Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8891 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 02-23-2019 5:48 AM
141 online now:
CosmicChimp, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), PaulK, Tangle (4 members, 137 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Happy Birthday: CosmicChimp
Post Volume:
Total: 847,794 Year: 2,831/19,786 Month: 913/1,918 Week: 200/301 Day: 2/23 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2627
28
2930
...
33Next
Author Topic:   Brexit - Should they stay or should they go?
Tangle
Member
Posts: 6621
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 406 of 493 (847075)
01-17-2019 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 404 by Percy
01-17-2019 10:14 AM


Re: May's government survives no confidence vote
Percy - I've lost a post somewhere, I've looked behind the sofa but can't find it - weird.

In summary it said that for two years the general vote didn't change much from the initial vote. There's some indications that it may now be changing. If it settles at 10+% for a while in favour of remain I think they'll find their reason for another vote.

It also said that our exPrimeminister is a screaming idiot to ask stupid people a difficult question and I doubt you'd find many on the remain side that disagrees.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 404 by Percy, posted 01-17-2019 10:14 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 799
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 407 of 493 (847076)
01-17-2019 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 404 by Percy
01-17-2019 10:14 AM


Re: May's government survives no confidence vote
It is this blind adherence to the 2016 referendum, including some dunderheaded idea that an issue can only be voted on once, that is a big part of the problem. The members of Parliament know a Brexit vote today would be far more informed than the one in 2016, and they should make sure it happens.

In all representative governments it is reasonable to ask, "If the electorate voted for the country to jump off a bridge, should the government do it?" In my opinion we elect our public officials not to blindly do our bidding but to represent our best interests, even when we have a misguided understanding of what those best interests are.

What is interesting however is that the ultimate culprit of this debacle is the Conservative party itself. And to some degree, Labour as well. For many years now, the Tories have had to deal with a case of schizophrenia within their own party between individuals who supported the Eurozone versus those that were Euro-skeptics. David Cameron decided to try to settle the matter (along with Scottish independence) by having a set of referendums and he assured the public that those referendums would be delivered and the results honored. I believe his assertion was that if he provided the people a voice, he could finally quell the issues once and for all.

Now the Scottish independence referendum went his way. And I think that may have led to a certain sense of complacency on his part. As a result, when the referendum for Brexit materialized, Remainers simply did not do an adequate job of selling their story and also being more vocal about the outright fabrications that the Leave side were performing as part of their tactics. Although to be fair, both sides lied. The end result is he boxed himself into a corner and ended up causing him to lose his PM status when things went to pot as they like to say.

Now does that mean that there is no provision for another referendum? Not at all. And I certainly don't think it is undemocratic to ask for one. The issue is one of perception and politics. Leave advocates have been consistently pushing the narrative that PM May and members of Labour and the Conservative Party have had no interest in delivering Brexit and are deliberately screwing things up in an effort to undermine everything. Perhaps that is true. Although my knowledge of how government functions is that they don't deliberately fuck things up; they are just too preoccupied with their own egos and their donors that fuck ups are a natural consequence of that mindset.

Ultimately at this stage, I think it is just a matter of timing more than anything. The Article 50 deadline is March 29th. The only way another referendum can be accommodated is if that deadline is extended. And the only way that can happen is if the majority party asks the EU for an extension and the EU grants it. Neither of those options is in any way certain. A general election is also off the table in lieu of the recent no confidence vote and also because there simply isn't enough time. So what we are left with is either a variation of May's deal or no deal.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 404 by Percy, posted 01-17-2019 10:14 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 408 by Taq, posted 01-17-2019 3:10 PM Diomedes has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7670
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.2


(1)
Message 408 of 493 (847077)
01-17-2019 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 407 by Diomedes
01-17-2019 2:32 PM


Re: May's government survives no confidence vote
Diomedes writes:

Now does that mean that there is no provision for another referendum? Not at all. And I certainly don't think it is undemocratic to ask for one. The issue is one of perception and politics.

There is certainly the danger of looking like you are having endless referendums until the vote goes the way they want. However, I don't think that is the case here. Rather, people can now see what leaving really means and what impact it will have so this justifies a new referendum, at least in this Yanks eyes. It's kind of like that moment after the tattoo artist has outlined the art on your arm and has the needle ready to go, and then asks one more time, "Are you sure???".


This message is a reply to:
 Message 407 by Diomedes, posted 01-17-2019 2:32 PM Diomedes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 411 by Diomedes, posted 01-18-2019 9:32 AM Taq has responded

  
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1595
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 409 of 493 (847078)
01-17-2019 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 403 by Diomedes
01-17-2019 9:28 AM


Re: May's government survives no confidence vote
I don't have a dog in this fight and despite some my own concerns with the EU, I was still in favor of Britain staying. My main rational is that Britain was the foil for Germany, which is essentially the defacto 'leader' of the EU. Without them, Germany would have even more clout over the smaller, weaker countries. And Brussels is essentially just their puppet.

