Tory Leadership

[-:Undertaker:-]

Olly Robbins out.

And major respect to Caroline Flint MP. A Labour and Remain MP. This is now about democracy.

Honestly, god bless those MPs who respect the result.

BREAKING: Oliver Robbins is leaving his post as the chief Brexit negotiator shortly after briefing the new prime minister. Read The Sunday Times to find out who Jeremy Hunt and Boris Johnson will be replacing him with

— Tim Shipman (@ShippersUnbound) June 29, 2019

Well said, Caroline Flint - if only every MP who backed Remain in 2016 would take the same approach to this. pic.twitter.com/qvzVjY8XPv

— Change Britain (@Change_Britain) June 28, 2019

“I won’t be voting to revoke Article 50”

Labour MP Caroline Flint tells #Marr that she would not vote to revoke Article 50 and cancel #Brexit, even if that meant leaving the EU with no deal https://t.co/fmbAzr0qsr pic.twitter.com/FnDplGo3yt

— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) June 23, 2019

[-:Undertaker:-]

Latest YouGov out today has Boris on 76% and Hunt on 24% among Tory members.

My ballot came yesterday. Sent off for Boris.

[dbgtz]

While I often vehemently disagree with Dan I think it's pretty daft to sweep aside all the financial aspects that are a major sticking point for people who actually read into it as "sovereignty or some ****". It's a fact that we pay an obscene amount into a system that then gives us a little bit back but tells us where it can be spent, and keeps the rest for paying off debts that other countries have accrued. In that one instance the money is the main point but sovereignty (or some ****) is very much an important part of it as well, so not really something to just rule out.
Also interested to see where "there should be a proper border between two separately ruled countries" became "ha ha ha we should put people at risk" in your mind

when did I sweep aside the financial aspects? my point to him was that he tries to make these claims which ends up being proved partially or entirely false so he reverts to falling back to the idea of sovereignty being the true reason for this whole thing
its not a fact to call it an obscene amount of money - its actually a tiny part of general taxation spending and according to both Johnson and Hunt there is plenty of money about anyway
its also naive to look at it as losing 9bn (13bn out, 4bn spent in UK off the top of my head) without taking anything else into consideration

recent article as well estimating it will cost individuals 9bn alone in tariffs which will be felt far more if taxes aren't lowered to compensate but equally that means less money for other things (also let's not forget the cost of an increased border/customs force, but at least some infrastructure is there as we don't actually have completely open borders with anyone but Ireland).

also when did i suggest anything like what you said in that last line?

Celebrating, yes.

A reminder I was in Britain for the "chaos" of 23rd June 2016 that was predicted. The only chaos we experienced was the sound of dinner plates and wine glasses shattering in middle class north London homes at the shock of the great unwashed having their say.

there is going to be tangible change when actually leaving

Indeed, and they're welcome to agree a FTA with us allowing relatively free trade when they drop their demands for 1/4 of our country.

but we were told there would be a deal and no deal wasn't on the table

Can you point to one place in the world where nationalism does not exist?

All the places that tried to suppress existing nationalism actually ended up creating frankenstein 'false' states by creating new identities and wiping away the older identities - which is ironically an aggressive form of nationalism itself. The Soviet Union. Yugoslavia. Ottoman Emprie. Republic of India. The Sudan. Libya. Iraq. And now the European Union with its anthem, flag, military and "ever closer union".

What good will creating a new nation spread across 28 vastly complex/different countries bring?

none of that relates to my question of what good comes of it
if anything you pretty much just agreed with me

you understand football teams have anthems and the un has flags and a peacekeeping "military". btw the current eus csdp set up is entirely voluntary and not an actual army and the future pesco was a) constantly blocked by the uk and b) we didnt have to join and could have left as it's entirely voluntary and c) is just a "better" cooperation of existing nation military and isnt pooling them under some eu identity
all pesco seems to really be is relying less on nato/the us after things trump has said

What are you claiming is going to happen if a normal border between two different countries is implemented?

i am not going in circles over this

Having influence, 1 of 28, isn't good enough.

Australia, Canada, New Zealand and America do not feel the need to have "influence" in the European Union. They just do things themselves where they have 100% influence over their own laws and politics. That's national sovereignty working in action.

Why would I settle for the influence of 3.5% over my own laws/politics when I could have the influence of 100%?

you understand if we ever negotiate again with the eu it still is 1 of 28, because we are in a position either side of the table to veto any deal
you will probably talk about how "oh we obviously have to give something because how else do you deal with 28 countries!!" well thats how its going to work either way - look at the poor extradition treaty with have with the US already as an example of how this will shaft us

Eh? What kind of thinking is this?

