UKH

Johnson gives a rousing speech in Parliament to leave the opposition reeling.

Corbyn fails to capitalise on Johnson’s unlawful behaviour and is goaded into not calling an election.

Johnson fends off predictable condemnation from SNP, Lib Dem’s, etc and with the help of the DUP seizes the initiative.

Johnson 1 Opposition 0

A fart still smells bad, no matter how loud it is and how pleased the child that released it.

T.

No matter how rousing the speech, the fact that he's trying to pit himself, Champion of "The People", against "The Establishment", is chilling.

Well he is champion of 17.4 million people but I'm not defending is actions.

This was exactly the tone of his speech.

What was equally chilling was the inability of the opposition to lay a glove on him.

What you mean shout the loudest playground insult? That's not JCs style. 

It'll work with the hard of thinking who don't realise or willfully ignore the Boris is the very epitome of the 'establishment'... 

So that leaves about 35-40m adults he is not the champion of... 

To use a sporting analogy, Corbyn was presented with an open goal.

Not only did he fail to score he kicked the ball over the stand and out of the ground.

The ball is probably still in the air.

If the purpose of Parliament resuming was to hold the government to account then they’ve just missed what might turn out to be their best chance ever.

Not the merest hint of contrition. Utter bar steward! My loathing of him, Gove et al rises hourly. However, to make things more depressing is that he's going to get away with his lies again.

I'll have to confess: I find him absolutely terrifying. A dictator in the making ... yet a rather large chunk of the electorate seem unable to see this. In the worst scenario, the reality is going to hit everyone too late to be able to do anything about it. I have never in my life felt that we are on such a knife-edge. As of this evening, it could go either way: this charlatan could be toppled in an instant or he will manage to entrench himself with ever greater powers. I don't mind putting this in such strident terms, because I believe it is as serious as I say. As I have said time and time again (nothing proving me wrong so far), I would just love to be proved wrong.

We all know Corbyn is useless. 

Ian Blackford was much better. 

I watched the AG earlier, it's like a big game to them, like their still down the uni debating society.

No remorse,shame or admission he/they were wrong, just that , in his opinion, they were right.

If the country votes this shower of shit in for another 5 years, they, and unfortunately, the rest of us, gets what's coming to them. I'll be joining the Anarchist Party.

You are.

He's also meant to be champion of about 65million people, not just 17.5

Blackford has a firm policy and is assured of a good election result.

I quite liked his question tonight and had to remind myself that his ultimate aim is the break up of the Union. 

I don't know about Johnson personally as a dictator, I think he's only interested in his own status. It's those he unwittingly enables that truly scare me. He's playing with forces that he has no control over or perhaps even understanding of.

It's not an attack on you, but this supposed solid mass of 17.4 million who all want one thing above all else doesn't exist, and never did.

Bollocks I was just making a humorous remark. I dislike the man almost as much as I dislike JC.  I disagree with his actions if for no other reason that it sets a precedent that others will exploit ruthlessly in future. Including him if he had won.

Normally Johnson would be facing an election and would have to answer to the people but for some reason Corbyn seems reluctant to either agree to an election or call for a vote of confidence.

I’m not buying this ‘we need to ensure that no deal is off the table first before we have an election’ argument.

What sort of master plan do they think Johnson has hidden up his sleeve?

But we all know the reason for the delay. Johnson is utterly untrustworthy and so Parliament must sit until October 31st to ensure that No-Deal Brexit isn't brought about by accident or bad faith Parliamentary games.

Besides, the opposition wants an election on its terms, not Johnson's.

I don't know, but he's clearly someone with a very limited respect for the rule of law or the constitution. He's shown not a shred of contrition or humility. Only a fool would trust him.

Never said it was.  See my response to MG

The opposition are running scared of Johnson.

They’ve got him boxed in with nowhere to go but they’re afraid he’ll pull a master stroke and deliver a no deal Brexit.

He won’t because he can’t.

What he is doing is establishing the ‘us against the establishment’ narrative to put himself in a stronger position when the election is finally called.

Meanwhile, the opposition (with the exception of the SNP) is too busy pooing itself, trying to score political points, infighting and enjoying watching Johnson’s discomfort to take proper advantage of their strong position.

They’ll miss their chance.

Quite sinister, will of the people and this parliament has no legitimacy sort of stuff.

Funny, I don't recall my constituency withdrawing our votes to remove the legitimacy of our MP.

He is beneath contempt. On any subject his response is always the most base, divisive, damaging and irresponsible. His response to the MP who invoked the memory of Jo Cox and asked him to moderate the rhetoric he uses (to inflame his far right fan boys) which is leading to death threats for MPs was disgusting. He has not a shred of decency or integrity. 

And does he bear no responsibility to the other 40-odd million?

FFS read what I said above. I'm not defending him. I'm not defending him, I'm not defending him.  In fact I explicitly criticised him. Is anybody still not clear? 

Sorry - I hadn’t read the rest of the thread when I replied. 

Judging by the polls it's probably about 16.4 million people, maybe less.

Sorry, but by your words you are defending.  Suggesting he is championing 17m people is defending him. 

It’s possibly a few more after tonight’s performance.

There are various potential ways in which he could pull off a no-deal. Jolyon Maugham last week went public with the possible flaw in the Benn Bill. There's also the double letter ploy or the potential to resign and put Corbyn in the hot seat to deal with the mess. I believe Cummings has been testing the reaction to various other possible avenues. They're all hugely risky gambles of course, but Johnson is a gambler, and I don't think he is fully boxed in yet.

I agree with you that this performance is in part designed to set himself up as "The People's Champion". But I believe that he's also trying to goad the opposition into a VONC, knowing that it's in his interest to have one now, rather than later.

It's telling that he's still referencing October 31st when others including Farage have publicly suggested that it's no longer possible. That suggests to me that he's still staking everything on that date, and would therefore much rather avoid an election after the end of October having missed that deadline.

Rubbish but if that is your understanding there is no more I can say. I give up!!!!!

JC is just waiting for students to recover from freshers activities, then they can register to vote by post at their home address and in person at uni. 

😀

I've changed my mind I'm not giving up. Which part of "I'm not defending him" do you not understand?

"I dislike the man almost as much as I dislike JC.  I disagree with his actions if for no other reason that it sets a precedent that others will exploit ruthlessly in future. Including him if he had won."

Which part of that sounds like a defense FFS?

I understand that quite well. Your posts are like a child saying "I didn't eat the biscuits" in front of an empty packet.

Quite possibly and quite rightly. They are the future of this country - not a bunch of aging, bigoted conservative party members and brexiteer f*ckwits who think we're still fighting WW2 FFS.

Hahahahahahaha, I really hope that comment ends up biting your arse!

I used to think Boris was just an incompetent buffoon. It’s now clear he’s an evil bastard as well.

The thing that worries me is that the defeat of a dictator who will use any means justified by his ends requires us to use any means to stop him.

Total War is possible

Absolutely, having just watched what he said in parliament today, it now abundantly clear to me that he is not just an odious, lying, self serving shit, but a seriously downright dangerous one as well - we can only hope that parliament and then, when an election comes, the people stop him in his tracks. Otherwise we are f*cked.

I think I see Johnson as potentially 'opening the door' for Farage to make more headway, if the Conservatives fare badly thanks to Johnson and the general disorder, Farage could pick up voters from dishearted Conservative voters, along with Leave voters.  There's 'something' in politics which wasn't there before, the potential for anger and resentment and the 'othering' of certain people to become harnessed by Farage. I suddenly thought about it today. 

Are you just trolling or do you actually think Mr Johnson is doing a good job?

I thought his response ‘humbug’ to the concern for MPs safety, followed up by the idea that the murdered Jo Cox’s memory would be best served by ‘his’ Brexit was truly disgusting.

What scares me is that there are enough f*cking idiots taken in by his polarising rhetoric that he might win an election. Are you really one of them.?

What I just cannot understand is why no one, even here, is talking about the level of lunacy we're faced with. Why has no one so much as mentioned this incredible, chilling load of gibberish he was spouting earlier today in America? 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1176802020264570880

I do feel as if I’ve had my liver pecked out repeatedly by lying Brexiteer fantasists since 2016. 

He’s as insane as Trump. But that isn’t quite insane enough to prevent them appealing to the weak minded who will believe any old horseshit.

