Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[Hiberno-Britannic Politics] Thanks For The Deal, I Hate It

19495969799

Posts

  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    danx wrote: »
    Burnage wrote: »
    History is going to absolutely crucify May and Cameron. Probably whatever poor bugger succeeds May, as well.

    People shouldn't forget her time as Home Secretary. She was awful there too.

    "Theresa May's career as a cabinet minister has produced some of the pettiest shortsighted and downright incompetent decisions around."
    Theresa May: "Hold my beer."

    JazzShadowenZilla360tynicRhesus PositiveFencingsaxCasualElldren
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    altid wrote: »
    Today has been quite a day.

    Honestly when I take a step back and look at it, I can't help but wonder why we aren't talking about May's resignation and the impending general election. The government has just lost 3 major votes in one day (is that a record?). One of those votes has found the government to be the first ever government in contempt of parliament. How that doesn't automatically get them thrown out (in the same manner as a straight up confidence vote) I have no idea. It also means May completes the double of being in contempt of court (second home secretary ever) and contempt of parliament (first government ever). Her lack of respect for the rules in place makes it clear she's just a tyrant at heart and simply too incompetent to pull it off effectively. Keep in mind that her reported plan at this point is to willingly let the markets crash to provide pressure for her deal.

    Because there are no alternatives and no one expects anything about parliament to really change with an election.

    Commander Zoom
  • surrealitychecksurrealitycheck the search for the means to put an end to things an end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered User regular
    the single most powerful pro corbyn political force right now is the erg

    its beautiful

    obF2Wuw.png
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    European Research Group as an anti-EU group is the most Orwellian of names.

    H3KnucklesAntoshkamonikerZilla360SleepAldoRhesus PositiveYoutubeFencingsaxMoridin889SolarSkeithMr RayNeveronCasualElldren
  • TastyfishTastyfish Registered User regular
    The name itself is largely responsible for my European Research Group Habit of sighing heavily in a 'Kif-eque' sign of frustration whenever they're brought into any kind of panel discussion.
    Though don't most of the right-wing think tanks have similarly paradoxical names? Sure it's not just the ERG that reflexively bring on an Ergh...

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Tastyfish wrote: »
    The name itself is largely responsible for my European Research Group Habit of sighing heavily in a 'Kif-eque' sign of frustration whenever they're brought into any kind of panel discussion.
    Though don't most of the right-wing think tanks have similarly paradoxical names? Sure it's not just the ERG that reflexively bring on an Ergh...

    Maybe in the UK?

    In the US and Canada they tend to be either bland nothings or use right-wing buzzwords that if you know anything about right-wing politics you will instantly spot (eg - freedom, federalist, etc).

    H3Knuckles
  • JazzJazz UKRegistered User regular
    Think-tanks seem to pay pretty well. I never see them in the "help wanted" ads, though. I could do that, think about shit all day. You guys would be good at that too.

    Maybe we need to start a GoFundMe or something.

  • TastyfishTastyfish Registered User regular
    Jazz wrote: »
    Think-tanks seem to pay pretty well. I never see them in the "help wanted" ads, though. I could do that, think about shit all day. You guys would be good at that too.

    Maybe we need to start a GoFundMe or something.

    I imagine they're the places were Parties put their smart arseholes. Politics is fundamentally a people game, but if you're bright, committed but with the people skills of a three day old badger corpse - we need to get you away from the hypersocial Organisers as soon as possible whilst making sure there's no chance you end up a Councillor, let alone an MP or there will be blood.

  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    In Europe they love the format "[country] [good thing]".

  • TastyfishTastyfish Registered User regular
    edited December 2018
    I thinking of the Countryside Alliance (it'd better be hunting or you can fuck right off with your environment nonsense. Also no bikes!)

    Tastyfish on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Tastyfish wrote: »
    Jazz wrote: »
    Think-tanks seem to pay pretty well. I never see them in the "help wanted" ads, though. I could do that, think about shit all day. You guys would be good at that too.

    Maybe we need to start a GoFundMe or something.

    I imagine they're the places were Parties put their smart arseholes. Politics is fundamentally a people game, but if you're bright, committed but with the people skills of a three day old badger corpse - we need to get you away from the hypersocial Organisers as soon as possible whilst making sure there's no chance you end up a Councillor, let alone an MP or there will be blood.

    They also tend to be stocking grounds for the government in exile when elections go the other way, for all those third tier posts you don't think of but somebody needs to fill. Of course, when elections go your way all the talent gets pulled out of them and it's a bit lean on the thinking or the tanking.

