "keep it in the family", because they are terrified of another election? Or because they can't agree on who to replace Theresa May with? Or both?
What price are the tory euroskeptics willing to pay in order to keep alive the possibility of a hard brexit? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fuzzy
Joined: 29 Nov 2013
Posts: 867
Location: The Marches, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Except the population didn't vote against tories because they changed their mind on the EU and immigration; they voted against tories because they have screwed those who needed welfare such as the sick and single unemployed etc. Today it is impossible for a near retirement, house owning person to claim unemployment benefit [contribution based] and look for a part time job. If you are not looking for full time employment, you are in breach and sanctioned. I understand the reason for this - because the mandarins retiring at 50 on £120000 who write these laws, are clueless pricks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fuzzy
Joined: 29 Nov 2013
Posts: 867
Location: The Marches, UK
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Potemkin Villager
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1102
Location: Narnia
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
They are indeed pricks but not clueless. They know exactly what they are doing and the effects of it.
_________________
"There's always been some bullshit product for farmers. And the people selling it are usually from out of town." David Friedberg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UndercoverElephant
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 9452
Location: south east England
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fuzzy wrote: | | Except the population didn't vote against tories because they changed their mind on the EU and immigration; they voted against tories because they have screwed those who needed welfare such as the sick and single unemployed etc. Today it is impossible for a near retirement, house owning person to claim unemployment benefit [contribution based] and look for a part time job. If you are not looking for full time employment, you are in breach and sanctioned. I understand the reason for this - because the mandarins retiring at 50 on £120000 who write these laws, are clueless pricks. |
Sure, there are multiple overlapping issues here, and each person only has one vote. That is before we consider that they have no choice about where they vote and are usually forced to vote tactically to have any influence at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UndercoverElephant
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 9452
Location: south east England
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2017 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fuzzy wrote: | | http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-15/70-uk-supports-pushing-ahead-brexit-despite-election-upset |
Perhaps, but how can anybody seriously believe a tory minority government is capable of pushing it ahead? Personally I believe they would have run into a show-stopping crisis a few months down the line even if they'd won a large majority, but with minority?
The tories have been bitterly divided on Europe for decades. UKIP was an offshoot of the tory right. Cameron was forced to put a referendum in the tory manifesto in 2015, because if he had not done so then he was risking a Labour government. It turned out he got a small majority, and was duty-bound to hold the referendum, which he was certain he'd win, thus lancing the boil forever. He lost, and resigned. May took over, and being a bit worried that her majority was insufficient to push brexit through, plus believing she was guaranteed to improve it and maybe by a lot, called a general election after triggering Article 50. And lost her majority. Now we are three months after that trigger, and a few days before negotiations are due to start, and instead of a united tory party there is a full-blown civil war going out, behind closed doors. This is the biggest British political FUBAR since WWII, and there is absolutely no way the tory party can push Brexit through now. It will destroy itself if it tries. It might split anyway.
Whatever you think the British people want, or voted for, Theresa May's tories are not competent or capable of delivering it. Surely she has to call another general election and pray that it does not produce another hung parliament.
And for the record, I believe a majority voted for the ending of freedom of movement, but without any knowledge of critical connected issues. Leaving the EU without ending freedom of movement? They didn't vote for that. Ending freedom of movement leading to serious economic decline? They didn't vote for that either. The key question is whether there is any realistically achievable flavour of Brexit there is majority support for, and I have no idea what the answer is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Little John
Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 6665
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2017 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| This is not just about those alive today. It is about all who come after us and their right to be able to vote for their lawmakers in their country |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