Did you follow today’s proceedings?

I spent most of the day listening to numerous opposition politicians ranting about Johnson’s unlawful behaviour and how they couldn’t wait to hold him to account.

Yet, as I stated in my original post, Johnson hadn’t read the game plan and came out swinging.

The opposition were caught flat footed and instead of being the beasting that Johnson deserved it turned into a recruitment campaign for Brexit.

Added to the performances of the AG, Raab and Gove earlier, what should have been a disastrous day for the government turned into an OK day.

There might be enough people who are willing to support him for him to win an election.

Calling them f*cking idiots won’t make them any more likely to vote against him.

I have no idea why you think that I believe that Johnson is doing a good job.

However, if I was a determined leaver who else would I be supporting?

Farage?

Well he’d be much better wouldn’t he?

I don’t care about the opposition, they are a shower (though don’t underestimate them in an election). 

It was not an OK day for the government. Cox came across as a spittle flecked drunken ex- boxer. Johnson was just a old uncle style tosspot. Gove was slippery as a snake dipped in lube.

And by the way I’m well aware that calling anyone an idiot on UKC won’t make much difference to the result of the next general election. That’s not why I’m commenting. I’m commenting because it’s what I think. I’m not making speeches at hustings.

FFS! 'Rather' ... and 'I don't know what to say' !! ... Sorry, that's English fence-sitting feebleness at it's worst.

I have seen most of today's proceedings.

The man is a total utter lunatic.  Watch his Peston interview.
Answering Peston, if he doesn't get a deal and he won't break the law, we're still leaving on 31st October.
That's like saying black is white.

What, as being, along with what's left of his party, the front runner for the most contemptible beings that this country has ever had the displeasure to experience?

You should care about the opposition.

They are all that’s standing between us and a no deal Brexit.

That they failed magnicently to put Johnson back in his box despite having a golden opportunity to do so certainly concerns me.

Your disdain for others who have a different opinion shouldn’t mean that you need to resort to personal insults.

I'm lost for words, I mean. 

And yet the opposition thinks that leaving without a deal is possible as that fear is their  stated reason for not having an early general election.

Does that make them lunatics too?

Johnson’s behaviour shouldn’t be allowed to become a distraction from what is most important politically.

Sorry, that's just not good enough in these extreme times. We're up against a guy who's not lost for words, and is capable of spouting hours of meaningful-sounding gibberish at the drop of a hat to befuddle and bewitch an apparently very dim or dozy population.

It's simple, it really is ... the man is a proven liar and will change the GE date to whatever he wants, ie after 31/10 and we've leave with No Deal.
Hence, no GE until an extension off 31/10 and No deal is, temporarily, off the table.
JC et al have been saying this all along. November, bring it on!
It's not hard to understand, really old chap, it's not that hard!

Does your patronising post deserve a reply?

Probably not, but you’ve caught me in a good mood, so -

you called Johnson a lunatic for saying that he could leave without a deal by Oct 31st without breaking the law and your next post explains how he could do it.

You can see how your posts appeared to contradict each other.

I reckon you'd support the devil himself if he'd deliver a clean, pure, Brexit. He could be the shittiest shit in the shit house, but if he came out swingin' for brexit you'd support him.

What happened to shame? 

Sorry, I'm going to have to re-post this, because many people don't seem to have grasped the level of lunacy we now have to deal with. Please just look at it. And please WAKE UP - this is a very, very dangerous madman.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1176802020264570880

I think Johnson is, amongst other things, a buffoon.

His suspension of Parliament was quite rightly ruled unlawful.

But I didn’t pick him to deliver Brexit.

Like you I’ve had him foisted on me.

What would you have me and all the other brexiteers do?

Abandon Brexit because we don’t like the man in charge? Or how he goes about things?

I’m supporting Brexit not Johnson.

Maybe you can find a post of mine where I’ve pledged my undying support for Johnson.

You might also find the one where I said I’d rather vote for Corbyn than Johnson.

Do you think that under Johnson there's any possibility for a Brexit that isn't a no-deal Brexit?

Apologies if you've already answered this before, but what type of Brexit would be your preference?

I haven’t got a clue where this will end up.

I’m fairly sure nobody else, including Johnson, knows either.

The incorrectly named ‘no deal’ isn’t good because it means no transition period.

May’s deal might be the best available although the backstop is a concern.

May’s deal and a customs union might get through Parliament.

Labour’s ideal of May’s deal and a customs union and guaranteed workers rights, etc won’t work because the EU won’t negotiate any future deal before we leave.

I think you misinterpreted my being lost for words. Yes, do re-post it, people need to see it. 

It’s true, we don’t know where it will end up. But are you comfortable with the direction we’re travelling in? Is there a Rubicon that Boris could cross that would cause you to think, if this is what it takes to get Brexit, then it’s just not worth it.

I’d hope for some it was last night. You watched Johnson glibly dismissing MPs who are receiving death threats quoting his words, and then co-opting a murdered MPs memory to support his cause, despite that cause being the opposite of what she believed; you can see now what a general election campaign is going to look like. Whoever wins that, how do you think society is going to function after that? 

Johnson is summoning demons that won’t just go away the day the election is over. This is driving a wedge through a fault line in our society and the damage to our institutions and relationships between sections of society will last the rest of our lifetimes. 

Johnson likes his classical allusions, so here’s one: he’s opening Pandora’s box; but instead of hope being left for us to cling to, all there is is a turd. 

At what point do you say, enough; these people don’t represent me and my values, and I don’t want the sort of Brexit they will deliver.

So what should JC have said to score in this "open goal" of yours and by doing so bring down BJ? Or are you just attacking Labour because you are a Tory which is fair enough but don't cover it up behind ' oh I think the Labour leader should be better at this or that'. 

I keep thinking of Yeltsin's time ruling Russia and wonder if that's what he (our Boris) is doing to us here and what might crawl out of the burnt ruins

I think we should all be a bit worried about "rousing speeches" in this context.  Plenty of very bad people have given very rousing speeches and there are many very disturbing comparisons for this.

As a tactic (shouting cowardly cowardly custard, insulting everyone and ramping up the rhetoric) may have worked in Boris school playground but clearly aren't working as intended here. If you felt roused to support Boris after yesterday's performance you need your head looking at.

Unfortunately Johnson, as Prime Minister, is in charge of delivering Brexit.

As a leaver I want Brexit to continue but that doesn’t make me in any way happy with some of Johnson’s actions or words.

It is he who needs to go away not Brexit itself.

If you are a remainer then, of course, the removal of Johnson and the demise of Brexit would be a win/win.

You could see Johnson replaced only to have Raab take his place.

Parliament, not you or me (yet), has the ability to try and remove Johnson by a vote of confidence and a general election.

For well publicised reasons they won’t do it.

You and I are going to have to endure this until some time after Oct 31st.

You're assuming everyone still thinks the same as they did three years ago.

Can you be goaded into not doing something?

Johnson is in the weakest position of any Prime Minister that I can remember.

We’re building up to a general election and the opposition, all of them not just Corbyn, have the opportunity to, in their own words, hold Johnson to account.

They failed to do so, partly due to Johnson’s aggressive attitude, but mostly down to their own divisions and agendas.

So instead of Johnson leaving Parliament cowed and disgraced he at the very least held his own.

How are the opposition ever going to defeat him in a general election when they cannot even give him a good kicking when he’s down?

That’s a kicking in the political sense not a physical one.

I don’t know if that’s the grammatically correct term but that’s what was happening last night with Johnson calling on Corbyn to demand a no confidence vote or an election knowing that he wouldn’t do so.

I get you earlier point about there being an 'open goal' for Corbyn and the opposition yesterday but that relies on a politician who has the ability to be shamed and those kind of politicians do  not dominate government. Johnson et al  will say anything. How do you deal with that?

Its also really disappointing the Diane Abbot would not condemn the similar actions of labour supporters. I understand why she and Cleverly on the radio this morning wouldn't (news cycle management etc) but if we don't  start getting politicians calling out this type these type of behaviour on their own side then politics could become very dystopian.

FWIW think we heading for a caretaker government and once the deal has been done then we'll get the vote of no confidence which he would lose and the caretaker government goes off to Brussels to hammer out a deal after we have got an extension to Art 50. 

Thanks for the reply, Baron; but it didn’t really answer the question.