We don't have an electoral college in this country because we're not a confederation, we're a unitary sovereign state. You're applying the constitutional logic of the Holy Roman Empire, United States of America or Dominion of Canada to a completely different constitutional arrangement. That would be like talking about a hypothetical British Presidency at the time of the next Coronation. Like, what?

The question on the ballot was should the United Kingdom leave or remain in the European Union. The people said Leave.

if you view something as equal, then there is surely an equal say?

What should be up to Northern Ireland?

And it was up to Northern Ireland - correct me if I am wrong, were Britons in Ulster issued ballot papers in the 2016 EU referendum?

ye, they voted to remain

[FlyingJesus]

when did I sweep aside the financial aspects?

When you said that all of his arguments were about sovereignty which is simply not true

its not a fact to call it an obscene amount of money

Genuinely hilarious. Yes there is more money than that in the world but to suggest that it's somehow a negligible amount is just daft. A number that comes to a few percent of what an entire COUNTRY spends is certainly an obscene amount to throw away

also when did i suggest anything like what you said in that last line?

Here:

you're willing to put people who aren't even in the same country as you right now at risk

In response to him talking about putting a manned border in place. I actually TRIED to find some evidence that he was suggesting something dangerous but nope, you just made it up

[dbgtz]

When you said that all of his arguments were about sovereignty which is simply not true

no but there have been many instances where he gets proved wrong, i think a particular one in mind is where he claimed the eu would just waive uk cargo through for 9 months or something which was false then ended up saying how its about sovereignty anyway so it doesnt matter

my point was its more of a failsafe than his only argument for it

Genuinely hilarious. Yes there is more money than that in the world but to suggest that it's somehow a negligible amount is just daft. A number that comes to a few percent of what an entire COUNTRY spends is certainly an obscene amount to throw away

why exactly is it do you think its thrown away

Here:


In response to him talking about putting a manned border in place. I actually TRIED to find some evidence that he was suggesting something dangerous but nope, you just made it up

The danger is the risk of troubles arising from a hard border in northern ireland

[-:Undertaker:-]

there is going to be tangible change when actually leaving

Hopefully, as that was the whole point in leaving.

but we were told there would be a deal and no deal wasn't on the table

Well... there is a deal. And it was rejected 3 times by a Remain-dominated House of Commons so we now leave without a deal.

Are you saying you would have voted for this deal as an MP?

none of that relates to my question of what good comes of it
if anything you pretty much just agreed with me

I agreed with you that nationalism should be replaced by supranationalism? Where?

you understand football teams have anthems and the un has flags and a peacekeeping "military". btw the current eus csdp set up is entirely voluntary and not an actual army and the future pesco was a) constantly blocked by the uk and b) we didnt have to join and could have left as it's entirely voluntary and c) is just a "better" cooperation of existing nation military and isnt pooling them under some eu identity
all pesco seems to really be is relying less on nato/the us after things trump has said

The classic EU salami slice method.

When has the EU *not* seeped into an area we never asked it to?

If I remember correctly, the EU Constitution that was rejected included the flag/anthem/trappings of statehood stuff, and when the Lisbon Treaty was then put forward it omitted those parts. Yet here we are today with the flag, the anthem and military personnel wearing the blue and gold stars on their uniform and on military hardware. Yet again, steamrolling ahead over the voters.

i am not going in circles over this

What you seem to be saying, is that because the IRA might plant explosives because of new border controls/customs therefore there shouldn't be any border controls and possibly no Brexit. Since when did we run this country based on blackmail from terrorists?

Our instructions come from the ballot box, not threats and semtex.

you understand if we ever negotiate again with the eu it still is 1 of 28, because we are in a position either side of the table to veto any deal
you will probably talk about how "oh we obviously have to give something because how else do you deal with 28 countries!!" well thats how its going to work either way - look at the poor extradition treaty with have with the US already as an example of how this will shaft us

That you view trade as a zero-sum game where one side must lose out is very strange.

I would remind you that it is the EU that is demanding an all-or-nothing approach instead of compromise/halfway house to these talks.

So now it is nothing (no deal). Like I said, I would have liked an FTA but it isn't something we absolutely require so they can get lost now.

if you view something as equal, then there is surely an equal say?

They did get an equal say, we all got one vote each.

ye, they voted to remain

So did four of my friends. But they lost.

[-:Undertaker:-]

[-:Undertaker:-]

A good walk-through by Douglas Carswell here.

It should be a Halloween and Bonfire Night to remember.