This is kind of what I have been thinking (especially since I will still be living in the EU after Brexit); though not quite as you put it. The idea that Brussels is a puppet of Germany is absurd; and Germany by itself cannot bully smaller countries effectively. The way the qualified majority voting system works, it takes an alliance of two of the big three member states to be an effective bully - and even then the third big state only needs the support of a few smaller countries to block them.

But, one of the big three is about to leave. With the UK gone, there is no longer any possible four-country blocking veto to a Franco-German proposal in the Council. The minimum set of countries that could veto a joint Franco-German project would be Italy, Spain, Poland, Romania and the Netherlands. If some of these larger countries are on board - it takes a lot of the smaller member states to veto.

Now, maybe some will actually be quite happy - seeing this as making the EU quite efficient. And maybe I'm getting more concerned than necessary since the Council can't act alone. But I quite liked the fact that the way the EU functioned it was hard to do anything that France, Germany and Britain were not all on board with - the differing political traditions of the three countries has tended to keep European policies relatively moderate despite the large number of extremists in the European Parliament.

The only time this bothers me is the budget; since the European budget works quite differently to how the US Federal government manages things. There's no shutdown when you can't agree - the previous budget rolls over until a new one is settled on. France has for two consecutive budget periods led a blocking minority veto against significant reform of the biggest wastes of European funds, like the outdated Common Agricultural Policy. Since the blocking countries are happy to avoid change, they don't suffer by delaying the budget, and the rest of the Union has been forced to capitulate to their demands.

With the UK out, one of the most powerful voices for reform on this front is gone. France and Poland will now find it even easier to resist any reform. In fairness, this is the kind of thing that probably led to a few Brexit votes.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 403 by Diomedes, posted 01-17-2019 9:28 AM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3766
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 410 of 493 (847085)
01-17-2019 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 405 by PaulK
01-17-2019 12:57 PM


Re: May's government survives no confidence vote
Are you sure that Her Majesty can't just behead her? I know Queenie Baby can't make the leave/remain decision herself (a stiff political thing that seems quite archaic) but she should be able to help things along for the good of the nation as all good monarchs should. A few heads on spikes posted on the north side of Tower Bridge I think would get the politicos' attention.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 405 by PaulK, posted 01-17-2019 12:57 PM PaulK has not yet responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 799
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 411 of 493 (847106)
01-18-2019 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 408 by Taq
01-17-2019 3:10 PM


Re: May's government survives no confidence vote
Taq writes:

There is certainly the danger of looking like you are having endless referendums until the vote goes the way they want. However, I don't think that is the case here. Rather, people can now see what leaving really means and what impact it will have so this justifies a new referendum, at least in this Yanks eyes.

It's a tricky issue no matter how you slice it. There is already rumblings from Leave advocates of what they are calling the 'Brexit Betrayal'. i.e. an assertion that the government is ignoring the will of the people or are purposely screwing things up just to get the outcome they originally wanted. I personally don't think that is the case. As mentioned, when Governments screw up, it is usually due to outright incompetence and political shenanigans as opposed to some Illuminati conspiracy. And considering the circumstances, if parliament is deadlocked, isn't placing the vote back to the people the democratic thing to do? I think the bigger issue is even if another referendum is considered, what the question would be would also be endlessly debated to the point that it might make the referendum non-viable.

caffeine writes:

This is kind of what I have been thinking (especially since I will still be living in the EU after Brexit); though not quite as you put it. The idea that Brussels is a puppet of Germany is absurd; and Germany by itself cannot bully smaller countries effectively. The way the qualified majority voting system works, it takes an alliance of two of the big three member states to be an effective bully - and even then the third big state only needs the support of a few smaller countries to block them.

Perhaps I was being melodramatic. But the better way to phrase things is that the perception of many EU nations is that Germany is calling the shots. This is a common discussion point in my original home country of Greece. Many basically say that after two world wars, Germany has found a way to control Europe without firing a shot.
But as you stated, if one looks at perceptions, Great Britain was essentially the nation that stood against tyranny on behalf of Europe. Now I don't think by any means Germany is tyrannical anymore. Quite the opposite. But the perception remains. And having Britain within the block at least acted as somewhat of a foil for actions taken by the other larger countries. France of course is still there. But they are having their own problems of late and may not be in the best position to function well against any perceived 'bullying' by other larger member states.