I was interested to see where your own ‘red lines’ are regarding the behaviour of those pushing for an outcome you want. What are you willing to tolerate in order to get your way? 

Farage yesterday said he would ‘do a deal with the Devil’ if it was what it took to get his version of Brexit. Well, we’re not taking him literally of course, but he appeared to be signalling there were no limits, no tactics he would reject no matter how corrosive to our system of governance, no matter how toxic to civil society, no matter how damaging to relationships between different groups who will have to share the same space in the aftermath 

by his behaviour last night, Johnson is indicating he will not allow himself to be outflanked by Farage in this regard; the campaigning that follows will be pure poison, inflaming and channelling anger as a political tactic 

It didn’t need to be like this. If Teresa  May had acknowledged the reality of her lost election, and interpreted it as a mandate to work across parties to deliver a form of Brexit that commanded broad support and could have taken significant numbers of remainers with her, we’d be in a very different place now. 

But we can’t go back. Johnson is burning the boats that could take him to a compromise and the only Brexit now available is a Farage one. But Whether Brexit happens or not, a campaign fought in the way Johnson clearly intends is going to wreak massive collateral damage to our political system and leave massive anger on both sides that will long outlast his government. His legacy will be a country that hates itself.

this is what is coming. At what point will you say, enough? 

You didn't answer the question you were asked. Is there a line in the sand that would cause you to change your mind on Brexit?

From my point of view, this awful situation is the almost inevitable endpoint of attempting to supercede a centuries old tradition of Parliamentary democracy with the narrow result of an ill-conceived, fraudulently carried out and dishonestly campaigned-for advisory plebiscite.

Note that I don't think that this nastiness is linked to the desire to leave the European Union. But it has been brought about by the referendum and the actions and rhetoric of those who campaigned for it, and indeed the complacence of Cameron's government and Parliament.

I know you don't relish this situation any more than I do, but it seems to me that without some major reset (a long pause, second referendum, citizens assemblies etc.), any Brexit is inevitably going to be carried out under this atmosphere of hateful hysteria, with the threat of violence hanging in the air.

Calm down dear !

I think and hope Mr Johnson may be surprised by how unpopular he will be at any election. 
Until the present Brexit lunacy I would have labelled myself a lifelong conservative voter. I would not vote for Boris under any circumstances for a number of reasons but mainly Because he is a lying sh*t and his lack of morals. 
The worst outcome for me would be a Corbin government at election time. I think the Conservatives are reliant on this fear and expect to gain votes accordingly from the party faithful. They may be surprised how unpopular they are with;

A/ Boris in charge

B/ the consequences of leaving with no deal or a cra* deal now apparent.   

I’m not sure how to answer your question.

I’m not trying to avoid it, I just don’t know.

Your assessment of what is to come is probably correct.

I disagree with Johnson’s tactics, if that’s what they are.

I don’t like the aggressive language, the division, the insults, etc, etc.

I can distance myself from the man and his behaviour but what does ‘say enough’ actually mean in real terms.

Do I say “enough, I don’t want Brexit to continue”?

”Enough, I want Johnson removed”?

We are, as you correctly stated, seeing the results of past failings.

It shouldn’t be this way.

Maybe there’s a way out but I cannot see it.

See my post at 9.09.

Sorry, I’m not trying to fob you off it just takes me so long to type and I hope my post addresses the points that you raised.

I totally agree.

Like you I usually vote Conservative but I certainly won’t be voting for Johnson.

Not at all, I essentially posted the same thing as scotch_eggs

Is he though? Strikes me he and the other quitters are terrified to check because that might no longer be the case after the complete pig's ear they've made of it.

Johnson is champion of Johnson's career, anything and everything else is a happy accident or collateral damage.

jk

Thanks again for the reflective reply. 

Brexit and social media bring out the worst in people; the most extreme views get amplified and ratchet up the anger levels further 

i don’t think they are representative of the country as a whole though. I think there are moderates on both sides who we are not hearing from. 

I think they need to make their voice heard; if moderate conservatives were widely articulating a ‘Not At Any Price’ position, and indicating there world be a cost to Johnson for pursuing his slash and burn strategy, he would be reined in more 

another moderate Conservative has said on this thread  he will not support Johnson at an election. If his office was getting a tide of emails to that effect, if focus groups and vox pops were saying ‘I want Brexit, but this Brexit will be irretrievably tainted  ; stop this behaviour now or you have lost my vote’, then he may change course.

only Brexit supporters and conservatives can shape this now. Johnson has made it abundantly clear the rest of the population are an irrelevance to him. 

You appear to be genuinely troubled by the direction we’re taking. Do what you can to avoid being complicit. Contact your MP if they are a conservative, contact Johnson directly. Say you have limits, and they are being reached. Make it clear that this vandalism of our civil society has a cost to them.

FTFY

Something that has puzzled me through a lot of this.. The whole point of the fixed term parliaments act was to prevent the government of the day from calling elections at times that suited them politically, yet everyone's acting like the opposition is obliged to vote for an election just because Bozo wants one for political purposes?

I've not seen anyone make this point in the news coverage or in parliamentary discussion and I'm not sure why.

Which would be illegal in a GE and nobody is suggesting electoral fraud is the solution to this mess. What is being suggested by remain/referendum campaigners is that students who may legally choose which seat they vote in should choose tactically. That may well prove effective and is within the law.

But of course you knew that already didn't you.

jk

Corbyn, along with others, has been demanding a general election for years.

Obviously the government are now trying to use this to their advantage.

I’m fairly sure that if the government had a large majority they wouldn’t be calling for  election any time soon.

Yes in more ways than one.

They're not, he's going to win and he's going to deliver your ruinous 'brexit'. You won, get over it.

jk

So who would you vote for?

Not LD (anti brexit). Not Green (anti brexit and way left). Labour (Corbyn and likely to eventually kill brexit). So do you effectively abstain (by spoiling, absence or voting for a no-hoper). Or do you vote for Farage's lot again which is what's driving Johnson's appalling behaviour.

jk

That's rather worrying, i don't know what to say

It's hard to tell how little sense it made in its entirety and in context before it was snipped for twitter but his mind does appear to be elsewhere entirely, just tumbling out words for the sake of it.

jk

The opposition aren't as daft as you think.  They want the Brexiteer vote split between the Tories and the Brexit party at the GE and Boris looking weak after asking the EU for a 6 month extension.   To do that they need to contain and neuter him for a month and let the Benn Act force his hand.   Boris's ranting can work for a few days but it will rapidly get old and just expose his powerlessness.

An alternative view might be that when the PM is coming across on television as an out of control ranting bully unfit for his office, that the best thing to do is to stand back and let him continue.

Sometimes the person you wish to defeat is doing such a good job of shooting themselves and their party in the foot then actually being calm, reserved and sensible (which was pretty much what Corbyn did) is all you need to do to make yourself look like the adult in the room.

Edited for typos.

On occasion.  Did you watch yesterday, however?  Johnson was playing to his gallery and will have had numerous clips and soundbites all over the media. These will be contrasted with Corbyn's utterly pathetic and incoherent response. Johnson will gain votes despite his appalling behaviour as a result of this.  Other responses were better notably Blackford but because they are more minor politicians they won't get the air time.  Corybn's ineffectiveness is as dangerous as Johnson's demagoguery.

I know, my reply was just to wind Gordon up (Sorry Gordon, just a bit of fun!)

Boris, really does worry me though, he can't string a coherent sentence together. The Peston interview was difficult to watch, even Peston struggled to hold his temper in when he was being blatantly lied to.

I honestly don't think he has the mental capacity for the role he is in.

It's getting to the point that between Boris and Farage, Farage is coming across as significantly saner, relatively sensible, significantly more trustworthly, and miles more competent.

I stress not that I support either of them in any way, but Boris is starting to genuinely scare me. In a contempt for law, parliament, populace, etc. These are not good traits in someone with power..

It's clearly even worse than I thought!

This is indeed an ominous situation. What we need now is for the combined opposition (including the expelled Tories) to agree on a caretaker unity government led by one of the senior MPs (eg Beckett or Clarke - not Corbyn). Then pass a vote of no confidence to depose Johnson and install this unity government within the allowed 14 days - giving Johnson no chance to call an election and fiddle the date to achieve his No Deal. 