    Rchanen
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    Jazz wrote: »
    Think-tanks seem to pay pretty well. I never see them in the "help wanted" ads, though. I could do that, think about shit all day. You guys would be good at that too.

    Maybe we need to start a GoFundMe or something.

    Some of them do openly advertise

    I follow IPPR and the IFS on twitter and they've both put out calls for applications in the past

  • CroakerBCCroakerBC YorkRegistered User regular
    Well, Oliver Letwin has been on the Todsy program this morning, banging the drum for a Norway Plus option. If, of course, the Governments deal fails.

    He suggests:
    1. There’s a majority in the house for it (probably true)
    2. The EU have said they’d accept it in short order (I hadn’t heard that, but no reason it couldn’t be true)
    3. It satisfies enough red lines to matter (Out of direct budget contributions, direct ECJ et al...I assume this is true, if practically irrelevant)

    Never thought I’d be agreeing with Letwin, novel start to the day!

  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    Also from the Today Programme: I'm detecting a slightly worrying undercurrent, from Leadsom in particular, that this government intends to press ahead with its own plans in circumstances where parliament has directed it to do otherwise.

    If that happens and the government gets pushed out in a confidence vote I have no idea what that means re: an article 50 extension. The EU may be willing to grant it, but there may not be a competent authority in the UK to request it.

  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    japan wrote: »
    Also from the Today Programme: I'm detecting a slightly worrying undercurrent, from Leadsom in particular, that this government intends to press ahead with its own plans in circumstances where parliament has directed it to do otherwise.

    If that happens and the government gets pushed out in a confidence vote I have no idea what that means re: an article 50 extension. The EU may be willing to grant it, but there may not be a competent authority in the UK to request it.

    The UK seems to be in short supply of competent authorities at the moment.

    V1mmonikerYoutubealtidshrykeMoridin889Mr RayH3KnucklesElldrenFry
  • pezgenpezgen Registered User regular
    I don't know, there's at least one obvious candidate:

    Desktop HippiemonikershrykeMoridin889Mr RayH3KnucklesZilla360ElldrenFry
  • KarlKarl Registered User regular
    CroakerBC wrote: »
    Well, Oliver Letwin has been on the Todsy program this morning, banging the drum for a Norway Plus option. If, of course, the Governments deal fails.

    He suggests:
    1. There’s a majority in the house for it (probably true)
    2. The EU have said they’d accept it in short order (I hadn’t heard that, but no reason it couldn’t be true)
    3. It satisfies enough red lines to matter (Out of direct budget contributions, direct ECJ et al...I assume this is true, if practically irrelevant)

    Never thought I’d be agreeing with Letwin, novel start to the day!

    ELI5 Norway plus please.


    Because it sounds nice purely based off the name.

    YOU'RE ALL BABIES.
    SO MUCH POTENTIAL TO WASTE.
    Koshian wrote: »
    JOKE'S ON YOU
    MY POTENTIAL IS ALREADY WASTED
  • CroakerBCCroakerBC YorkRegistered User regular
    Karl wrote: »
    CroakerBC wrote: »
    Well, Oliver Letwin has been on the Todsy program this morning, banging the drum for a Norway Plus option. If, of course, the Governments deal fails.

    He suggests:
    1. There’s a majority in the house for it (probably true)
    2. The EU have said they’d accept it in short order (I hadn’t heard that, but no reason it couldn’t be true)
    3. It satisfies enough red lines to matter (Out of direct budget contributions, direct ECJ et al...I assume this is true, if practically irrelevant)

    Never thought I’d be agreeing with Letwin, novel start to the day!

    ELI5 Norway plus please.


    Because it sounds nice purely based off the name.

    Basically EFTA (keeps Freedom of Movement, keeps Single Market access, pays a bit for that), with a bolt on Customs Union.
    Loses all rights to be part of decision making but influences it, and gets to get out of a few things we don't apparently want (CAP etc.) as a result.

    It's not as good as EU membership, but it's basically the softest of soft Brexits.

    Youtube
  • DoodmannDoodmann Registered User regular
    I thought axing freedom of movement was the only goal?

    V1mmonikerFencingsaxQanamilMoridin889
  • Mc zanyMc zany Registered User regular
    Doodmann wrote: »
    I thought axing freedom of movement was the only goal?

    It is but no one wants to admit it.

    SolarCommander ZoommonikerYoutubeJazzQanamilSkeithshrykeShadowenMoridin889Mr RayH3KnucklesElldren
  • klemmingklemming Registered User regular
    MPs may try to steal Brexit from British people - Liam Fox
    There is a risk MPs could "steal Brexit from the British people" if Theresa May's proposed deal is rejected, a senior cabinet minister has warned.