AZPaul3 writes:

Are you sure that Her Majesty can't just behead her? I know Queenie Baby can't make the leave/remain decision herself (a stiff political thing that seems quite archaic) but she should be able to help things along for the good of the nation as all good monarchs should

You know its funny you mention that: I was literally thinking about this the other day. I don't know the legality of the Monarch's power, but does she have any clout to step in when Parliament is at a standstill? I kind of think along the lines of the Vice President in the USA being able to break a tie in the Senate. Are there any powers the Head of State can utilize in the British system? My guess would be no. But she has been silent on this matter the whole time and maybe even voicing an opinion or stating that Parliament should work more collaboratively might help. Or maybe not. Seems Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn hate each other so the gridlock will likely persist.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 408 by Taq, posted 01-17-2019 3:10 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 413 by Taq, posted 01-18-2019 1:29 PM Diomedes has not yet responded
 Message 414 by PaulK, posted 01-18-2019 1:36 PM Diomedes has not yet responded
 Message 415 by AZPaul3, posted 01-18-2019 2:15 PM Diomedes has not yet responded
 Message 419 by Diomedes, posted 01-22-2019 10:48 AM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 799
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 412 of 493 (847141)
01-18-2019 1:25 PM


Brexit Film on HBO
Not sure how many are aware, but HBO is putting out a film on Brexit staring Benedict Cumberbatch which is premiering this Saturday here in the USA. You can view the trailer on Youtube:

I think I'll try to catch it on the weekend.


  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7670
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 413 of 493 (847142)
01-18-2019 1:29 PM
Reply to: Message 411 by Diomedes
01-18-2019 9:32 AM


Re: May's government survives no confidence vote
Diomedes writes:

It's a tricky issue no matter how you slice it. There is already rumblings from Leave advocates of what they are calling the 'Brexit Betrayal'. i.e. an assertion that the government is ignoring the will of the people or are purposely screwing things up just to get the outcome they originally wanted. I personally don't think that is the case. As mentioned, when Governments screw up, it is usually due to outright incompetence and political shenanigans as opposed to some Illuminati conspiracy. And considering the circumstances, if parliament is deadlocked, isn't placing the vote back to the people the democratic thing to do? I think the bigger issue is even if another referendum is considered, what the question would be would also be endlessly debated to the point that it might make the referendum non-viable.

I see a lot of truth in what you write. Even if I am not familiar with the specifics of UK politics there are still political truths shared between Western democracies.

I see two ways out of this, one of which may not even be legal since I don't know the specifics of how UK law works. First, they hold a vote with the same Brexit question as the first vote. That would seem the fairest.

Second, Parliament refuses to exit the EU and faces the voters at the polls (would this be legal?). MP's could be honest and simply say that they can't be part of seriously damage the economy of the UK and will not vote for a Brexit deal. The next step is owning the political fall out.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 411 by Diomedes, posted 01-18-2019 9:32 AM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14720
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 414 of 493 (847143)
01-18-2019 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 411 by Diomedes
01-18-2019 9:32 AM


Re: May's government survives no confidence vote
In reality the Queen is supposed to stay out of politics. In law she has powers, but using them would provoke a crisis.

She doesnít have a casting vote on anything - she doesnít even have a vote in a General Election. In principle she could tell Theresa May to pack her bags and get out of Number Ten, but I really donít think we want a massive fight over the Monarchy on top of all the Brexit mess. And thatís about the most useful thing she could do - even in principle - right now.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 411 by Diomedes, posted 01-18-2019 9:32 AM Diomedes has not yet responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3766
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 415 of 493 (847148)
01-18-2019 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 411 by Diomedes
01-18-2019 9:32 AM


Re: May's government survives no confidence vote
You know its funny you mention that...

Yes, it was kinda humorous. But, We know better.

As I understand, Her Majesty has the power of Royal Prerogative which allows her to step in and change governments, select a Prime Minister of her own choosing regardless of the Parliament's makeup and vote. As Commander in Chief of the armed services she could seize the Parliament and the government buildings, make/break any foreign treaties she so happened to desire.

She could actually behead Theresa May and replace her. She could dissolve Parliament and appoint any person she chooses to be PM. She legally has such power.

So, yes, Her Majesty could try to influence the events, voice opinions on the matter and demand that Parliament work more collaboratively.

The problem is Her Majesty could only do something like this once and even then not completely. A major portion of British society, not just the political class, would backlash big time and put an end to The House of Windsor and the monarchy altogether in very short order if she tried. British society views the monarchy as a quaint ceremonial plaything they dress up as the embodiment of their national sovereignty. The Royal Prerogative may be a legal thing on paper but in reality it is a fiction. It is the "third rail" of the monarchy. Touch it and you die.