The new government must then put a deal (either the May Deal or something closer to Labour's proposal that can be agreed quickly with the EU) to a confirmatory referendum against Remain. It will be tight, but I think Remain would win.

The election should be held after the referendum. It can then be on all the other important issues without the distraction of Brexit and allow each of the parties to re-unite around their core policies and philosophies. 

We will also need a major independent constitutional commission to examine how things have gone so wrong and recommend fundamental changes to our constitutional arrangements to ensure this can't happen again. 

And we need to examine closely how we have allowed a proportion of our population to become so disaffected that they are currently prepared to follow a charlatan like Johnson, at huge risk to our democracy, and take effective action to address this.

Wishful thinking? I hope not.

PS: I'm working with our local People's Vote campaign. Are you?

Martin

Well if I want Brexit to happen I do have much choice do I?

Even less if you consider that I’ve said that I wouldn’t  vote for Johnson.

What you shouldn’t do is imagine that most leavers are being led by or are in awe of either Johnson or Farage.

These two have manoeuvred themselves into positions where they can claim to be champions of Brexit.

Most leavers see them as self serving individuals who are using Brexit for their own ends.

They have , in effect, hijacked Brexit. Maybe hijacked is not the right word but it’s all I can think of at the moment.

We’d love a more moderate ‘leader’ but that’s not our choice.

Most leavers will be happy to see both of them disappear once Brexit is delivered.

This article suggests this was the plan but Corbyn and co. not going for it wasn't in their calculations:

https://www.politico.eu/article/where-boris-johnson-went-wrong-dominic-cumm...

 Hence all the bluster and vitriol - they're panicking. 

Agreed

Unfortunately i think it is wishful thinking. The libdems and dissident tories won't support a GNU led by Corbyn, and lots of labour won't support a GNU led by Clarke. So after any putative vonc, even if Borid loses we'll have a 14 day period during which there is a complete inability to form another government. And meanwhile the clock keeps ticking.

Plan?

They have a plan?

What seems clear to a great many Remainers, but is staunchly denied by many Leavers, is that it's exactly these and other "self serving individuals who are using Brexit for their own ends" that gave the whole Brexit movement legs in the first place.

It's hardly surprising that almost the only arguments you now hear in favour of pushing ahead with it are based entirely on 'respecting the referendum' or some such rather than looking forward to the brighter future Leavers were promised. Pretty much all of those arguments for positive outcomes were debunked some time ago but at the time of the referendum it's clear that most Leavers voted in good faith for what they genuinely believed were positives. That good faith has been exploited beyond all reasonable measure and the only way it's being held together now is by determinedly dodging reason and callously inciting tribalism.

I presume so. Somebody can be about to do something, until somebody else says 'I bet you don't have the bottle to not do it' so they then decide not to.

A different context I acknowledge....

Ha, good point! Well, maybe Cummins had a plan...

What drove people to vote for Brexit was a feeling of being ignored.

You’ll notice I said a feeling.

Three years after making a choice those people still have their initial feelings but they’ve been added to by the inability of Parliament to deliver Brexit.

Some people fail to understand that the leave campaign with its unelected leaders and lies didn’t deliver a leave result in the referendum. The result would have been the same if there hadn’t been a leave campaign at all. Many years of feeling ignored drove the leave campaign.

Most people aren’t being led by Farage or Johnson, these two are merely self appointed figureheads.

Were they to disappear tomorrow people’s feelings won’t just go away.

If Cummings is the mastermind that some say that he is then he hides it well.

Come on, when you tell us why most people voted the way they did at least have the decency to put the occasional "I think most people...". Unless, of course, you are actually claiming to know most peoples' motivations, in which case crack on.

It’s an Internet forum for heaven’s sake!

Nobody, except you it seems, thinks I know what everyone else is thinking.

It won’t be a very interesting discussion if we don’t generalise every now and then, will it?

You can take it for granted from now on that everything I say from now on is just my personal opinion.

Feeling ignored was why many people voted against the government. Hardly surprising seeing as what they'd had to put up with for most of the previous decade. But a vote against the government and a vote against the EU are two very different things, and it was the "self serving individuals who are using Brexit for their own ends" that managed to convince these rightfully disaffected people that a good way to express their dissatisfaction with UK government was by voting Leave, thereby scapegoating a relatively innocent party to protect the very same government that was screwing them over. In reality, that outcome demonstrably (according to even the hard-line Brexit government's own predictions) makes the lives of these very same people hugely worse.

And yet, three years on, with a great deal more known about the ins and outs of the situation, most leavers haven’t changed their minds.

Oh, sorry, according to Sir Chasm I’m not allowed to guess what others are thinking, 

Exactly my point earlier: "at the time of the referendum it's clear that most Leavers voted in good faith for what they genuinely believed were positives. That good faith has been exploited beyond all reasonable measure and the only way it's being held together now is by determinedly dodging reason and callously inciting tribalism."

As a Remainer I basically agree. I think there was a lurking desire to try and push back against the effects of globalisaton too, I remember somebody who'd be a traditional Labour talking about certain industry not coming back to the UK, and quite a while before the referendum speaking of Nigel Farage in favourable terms, as if he felt he related to Farage. 

It seems like a bit of an example of 'emotion and spin' rather than rational decision making to me, BTW.

Absolutely you're allowed to guess. But the quotes below come across as statements of fact.

"What drove people to vote for Brexit was a feeling of being ignored."

"Most leavers see them as self serving individuals who are using Brexit for their own ends."

"We’d love a more moderate ‘leader’"

"Most leavers will be happy to see both of them disappear"

You, I and everyone else on this forum do not think that the statements above are facts.

If they were I’d possibly have provided a link to support said statements.

They are my opinions.

Are you going to pursue other posters who don’t specifically declare what’s fact and what’s opinion with such alacrity?

Or is it just those who have a different opinion to you?

Human nature was ever thus, to quote Oscar Wilde: 'We all know that morality is something we apply to those we don't like' Objectivity and morality - they're both applied to those we have less in common with, or less good feeling for. 

Edit: I seem to be getting more cynical?

But won't a clear thinking "more Moderate" leader be backing Remain? That could be your difficulty.

Martin

Indeed

Possibly.

And therein lies the problem.

It depends what bollocks they come out with.

Most people probably have a different opinion to me, i don't pretend to project my opinion onto millions of others.

You seem to be in a group of one who has been convinced that I have been pretending to actually speak for all leavers.

You explicitly did, "We’d love a more moderate ‘leader’". 

Oh for goodness sake!

Did you think I’d gone around and asked everybody what they thought.

Of course you didn’t.

You’re just being awkward, for a change.

That looks good to me. As much as I would like Brexit put to bed and us remain in the EU, I think the LD proposal is dangerous as it completely ignores the result of the (admittedly flawed) referendum. I also think the people’s current view on Brexit can only be decided by a second referendum and not through an election. The inferences politicians choose to make from election results would really not be helpful at the moment. 

Perhaps you think this chap wants a more moderate leader https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1177131180782751744?s=19

Or perhaps he's a remainer. Now I'm not claiming he is representative of "most" leavers...

I obviously don’t know but I’ll guess that he’s happy with Johnson as a leader.

Where you just asking my opinion or did your post have another point?

Well, I'm guessing that's one leaver whose leadership choice and motivation for brexit you might have misinterpreted. So now we're down to you only speaking for 17,399,999 leavers and i just don't have time to investigate all the others.

It would be easier for you if you just accepted the fact that I am, in fact, the leading authority on everything to do with leaving the EU.

Anything I write or imply can be taken by you as gospel and indicative of what all, that’s all as in every single one, other leavers think or believe or want.

The rest of this forum can then continue with our interesting if sometimes contentious debates without any more irrelevant and irritating interruptions.

That's what I've been saying, keep up.

Again with speaking for other people, just can't help yourself. 

The problem they face is if they were to offer a second referendum offering a remain option, if the vote is leave again they're in the same place Cameron was in. While another referendum (with more specific question and answers) seems like the best way to get a mandate in this instance, it could leave them in a difficult situation. 

Personally I'd suggest you have a very long hard think about precisely what the brexit you voted for was supposed to achieve, then consider what it will actually deliver and how you might better achieve your initial goals because as it stands you're being mugged.

Doesn't matter, you're getting Johnson, all you can do is moderate or stoke his behaviour. Currently our voting behaviour is driving Johnson's, I know you won't like that but it's time for some home truths.