    Former disgraced former MP Liam Fox said there was "natural Remain majority" in Parliament and any attempt to overturn the 2016 referendum vote would be a "democratic affront".

    It came after MPs voted to exert more influence should the PM's deal fall.

    Ministers will again battle to win over MPs to Theresa May's withdrawal deal after three government defeats.

    Senior Brexiteers in the cabinet have warned that the UK may not leave the EU if Mrs May's deal is voted down.
    God, this really is starting to feel like briar patching.
    "Please god, whatever you do, don't overrule us and drag us all out of the hole we dug for ourselves."

    Nobody remembers the singer. The song remains.
    V1mmonikerFencingsaxShadowenMr RayH3KnucklesZilla360Elldren
  • KarlKarl Registered User regular
    CroakerBC wrote: »
    Karl wrote: »
    CroakerBC wrote: »
    Well, Oliver Letwin has been on the Todsy program this morning, banging the drum for a Norway Plus option. If, of course, the Governments deal fails.

    He suggests:
    1. There’s a majority in the house for it (probably true)
    2. The EU have said they’d accept it in short order (I hadn’t heard that, but no reason it couldn’t be true)
    3. It satisfies enough red lines to matter (Out of direct budget contributions, direct ECJ et al...I assume this is true, if practically irrelevant)

    Never thought I’d be agreeing with Letwin, novel start to the day!

    ELI5 Norway plus please.


    Because it sounds nice purely based off the name.

    Basically EFTA (keeps Freedom of Movement, keeps Single Market access, pays a bit for that), with a bolt on Customs Union.
    Loses all rights to be part of decision making but influences it, and gets to get out of a few things we don't apparently want (CAP etc.) as a result.

    It's not as good as EU membership, but it's basically the softest of soft Brexits.

    Does it allow us to create our own trade deals though?

    YOU'RE ALL BABIES.
    SO MUCH POTENTIAL TO WASTE.
    Koshian wrote: »
    JOKE'S ON YOU
    MY POTENTIAL IS ALREADY WASTED
  • Mc zanyMc zany Registered User regular
    I love that outburst as it does a masterful job of spreading news of the not leaving the EU option to millions of people who hadn't heard of it.

    V1mFencingsaxShadowenMoridin889H3KnucklesElldren
  • Desktop HippieDesktop Hippie ATOMIKA! IT’S ME! IT’S DESKTOP HIPPIE!Registered User regular
    klemming wrote: »
    MPs may try to steal Brexit from British people - Liam Fox
    There is a risk MPs could "steal Brexit from the British people" if Theresa May's proposed deal is rejected, a senior cabinet minister has warned.

    Former disgraced former MP Liam Fox said there was "natural Remain majority" in Parliament and any attempt to overturn the 2016 referendum vote would be a "democratic affront".

    It came after MPs voted to exert more influence should the PM's deal fall.

    Ministers will again battle to win over MPs to Theresa May's withdrawal deal after three government defeats.

    Senior Brexiteers in the cabinet have warned that the UK may not leave the EU if Mrs May's deal is voted down.
    God, this really is starting to feel like briar patching.
    "Please god, whatever you do, don't overrule us and drag us all out of the hole we dug for ourselves."

    Grimly amused at the number of people who demanded that the UK leave the EU so that parliament could take back control who are now having a canary because parliament has taken control.

    muhqxj.jpg
    shrykeShadowenH3KnucklesElldren
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    I mean it was always all bollocks

    There was never actually any real policy behind leaving the EU. It was rhetoric, and nothing else. The policy put together to actually leave the EU is May's deal, and everyone hates it.

    BurnageklemmingPLAPhillishereCommander ZoommonikeraltidFencingsaxJazztynicshrykeShadowenMoridin889Mr RayH3KnucklesCasualZilla360Elldren
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    To paraphrase the time honoured American rhetorical flash, "Take back sovereignty to do what, sir?"

    Kayne Red RobeDoodmannCommander ZoomV1mmonikerFencingsaxJazztynicshrykeShadowenMoridin889Mr RayH3KnucklesCasualZilla360Elldren
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    The issue with the backstop is that it's a "put up or shut up" agreement.

    In principle it isn't necessary, provided the UK government can come up with an acceptable means of maintaining an invisible border between the UK and ROI. Which the UK government have failed to do for over two years.

    The government has to stick with the backstop or (finally) acknowledge that their red lines are irreconcilable. They aren't going to do that, so they're trapped.