Let's face it. The Royals have a pretty good gig going on in Britain. Get political and risk alienating enough of the society to put an end to this most cushy of arrangements. Effectively, The Crown is barred from even voicing an opinion on such matters for fear of alienating large segments of her subjects. So, the Crown is told, rather pointedly, to stay in its role and do what its told, nothing more.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 411 by Diomedes, posted 01-18-2019 9:32 AM Diomedes has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 416 by caffeine, posted 01-19-2019 4:57 PM AZPaul3 has responded

  
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1595
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 416 of 493 (847232)
01-19-2019 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 415 by AZPaul3
01-18-2019 2:15 PM


Re: May's government survives no confidence vote
As I understand, Her Majesty has the power of Royal Prerogative which allows her to step in and change governments, select a Prime Minister of her own choosing regardless of the Parliament's makeup and vote. As Commander in Chief of the armed services she could seize the Parliament and the government buildings, make/break any foreign treaties she so happened to desire.

She could actually behead Theresa May and replace her. She could dissolve Parliament and appoint any person she chooses to be PM. She legally has such power.

Not really. The government needs to be able to command a majority vote in the House of Commons; so the Queen cannot appoint someone Parliament would not accept. Much of the British constitution is customary; and not actually codified into law anywhere; but this applies to the crown's prerogatives as much as Parliament's. If the Queen can ignore the customary powers of Parliament because they're not codified, then her own powers do not really exist wither.

More significantly, there is substantial codified statute law limiting the powers of the crown; most notably the Bill of Rights of 1689 - which was enacted into law the last time Parliament felt a king was getting a bit big for his boots. The Bill of Rights explicitly denies the Queen the power to do what you say. She cannot break treaties without the consent of Parliament; for example. Nor can she dissolve Parliament at whim - that may have been a legally open question at one point; but the Fixed-term Parliaments Act (2011) clearly states that only the House of Commons has the authority to dissolve itself.

While the Queen is, indeed, officially head of the armed forces, I'm not sure of the exact conditions around which she can exercise this power. Important to note, however, is that the Bill of Rights also makes it illegal for the armed forces to exist without the consent of Parliament. The most recent authorisation for the continued existence of the army was the Armed Forces Act 2016. It states very clearly that it cannot be extended beyond 2021 without Parliamentary approval.

Now, when it comes to something as drastic as the monarch launching some sort of coup d'etat; obviously the opinion of the populace and the people with guns is more important than legal niceties; but on a strictly legal basis the Queen does not have even technical or theoretical powers to dissolve Parliament, nor to appoint governments without Parliamentary approval.

Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 415 by AZPaul3, posted 01-18-2019 2:15 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 417 by AZPaul3, posted 01-19-2019 5:24 PM caffeine has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3766
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.4


(1)
Message 417 of 493 (847236)
01-19-2019 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 416 by caffeine
01-19-2019 4:57 PM


Re: May's government survives no confidence vote
Damn. I was so looking forward to nice beheading.

We can't do that to our pols over here even when it's necessary and proper.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 416 by caffeine, posted 01-19-2019 4:57 PM caffeine has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 418 by Pressie, posted 01-22-2019 7:28 AM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1998
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 418 of 493 (847392)
01-22-2019 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 417 by AZPaul3
01-19-2019 5:24 PM


Re: May's government survives no confidence vote
Cameron. He started this nonsense. I was looking forward to his proper and nice beheading.

I'm sure The Queen is not amused with his antics and then relieving himself of the chaos he created by an ill thought out vague election promise.

But, on the other hand, he's a poor rich boy. Money, properties, etc. all over the world. He'll always be rich and then look for sympathy.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 417 by AZPaul3, posted 01-19-2019 5:24 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

    
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 799
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 419 of 493 (847399)
01-22-2019 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 411 by Diomedes
01-18-2019 9:32 AM


May's Plan B
I read some of the supposed details on what Theresa May has planned as part of 'Plan B', in lieu of the defeat of her original plan in Parliament last week. For the life of me, I can't figure out exactly what the difference is.

She mentioned waving the fee for EU residents living in the UK. I didn't realize that was so contentious since it was roughly £65 pounds. But beyond that, all that she stated otherwise was that she would work to get 'reassurances' on the Irish Backstop. But didn't she already try to do that? Am I missing something?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 411 by Diomedes, posted 01-18-2019 9:32 AM Diomedes has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 420 by PaulK, posted 01-22-2019 11:19 AM Diomedes has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14720
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 420 of 493 (847407)
01-22-2019 11:19 AM
Reply to: Message 419 by Diomedes
01-22-2019 10:48 AM


Re: May's Plan B
Mayís Plan B is she threatens everyone with No Deal to get Plan A through Parliament.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 419 by Diomedes, posted 01-22-2019 10:48 AM Diomedes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 421 by Diomedes, posted 01-22-2019 12:17 PM PaulK has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
2627
28
2930
...
33Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019