I don't really care who you follow or like, I care about the harm your lack of opposition is allowing, even driving them to cause.

Surprise surprise. The 1001 glorious brexits turn out to have been a stalking horse for far right deregulation and asset stripping. If only someone had seen that coming.

It absolutely is. You voted for the most extreme option last time you went to the polls, in doing so you got your candidates and you shifted the Overton window mainstreaming brexit extremism. Johnson has been chosen as leader by a bunch of radicalised brexiters and ex-UKIP entryists. You and people like you are driving this, it's not being done to you, it is by you.

Then what, what is 'brexit'? It's not a thing in its own right, it's a step toward something. What?

jk

Brexit is the leaving of the EU.

Not Europe but the EU.

It should have included a withdrawal agreement and a future relationship deal to be implemented during the transition period.

As that hasn’t happened we’ll have a withdrawal agreement and then negotiations for a future relationship which within take place during the transition period.

How that relationship will develop will probably depend on which political party is in power.

Well because all debate and conservative strategy since then has been to deepen the divide between voters on either side of the argument. It's now become a particularly toxic type of identity politics. I still have never heard a single cogently argued (and backed up with a realistic plan) benefit in leaving.

I don't think most herd mentality leavers really think about what sort of leave they want anymore. They just want it over and done with (alongside a few worn down remain voters). The great irony is that it will never be over and done with.

In my opinion you are probably right that leavers just want it done.

That might explain Johnson’s popularity.

Which is an insufficiently defined objective of no value. Why, what are we leaving the EU to achieve? Which other institutions will we have to leave, remain in or join to achieve your goals?

Obviously.

Transition to what. Nobody can agree what brexit should do because there are 1001 different versions, mostly contradictory lumped together as if they're the same thing to achieve a notional majority but no defined way forward.

Shouldn't we decide and approve that deliberately rather than smashing everything up then leaving the rebuild design and implementation to chance?

jk

But hard exit or withdrawal agreement brexit will both lead to either frenzied negotiations on terms of co-operation or two years transition negotiations (just for starters); leave does not mean leave and never has.

It's fantasy or a lie depending on who's saying it.

As I said based on a statement given by Mr Barnier - I would provide a link but can’t find one, I’ll keep looking - both the withdrawal agreement and the future relationship were supposed to be sorted before the UK left the EU and the transition period was the time to implement any necessary changes.

Hence the term ‘implementation period’ which seems to have fallen out of favour.

Like much of the planned events that’s not what happened.

Like all international relationships the one between the UK will always be developing.

I’m not sure what you mean by ‘leave does not mean leave’.

It's probably a bit like "brexit means brexit".

So we've gone from people wanting to leave for reasons that either weren't related or weren't achievable, to those same people wanting to leave for reasons that simply no longer make sense outside the realms of human psychology.

And yet, once a team is picked, tribal affiliation seems to trump almost all.

It would be wrong to deny that tribal affiliation is playing a major part in the Brexit process. IMHO

Blame for that must lie squarely with Mrs May. Given the 48/52 result a compromise might have been in order but no she came up with her stupid red lines representing a quite 'hard' brexit and empowered those hardliners in her party. Of course for the real hardliners even her red lines were a betrayal of their perfect vision.

The most meaningless political slogan I've ever heard; ridiculously adopted enthusiastically by hardline leave voters.

The longer the Brexit process has gone on the more that tribalism has appeared.

It’s a bit like the ‘them and us’ mentality fostered by certain football managers and now happily adopted by Johnson.

Yes but it hasn't just appeared out of thin air - it's been nurtured and fertilised by political discourse, the traditional media and social media. And the radicalisation has happened mainly to the leave side in spite of what is said about radical remainers. Is there such a thing as being a radical who wants to keep things as they are?

I hope you don't mind me arguing about semantics, but I'd like to contest that. I actually don't think Brexit means 'leaving the EU' at all but has taken on a meaning that goes far beyond that.

Leaving the EU is a vague policy that could result in any number of possible end states. Norway, Switzerland, Turkey, the USA, Canada, Russia, North Korea, Japan and the British Empire circa 1970 are (or were) all non-EU states. 'Leaving the EU' says almost nothing about our actual end state.

'Brexit' initially meant the act of leaving the EU, but it now has an Orwellian twist applied. It now simultaneously means whatever hoped-for end state its proponent wants, as well as whatever the government is currently proposing or aiming to achieve. And that allows the government to claim the moral authority from the 2016 referendum while doing what it wants, regardless of whether it's actually what leavers wanted.

I think the distinction is important because, as you rightly say, tribalism is a huge part of this and 'Brexit' is now a core part of that identity. In truth though, Brexit was not what was on the ballot paper in 2016, merely 'leaving the EU'.

Yes, but it's very simple, so it must be easy.

No, it was always WA before leaving (including financial contributions, mutual citizens' rights, ...), then use the implementation period to put the future relationship as outlined in the PD into actual law/treaties.

CB

I don’t know about radical but using the debates on this forum there is as much emotion, determination, etc on the remain side as the leave side.

Maybe social media has allowed people to align with others in a tribal way that wasn’t possible before

twitter, Facebook,etc.

No one envisaged the withdrawal agreement taking so long.

It was thought that once sufficient progress was made on the WA that talks about the future could begin, a decision to be made on that as early as Dec 2017.

I wish I could find the clip of Barnier outlining the fact that the transition period was for the implementation of already agreed policies and not for negotiations.  I’ll keep looking for it.

Not really or they would have needed the backstop as an insurance policy on the results of the negotiation.

Well I’ve given up looks for the Barnier statement that I was looked for.

I must have imagined it.

Makes me wonder what else I’ve misremembered.

It is incredibly difficult to find a report about a specific event from any given point in the whole timeline of events. Unless an exact quote can be remembered, it'll be lost among the thousands upon thousands of pages of headlines generated since late 2015.

Wow. What’s more worrying is he is a SERVING member of the armed forces. A hero apparently... a hero that likes to threaten women. 

This is exactly what happened. The state of play at the end of the WA negotiations is summarized in the PD.

CB

I thought it was part of the televised briefings that Davies and Barnier used to hold.

Probably late 2017 maybe early 2018.

But I can’t find any other evidence to support what I thought I remembered hearing.

So, I’ll have to put it down to misremembering.

Yes, I’ve obviously confused myself. Sorry.

No worries, it is hard to keep track! May you live in interesting times is indeed a curse sometime.

CB

It suddenly occurs to me how often Boris employs the ‘dead cat’ routine. Instead of apologising for lying to Her Majesty or for the nonsensical Brexit strategy he performs some headline taking stunt which stifles the debate we should be having like ‘what realistic advantages will leaving Europe bring us’

It’s  all smoke and mirrors to confuse and misdirect.    

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/sep/26/boris-johnsons-brexit...

Assuming this transcribes his interviews correctly, it really is extraordinary how Johnson just lies absolutely all of the time, even when speaking about obviously provable things in public. (I have in mind his lies about the effect of the Benn Act.) It’s quite worrying. If this is effective politics (and I fear Trump has shown us that it is) then the quality of our public life is going to decline markedly.

jcm

Well if Google can produce an app that creditably translates pretty much any language to any other in real time, surely someone must be able to find a way to flag up lies 'at the point of sale'. I fear however, that such a flag would be flapping so frantically with the likes of Trump and Johnson that it would simply become a blur.

In reply to:

I might have missed something, but what did Johnson say that provoked another MP to bring Jo Cox into the debate?
I'm not trying to defend him for his overall behaviour which is absolutely deplorable, just genuinely confused why Jo Cox has been mentioned.

It was all to do with the kind of language ('surrender bill', 'traitor', 'betrayal' etc) that led to the death of Jo Cox, and has led to death threats in the last week to a number of MPs. Johnson then reacted in a totally despicable way, saying the best way we can honour the memory of Jo Cox, is to do exactly the opposite of what she was campaigning for. And he called mention of Jo Cox's murder in the context of the hate language that led to her death (at the hands of a 'Britain First' extremist) 'humbug'. I think it's essential that everyone listens to what Boris Johnson's own sister has to say about it: https://www.theguardian.com/media/video/2019/sep/26/boris-johnson-sister-sa...

+1

Call this f*cker out, constantly, persistently.