  • BethrynBethryn Registered User regular
    Liggle advice (pdf) for anyone curious.

  • surrealitychecksurrealitycheck the search for the means to put an end to things an end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered User regular
    ya, sticking point being that it is far too frank about the risk the backstop poses, but not anything anybody didnt know. another self-inflicted wound

    obF2Wuw.png
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    It is also very clear that it is an indefinate situation requiring a further legal agreement to supersede it

  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    CroakerBC wrote: »
    Well, Oliver Letwin has been on the Todsy program this morning, banging the drum for a Norway Plus option. If, of course, the Governments deal fails.

    He suggests:
    1. There’s a majority in the house for it (probably true)
    2. The EU have said they’d accept it in short order (I hadn’t heard that, but no reason it couldn’t be true)
    3. It satisfies enough red lines to matter (Out of direct budget contributions, direct ECJ et al...I assume this is true, if practically irrelevant)

    Never thought I’d be agreeing with Letwin, novel start to the day!

    It seems unlikely to me that they'd give a deal as favorable as Norway's since they want to discourage leaving.

    It also seems unlikely anything with freedom of movement has support. That's the main reason for Brexit

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • surrealitychecksurrealitycheck the search for the means to put an end to things an end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered User regular
    edited December 2018
    PantsB wrote: »
    CroakerBC wrote: »
    Well, Oliver Letwin has been on the Todsy program this morning, banging the drum for a Norway Plus option. If, of course, the Governments deal fails.

    He suggests:
    1. There’s a majority in the house for it (probably true)
    2. The EU have said they’d accept it in short order (I hadn’t heard that, but no reason it couldn’t be true)
    3. It satisfies enough red lines to matter (Out of direct budget contributions, direct ECJ et al...I assume this is true, if practically irrelevant)

    Never thought I’d be agreeing with Letwin, novel start to the day!

    It seems unlikely to me that they'd give a deal as favorable as Norway's since they want to discourage leaving.

    It also seems unlikely anything with freedom of movement has support. That's the main reason for Brexit

    they explicitly cant give something as loose as norway due to them now understanding the failings of the original treaty, but norway-style arrangements arent that favourable for the uk in any case. the controls you get are minor, loss of control major and like you say free movement

    us going to norway would not be a huge loss for the eu. we would still be paying something like 2/3 of our current contributions etc

    going to norway is literally just a damage control exercise. it accomplishes nothing.

    surrealitycheck on
    obF2Wuw.png
    YoutubeCasualElldren
  • surrealitychecksurrealitycheck the search for the means to put an end to things an end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered User regular
    something that is kind of vaguely astonishing about the discussion in the uk is that people dont realise we basically wrote the eu financial regs.

    obF2Wuw.png
    DoodmannmonikerYoutubeFencingsaxJazzMoridin889H3KnucklesCasualElldren
  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    CroakerBC wrote: »
    Well, Oliver Letwin has been on the Todsy program this morning, banging the drum for a Norway Plus option. If, of course, the Governments deal fails.

    He suggests:
    1. There’s a majority in the house for it (probably true)
    2. The EU have said they’d accept it in short order (I hadn’t heard that, but no reason it couldn’t be true)
    3. It satisfies enough red lines to matter (Out of direct budget contributions, direct ECJ et al...I assume this is true, if practically irrelevant)

    Never thought I’d be agreeing with Letwin, novel start to the day!

    It seems unlikely to me that they'd give a deal as favorable as Norway's since they want to discourage leaving.

    It also seems unlikely anything with freedom of movement has support. That's the main reason for Brexit

    Two points:
    1. I believe the court ruling is that the UK can walk back the Article 50 without needing the rest of the member states to agree. That gives the UK an out (even if they seem determined not to use it) and reduces the EU's leverage. Given that the UK has a sweetheart deal with the EU right now and the positives about a situation where the UK is no longer in a position to limit EU integration efforts, a Norway type deal is a possibility.
    2. In regards to Freedom of Movement, I'm not entirely sure that's an absolute deal breaker. For some Leaver types, it still is, obviously; but I think that there are a fair amount of MP types who are finally grasping the idea that the Good Friday situation and restricting Freedom of Movement is a non-starter without basically going no-deal, and that a no-deal Brexit is actually a bad thing.
    The hard core Leaver types will be angry and possibly vote people out of office over this, but there might be enough people thinking they'd be out of office either way, and avoiding a no-deal means that being thrown out of office will less literal.