Privileged bigotry should have no place here. Baron are you for or against?

She was referenced because an MP who was a friend of hers and from a nearby constituency talked about the threats and abuse she received; obviously and understandably the fact that Jo Cox was murdered intensified the fear arising from these threats. It seemed perfectly understandable to me why it was raised, as Cox’s murder showed that those threats are not to be taken lightly and the fact that she was murdered makes the act of inflaming and provoking the type of people capable and inclined to such violence even more callous and irresponsible. It was clear watching it that the women involved were upset and Johnson’s contemptuous manner of dismissing their concerns was not what you’d expect from someone with any decency. 

And Ed Miliband was sunk by looking gormless eating a bacon sandwich...

Not read the whole thread, but...

I'm sure historians will recount the day when Boris de Piffle the Loser lost his final battle at the Halloween Ball.

I don't think Boris should be stoking the fire in an already angry political environment but do you not think in reference to Cox that he meant the best way to stop anger rising among extremist nut cases and make people safer is to do what was promised and actually leave the EU? 

The sorts of people prone to direct violent action are at the extreme edge but behind them is a huge swell of moderate leave voters with ever growing discontent. And it's not just leave voters either, a lot of people I know voted remain and over time more and more of them just want us to get out and have done with it, they don't really want to leave but they are just sick of it all now and I can understand why.

If we finally leave that frustration disappears among the masses and in turn the extremists are reeled back in too. I don't support political violence in anyway but if you push and push eventually something will give and violence will break out. If we are still in the EU in six months I can forsee protests turning violent and riots kicking off. This political stalemate can not last indefinitely.

Bollocks

Of all the justifications for pushing ahead with what we all now know to be a hugely damaging exit, the threat of Leaver violence must rank among the least worthy and also the least credible.

I can quite believe the likes of Farage will stoke unrest, before quickly pretending it wasn't him what did it. But do you really think all will be peaceful if we all suffer a no deal catastrophe? I'll hazard it might even be Leavers who are the most incensed of all once it becomes apparent that many have lost their jobs, the wages of the others no longer buy as much, the NHS becomes a second class safety net for those too poor to afford insurance, and the government reintroduces austerity to help pay for it all without the rich being overly inconvenienced.

Johnson has been part of the group that has been deliberately driving events, upping the rhetoric and stoking violence for months.

So lets have a second referendum then.

What happens if we leave with no deal and people actually die, people's businesses fail, life gets harder for everyone? It won't be a few pathetic lowlifes who can't deal with not getting what they want anymore. It'll be hundreds of thousands with legitimate grievances.

Absolutely! We don't want any more deaths so we'd better give the violent nutters what they want.

No that's obviously not what he meant and you know it.

Even if he did mean it that way WALOB you just spouted. 

The way I see it… I would far rather have the army shooting the scumbags who (say they) will be out rioting for Brexit, then I would have them out shooting normal people rioting for food for their children.

What happens the next day?  It is not possible to be "done with it"(other than repeal). This is only the start. 

Wake up dude, you've been lied to.

If we 'finally leave' we actually just start the next more painful, more difficult phase that will consume at least another decade.

jk

That assumes that the frustration is solely caused by membership of the EU. It isn't. Austerity, changes in the condition of our towns and cities, shifts in employment patterns and a number of other things are more plausible causes of frustration. 

Indeed.

Sorry, I’ve been out 

Am I for or against what?

Possibly, but I was making a comment about something I’d gotten wrong.

Johnson’s language re Jo Cox and the response to concerns about death threats to MPs.

Refer to Gordon’s post above.

Do you care about the prevalence of untruths in modern political dialogue?

Do you think you might have taken in by some of them?

Did you think leaving the EU would be easy?

Did you think it would be beneficial?

Johnson was wrong to say humbug and shouldn’t have said that the best way to honour Cox is to get Brexit done.

Politicians often lie. Most of their lies are fairly obvious to anyone who takes the time to examine them. I’d rather that they didn’t lie.

No

No. 

Yes. 

I think a few politicians lie a lot, most don’t much at all. The liars seem to have the upper hand at the moment.

Are people really taken in by the lying or are they ignoring it in order to achieve their aims?

I’m guessing it’s mostly the latter.

But what are you going to do about it, Baron?

you said you would not vote for Johnson; but unless you live in his constituency, or are a Conservative party member, you couldn’t anyway

Is your MP a Tory? If so have you contacted them to say you will be unable to give them your support until Johnson starts behaving in a manner that befits the office he holds? 

Have you contacted Johnson directly to explain that you won’t vote Tory in any election while he behaves in this way?

Then that is corrosive to political and civil dialogue in this country and will have consequences long into the future.

The willingness to believe lies which confirm your biases is such basic psychology that that seems unlikely.

When I said I wouldn’t vote for Johnson I should, of course, have said that I won’t vote Conservative as I usually do.

My MP is Labour so I’m one of those many people of all different political persuasions whose vote doesn’t count anyway.

Johnson isn’t listening to me, you or anyone else who is critical of him.

He will, hopefully, get the message from a general election.

The effects of Brexit will indeed have long lasting consequences no matter what the outcome.

It’s an interesting issue that among all these people going berserk about democracy, there will be millions (like me) whose vote has never counted for anything anyway because of FPTP. But nobody seems to care about that. 

It's getting to the stage were I hope the other 27 E.U  states simply tell the UK  to fùck off and deal with the shit which is entirely of their own making. What really disappoints me is that people are going to rejoice that 40 years of close cooperation are being thrown away for not one single tangible advantage. 

The other E.U states will continue to pull the strings and  I can see the UK begging on it's knees not to be too penalized by trade deals and other essential cooperation that will need to be negotiated.

So, you claim their will be advantages, let's hear some of them and don't say recovering sovereignty as the UK  has never lost it !

Indeed. The Conservatives could end up with a huge majority and yet only obtain 40% of the popular vote. It is a flawed system based on the premise that the country needs strong government. We have seen what Boris Johnson's style of strong government is. 

Yes and once we're out the government can get back to dealing with  that stuff, if the people don't like how they manage things post Brexit they can vote them out.

Right now we are in a state of paralysis, the government has no majority so can't pass anything or win any votes and the opposition is actually trapping the government in power by refusing a general election, thus the stalemate continues and pressure builds. Cummins this morning has just said he's not surprised people are angry at MP's and the best was dispell that anger is to leave the EU which is exactly what I suggested Boris was getting at yesterday.

I can understand why labour refuse to agree to an election because they know they'll be destroyed and they know a Tory government with a majority will likely  leave with no deal if needs be. But really they are delaying the invitable if we have to get an extension to Jan 2020 we'll just end up leaving with no deal then instead as parliament refused to back May's deal and I can't see the EU offering much different. 

So in the meantime we keep delaying and keep business in the dark, no one is willing to invest, the longer the delay the more harm is done to the country before we leave anyway. I say pull the plaster off quickly, take the pain and then we can at least get on with things.

I care, being in a similar situation, and maybe a change to FPTP will be more likely because of what’s happened in the Brexit process.

Where do you live? Not your actual address, a country will do, thanks.

Had you checked my profile you will see that I live in France.

OK it's not certain that my profile is up to date.

I didn’t check your profile but sort of guessed by your user name.

I’ll also guess, hopefully correctly, that you moved to France for reasons that suited you.

Reasons that might appeal to me as well or they might not.

Not because they’re right or wrong reasons but because we are all different.

And that’s part of the problem with, amongst other things, Brexit.

I’ll give you two reasons why I want Brexit, you’ll probably disagree with them and we’ll keep going round in circles.

I don’t want freedom of movement.

I don’t want to be under the jurisdiction of the ECJ.

I do want close economic, social, cultural, scientific  and security ties to many European countries.

Nobody is going to make you move.

Is there a particular ECJ judgement that has adversely affected you?

Well, there was a simple way to keep all those advantages.

And round in circles we go.

There's no point moaning just because someone replies to you. 

I am curious about the terrible woes the ecj has inflicted on you though.

Did you read my reply to Pyreneenemec?

Different people, different ideas, no right or wrong, just different, no resolution.

I don’t have to have had a negative experience to not want something.

This country is going to be bogged down in post-Brexit negotiations and arrangements for years. We will be distracted from getting on with things for a long time. 

Then we'd best get started, quicker we get going the quicker we'll have it done. 

I don't doubt there is a lot of work to do post Brexit but at least then the people will have gotten what they voted for. If they don't like the outcome of that then they only have themselves to blame. 

So is the answer ‘no, I cannot point to a single ECJ judgment I disapproved of’?

jcm

In reality he is only the 'not' champion of around 16m. The rest couldn't be bothered to vote. If they had we wouldn't be in this mess.

Why do I have to disapprove of something to not want it?

I’m an adult, I get to choose what I want.

Doesn’t mean I’ll get it of course.

I doubt if more than a small percentage of leave voters will get what they voted for. You can hardly blame the rest.

I didn’t say you did have to. I just asked whether you could in fact point to any ECJ judgment you disapproved of.

jcm

Fine, but then you don't get to complain about people disregarding your opinion as idiotic.

I certainly wouldn't sacrifice 40 years of cooperation for meager advantages such as these.

We'll agree to disagree and leave it at that !

If you don’t disapprove and haven’t been adversely affected then what are you basing your opinion on? I’m genuinely interested in how you’ve formed an opinion so different to my own, given that I also couldn’t point to a ECJ ruling (let alone one I disagree with). 

I reaise you are saying you don’t need reasons, and I get that, but most opinions are based on something rather than a finger in the air. I should imagine, and please correct me if not, that not wanting freedom of movement is based on a perception that it affects jobs and alters the cultural mix- I reasons I get (I disagree but I get!). 

Someone was arrested breaking into Jess Phillips' constituency office shouting "fascist" just after Johnson's speech yesterday. Looks like he's inspired other people to "come out fighting" as well. Staff inside terrified apparently. 

Ian Turner MP approached Cummings detailing death threats he'd received. Cummings' response was that he should "get on with Brexit".

It's not even thinly veiled anymore.

Question: is Brexit worth our government actively inciting division and likely violence against the country's founding institutions and principles? Would you prefer to see our institutions respected or Brexit delivered to their destruction? Binary question.

What do you mean?

I don’t think that EU law should have primacy over UK law.

You've basically said you dislike the ECJ for no reason. Therefore, we can basically ignore your opinion on it as vacuous.

But it’s a binary question is it?

Whoever attacked Phillips’ office needs to feel the full weight of the law.

He should also have educated as to what a fascist is.

And your answer to my questions?

How have you come to that conclusion? Is there not an example or where EU law has superseded uk law for the worse and has therefore swayed your opinion?

on the flip side, EU law has thrust a lot of good things on us that our laws might have got to eventually but we’re in no rush to implement. 

So do you want me to abandon my support for something I have supported for many years because some odious characters have  emerged as the Prime Minister and his advisers?

I want to see Brexit delivery and I’d rather that Johnson had no part in that.

I feel that we have a reasonable system for deciding which laws we want and as seen very recently a very good system for ensuring that those laws are upheld.

You can't always get what you want. Would you prefer to see our institutions preserved or Brexit delivered?

I want both.

While our institutions might be under attack I don’t see any signs of them collapsing any time soon.

That’s fair. So I guess that in your mind the balance of positive to negative effects of the EU law on our own courts lays in the negative. Which brings me back to my point? Why? What has made you come to that conclusion? 

I would say the opposite- that EU law making hadhad a mostly positive effect on our lawmaking- but admit that we’re I asked to give my reasoning I would only be able to say a vague piece about workers rights and environmental standards. Nothing concrete, but the fact that these positive additions to the statute books were thrust upon us means we hadn’t done it on our own and Therefore the EU’s input was positive. 

You don't. However given the extraordinary cost of change one might expect a reasonable adult to have a significant actual grievance in order to justify it.

Which leaves the foreigners. Ironically treating them as we plan to, second class citizens, little more than economic assets to be hired and fired with the ebbs and flows of the economy, no rights beyond those tightly bound up with their work visa, that makes the real issues associated with migration: social integration, public service provision, housing market volatility etc worse not better. And they'll get more brown, less Christian which I know will upset a lot of the wankers I spoke with back in 2016.

jk

If I lived in a country with corrupt politicians and a weak judicial system I’d probably welcome the primacy of EU law.

I understand that it is possible that without EU law we’d have lower environmental standards and fewer workers rights  but I have enough faith in our political parties that we’d have developed similar standards without the EU’s help.

I guess that I’m not a reasonable adult then.

I think more brown and less Christian should be the ultimate goal of the entire human race! Speaking as a ging, the cost of suncream requires two salaries and my wife is especially beautiful once she’s been in the sun and her Asian-ness has come through. Religion of any type has held us back for long enough! And the type of Christianity nowadays is so wishy washy anyway that it’s almost embarrassing that people claim to still ‘believe’! 

 Sorry Baron. That doesn’t seem to be available any more. The only potential futures from here appear to be:

1. a country riven with division and anger remaining in the EU

2. a country riven with division and anger outside the EU

the only differences are in scenario 1 just the Brexit voters are angry, whereas in scenario 2, everyone is angry, when it becomes clear that “project fear” was actually “an accurate assessment of future risks”, and “short term disruption” actually means another generation of austerity as tax revenues shrink in the face of increasing demand. While the politicians who sold the project and the interests they promote continue to get visibly richer

The dream’s dead, Baron. Your moderate, reasonable request has been hijacked by people that want to use Brexit to remodel our society and politics on a different set of values to those we’ve accepted over the last 50 years. The only Brexit you get now is one that will poison our civil society for a generation.

Given all this, do you still want Brexit, knowing what it will lead to?

I hate to repeat myself, but- what are you basing that on? You keep asserting your opinion when trying to assert your reasoning. Can you see the difference and why it might be frustrating in the context of this binary choice to have someone’s feelings thrust upon you with seemingly no logical consciousness behind it? 

Sorry, I thought I’d made myself clear when I said I I don’t want EU law to have primacy over UK law.

I don’t see the need for it.

It will come as no shock if I don’t share your vision of what the future holds.

That doesn’t mean that I don’t have grave concerns for the political direction that Brexit is taking.

Politicians have the ability to do something about this by holding an election.

Then hopefully the vast majority of moderate voters can show their displeasure at proceedings.

Or we’ll find out that most voters are actually extremists and Farage will emerge victorious.

Or even the Lib Dems

It's becoming apparent that's no longer an option.

So you're happy for them to be under attack for the time being if that's the only way Brexit will get delivered?

Your increasing detachment from the reality of what's happening here is not uncommon but it is concerning.

Ok... I’m not going to go around in circles again and will assume that you simply don’t understand rather than being intentionally evasive. Unfortunately you’ve just proved a lot of remainers right in their assumption that (even the most polite and eloquent as you are) brexiteers don’t actually have a clue why they want other than less foreigners/ perceived foreign interference- which I’m sure you are aware isn’t actually foreign for as long as we are part of the EU we have a vote on what it does and doesn’t foist upon us.

i did enjoy a calm interaction on the subject though, so thanks. 

Of course I’m not happy about institutions, organisations or individuals being treated in an unreasonable, unnecessary and sometimes violent way.

We could abandon Brexit but won’t this make things ten times worse?

If the WA had been passed would we be seeing this level of abuse?

How am I detached from reality when I have posted here on a daily basis condemning Johnson’s approach?

How do you envisage an election (which can't be held before 31/10) resolving this shitshow you voted for?

What shitshow would that be?

Do you mean Brexit?

Who knows what an election will actually achieve but unless you know of another way of removing politicians from office it’s the best we’ve got. IMHO

How do you propose we undertake international obligations *without* giving those obligations priority over domestic law??

jcm

I think we're talking about the direction brexit is taking.

Well, you suggested that we could do something about the direction brexit is taking by having an election. But we can't have an election before brexit. So how does the election help?

Do you have a specific example in mind?

How else are international treaties supposed to work, other than by pooling some sovereignty?

It's not as if we don't have input into framing EU law (and currently some useful vetos).

You don’t believe we’re going to leave on Oct 31st so we’ll have one during our next extension period.

The Johnson problem could possibly be solved earlier by a vote of confidence.

The prime minister ratcheting up offensive language to stoke public fury at institutions as a deliberate political tactic doesn’t cause you grave concerns?

that doesn’t go away after the election. A rubicon has been crossed. If it works, and it looks like it is working, that’s what political campaigns look like from here on in.