    Casual
  • surrealitychecksurrealitycheck the search for the means to put an end to things an end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered User regular
    edited December 2018
    "if we go to a norway model we leave the ecj" - quoth the letwin

    "if only he had heard of the efta court" - quoth the grieve

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFTA_Court

    out of the frying pan into the extremely small pointless fire
    The EEA is based in a two pillar structure, the EU constituting one pillar and the three participating EFTA States the other. In substance, the EEA Agreement has extended the EU single market to the participating EFTA States. EEA law is therefore largely identical to EU law. In order to secure a level playing field for individuals and economic operators in both pillars, special homogeneity provisions have been laid down in the EEA Agreement and in the Surveillance and Court Agreement. Under these rules, the EFTA Court shall follow the relevant case law of the ECJ on provisions of Union law that are identical in substance to provisions of EEA law rendered prior to the date of signature of the EEA Agreement (2 May 1992) and shall pay due account to the principles laid down by the European Court of Justice's relevant case law rendered after that date. The EFTA Court's jurisprudence is in fact based on the case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The politically important distinction between old and new ECJ case law has largely been qualified in practice. The EFTA Court also refers to the case law of the General Court of the European Union (EGC). All three EEA courts (ECJ, EGC, EFTA Court) have not only emphasized the need for a uniform interpretation of EU and EEA law, but have actively seen to it that homogeneity is preserved.

    surrealitycheck on
    obF2Wuw.png
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    CroakerBC wrote: »
    Well, Oliver Letwin has been on the Todsy program this morning, banging the drum for a Norway Plus option. If, of course, the Governments deal fails.

    He suggests:
    1. There’s a majority in the house for it (probably true)
    2. The EU have said they’d accept it in short order (I hadn’t heard that, but no reason it couldn’t be true)
    3. It satisfies enough red lines to matter (Out of direct budget contributions, direct ECJ et al...I assume this is true, if practically irrelevant)

    Never thought I’d be agreeing with Letwin, novel start to the day!

    It seems unlikely to me that they'd give a deal as favorable as Norway's since they want to discourage leaving.

    It also seems unlikely anything with freedom of movement has support. That's the main reason for Brexit

    They probably will just to avoid having to deal with the shitshow that is no deal Brexit. Sure, the UK will burn, but the smoke will stink up the entire continent. So lets go Norway Plus and let them pretend they left the EU.

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    The article 50 revocation thing that's doing the rounds is the Advocate General's opinion on the case. It's a recommendation to the court that they are not obliged to follow (but usually do).

    The actual ruling is sometime in December, I think.

  • surrealitychecksurrealitycheck the search for the means to put an end to things an end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered User regular
    japan wrote: »
    The article 50 revocation thing that's doing the rounds is the Advocate General's opinion on the case. It's a recommendation to the court that they are not obliged to follow (but usually do).

    The actual ruling is sometime in December, I think.

    broadly it would be astonishing if they said anything other than what he said simply because the drafter has made clear his intention (kerr), and the only real reason they could come up with to stop unilateral revocation is that it would render article 50 a procedural nonsense because it could be abused by a bad faith actor. the latter is already covered by the ags opinion; the court itself has no real reason to go much further i would have thought, not least because that would involve agreeing with the uk gov which would be fairly ridiculous for them to do...

    obF2Wuw.png
  • surrealitychecksurrealitycheck the search for the means to put an end to things an end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered User regular
    https://www.redpepper.org.uk/embracing-brexit-would-be-a-historic-mistake-for-the-left/

    good tom kibasi article taking aim at a lot of lexit claims. this is quite amusing because his fellow ippr friend grace blakeley has been making the opposite arguments publicly - perhaps they should hash it out?

    still good stuff

    obF2Wuw.png
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    japan wrote: »
    The article 50 revocation thing that's doing the rounds is the Advocate General's opinion on the case. It's a recommendation to the court that they are not obliged to follow (but usually do).

    The actual ruling is sometime in December, I think.

    broadly it would be astonishing if they said anything other than what he said simply because the drafter has made clear his intention (kerr), and the only real reason they could come up with to stop unilateral revocation is that it would render article 50 a procedural nonsense because it could be abused by a bad faith actor. the latter is already covered by the ags opinion; the court itself has no real reason to go much further i would have thought, not least because that would involve agreeing with the uk gov which would be fairly ridiculous for them to do...

    I think it matters in a tactical sense because it means that revocation won't be a definitively available option at the time of the "meaningful vote".

    Though it is interesting that the government hasn't made the argument that it isn't a sure thing (yet), instead choosing to argue that they simply refuse to acknowledge it as an option.

This discussion has been closed.