People don’t start as extremists. Bathe them day in day out in messages about betrayal by  contemptuous elites and you can move them a long way from where they started. We are a different country to what we were before the referendum, and we can’t go back. People who saw our membership or otherwise of the EU as the central organising principle of their identity before 2016 were few an far between. Now it is commonplace and is consuming the entire political space. These people- and that includes us-  will not go back to how they/we were before the referendum. Trade talks with the EU, massively difficult and complex discussions, started from a place of rancour and distrust, will go on for 10 years or more, picking at the open sore Brexit has left in our collective consciousness. Positions will further harden, and people will be pushed to progressively more opposed positions 

and with our electoral system, not only is driving this process a winning strategy for the Tories, it’s the *only* strategy for the Tories. Your party as a moderate right of centre one-nation pillar of our system is dead. It can only continue in a ghoulish afterlife competing with whatever the latest Farage vehicle is on what used to be seen as the far right, but is now part of the mainstream 

they went and left you, Baron; just the same as the way the Labour Party went and left us on the centre left. Forgive my language, but unless you clearly repudiate them and what they are doing, all you are to them is a ‘useful idiot’, giving a veneer of legitimacy to a project you don’t even believe in. 

Obviously there needs to be an adjudication system for international affairs.

That’s not the same as allowing primacy over domestic law.

It sort of is. If you enter an international treaty on environmental standards, you can’t then implement domestic policy which undermines this. Therefore the international law is prime. 

What laws do you want the UK to control which are currently being controlled by the EU? 

If 2 countries (A and B) have a treaty, then B passes a law which contradicts the treaty, where does that get resolved, assuming both countries regard their law as primary?

Then scale that up to 28 countries.

I think that I possibly did not make myself clear - I have very grave concerns about the direction that the country is going in.

You are correct when you say that things are not going back to the way that they were.

We, you and I, have always been used by political parties.

Brexit or no Brexit this won’t have a happy ending.

Well, for instance, if we propose to agree to continue with membership of Euratom, how can we possibly expect other countries to agree that if any dispute arises over whether some practice or other does comply with it, that dispute should be governed by our domestic law (whatever that would even mean), or that it should be determined by the UK courts?

One could ask the same question about patents, or competition law, or tax avoidance, or anything. International cooperation just can’t work if nations insist on their domestic law having primacy. Like I say, how do you imagine it’s going to work?

jcm

How do countries outside of the EU deal with similar situations?

I have no idea whether we're going to leave on the 31st. But I'm quite happy to ascribe some beliefs to you if you want to play that game.

How? If we assume that Borid loses a vonc where does that leave us? Either 14 days to cobble together some sort of government of national unity (same MPs as we have) or a general election which would still fall after brexit.

As I asked Andy Hardy, how do countries outside of the EU deal with such situations?

I think that we were discussing changing the abusive nature of political proceedings rather than Brexit itself.

Although one never knows what result an election might throw up.

No, i don't believe you think that at all. What you said was "That doesn’t mean that I don’t have grave concerns for the political direction that Brexit is taking. Politicians have the ability to do something about this by holding an election.". You were explicitly referring to the political direction brexit is taking. 

No!? Really!?

Well, there is the ISDS, which is a mechanism by which large corporations can sue governments if their right to pursue a profit is infringed, not administered in public or even in the country being sued, not really what you want if you want domestic law to be primary at all times.

Apart from that I would assume that, the text of the treaty would say "this treaty trumps domestic law in countries A and B". A bit like the EU treaties, and maybe the treaty would set up a bi-partisan court to resolve issues.

But all that is by the by: it's leavers, like yourself that should be providing the answers here, you want to leave, fair enough. You want UK law to always be primary, again, fair enough, but leavers have to come up with the mechanisms that enable this.

Fair enough. Thanks for engaging in a constructive spirit, in the ocean of spite Brexit has let loose, this thread has been a welcome island of reasonable discussion. 

FWIW I think the only way out without irreparable damage is a second referendum, on a single transferable vote, with remain, a deal (realistically the May deal) and no deal on the paper. 

I’d hope remain would win; but once Cummings and the press got to work , I expect  the campaign would make the previous referendum campaigning look like it was done by nuns; and I think no deal would win

some people are going to feel cheated whatever the outcome and however we get there; and there will be consequences whatever direction we take. Of course some people will cry ‘betrayal!’ at a second referendum; but I think more people on both sides will accept the outcome of a three way vote , whatever the outcome is, than if remain or no deal are pushed through without further consent. 

I would certainly accept no deal if that was the outcome, and people explicitly and knowingly voted for it. I won’t ever accept it if we get it by chicanery, and I expect there are millions like me.

I believe we'll be committed to withdrawal agreement (May's) and a short extension to implement the minimum necessary laws by the 31st (likely) or out with no deal (slightly less so). Johnson is reckless enough, with little enough to lose that he will use the remaining tools at his disposal to force parliament's hand.

Then we get a populist car crash of an election and a hard right government with a mandate for deregulation and looting (sorry, austerity) to fix the problems the previous parliament voted to inflict on the public.

To win that vote there needed to be a *very* good reason for his own party members to vote against him but that was never going to happen until it was far too late. What is practically possible, legally possible and politically possible all have to coincide to make it actually possible. They haven't yet (still not practically possible, parliament needs to remain in session as a check on Johnson's power).

jk

I agree. 3-way vote, 'no-deal' wins, emigrate and start again. Hard to see any better outcome being possible now.

The problem is of course no-deal is no such thing, it's just an economic shock followed by an unknown 'deal'.

jk

It varies. WTO is one mechanism then there are various courts of arbitration etc.. Human rights are dealt with by a seperate body that is not part of the EU ( I assume you know this and are not confused that Human Rights is a European Union initiative--0- a common mistake).

In all these case primacy has been negotiated away as a means of resloving international disputes.

Things like patent law, are usually local.

There is a surprising amount of Uk law which is overriden by intenrational law in such areas as shipping and flying in aircraft. You must have read an airline ticket saying its subject to international conventions.

Either way codifying these things under one EU umbrella makes life easier. You have just seen an example this week of it in place, Thomas Cook passengers being repatriated.

But once again, that's bollocks, we all know why Labour isn't demanding an election, and it's because Johnson then gets his "deal"  or more to the point No deal through by default, as there's no parliament during the run up to an election.

Corbyn has stated a number of times, "postpone Brexit or take no deal off the table, and we'll have an election".

This is the same selective hearing people have when saying Labour had no Brexit policy, or that they keep changing their minds / are sitting on the fence.

I don't know how many times I've typed it on UKC, "We'll  find out what the deal is, and then we'll vote on that", it's been the same for three years.

Hey, I wasn’t having a go at Corbyn.

I was simply reporting what had taken place on Parliament with no implication as to Corbyn’s reasons.

This is the problem with the whole idea of putting it onto the ballot in a second referendum. No deal is not a destination, it's a really unpleasant and inefficient means of transport to a deal that will need to include citizens' rights, the divorce bill and the Irish border. This whole debacle has surely shown us that unless an outcome can be properly defined it shouldn't be included as a voting option.

I'm pretty pessimistic about a sensible referendum choice being offered without this disaster ending up amended to it and I still think we'll vote 'out' in the most simplistic way offered but I am frequently wrong.

I suppose it's possible if Johnson is willing and able to force parliament to vote through May's WA in the next few weeks as their last least worse option they may well do so conditional on a deal/no-brexit ref'. He'd be far more reliant on the opposition than his own hard line cabinet to pass May's deal but realistically I think this is now the only way his party and career survives either delivering or escaping brexit. It's not entirely clear though that he believes it so we're left waiting to see what tricks he still has left.

jk

I'd love to say I felt otherwise and was optimistic but I fear you're right. I'm just frustrated and depressed about the lack of honesty about the whole thing and the lie that a no deal brexit represents some kind of clean break and the end of its monopoly on our politics is just the latest in a long line of Brexit bollocks.

I think he could easily get that through parliament - the second referendum was a popular choice in the indicative votes and that was without the backing of the government, and before a load of moderate Tories got kicked out. It's far and away the most sensible way out of this deadlock but it will never happen under this government. Brexit is now existential for the Tory party - their electorate is overwhelmingly leave and May's deal, let alone a second referendum, is increasingly toxic to them. There's no way his party or career would survive being seen to back down now, not with a general election looming in the near future.