Brexit.

[Tigger]

So, er, hard brexit needs some little blue pills?

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I really don't understand what's going on over there. Every single possible metric shows in clear terms that leaving the EU is a terrible idea and shouldn't happen... but no one is saying "so let's just cancel it and stay in". The fucking opposition leader seems to be an accelerationist who wants it to happen, everything burns down, and then he gets to rule over the ashes. There's no one sane at any level of that government.

I'm so sorry that this is happening to you guys.

Nope, I think that misstates Jeremy Corbyn's position, and certainly Labour Party policy, such as it is.

Labour policy -- at the moment -- is to accept the result of the referendum (primarily because a lot of Labour MPs outside London represent constituencies that voted to Leave) but only to agree to terms that meet Labour's six tests:

1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?

2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?

4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?

5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?

6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

Keir Starmer: Labour has six tests for Brexit – if they're not met we won't back the final deal in parliament | LabourList

So the plan is to defeat the present proposals in the forthcoming vote and then follow up with a vote of no-confidence in the government, which would mean a general election.

Obviously Labour intend to win that, or at least come out of it in a position to form a minority government with the help of the other opposition parties, especially the SNP. Then they would seek to renegotiate with the EU seeking a relationship similar to the one Norway has with the EU.

At that point more and more senior Labour figures are saying they would want to have a referendum on the revised deal, and I think the two options would be "Accept the Norway-style deal" and "Remain" -- under which circumstances Remain would almost certainly win.

But a lot has to happen before we get there.

I'm sorry that the UK is putting the rest of the EU through this, and because David bloody Cameron thought he could solve the Conservative Party's internal feuding by having a referendum.

Just resurfacing to say thank you to Innula.

I am glad you find my attempts to explain this stupid mess helpful.

Here's a helpful infographic from the House of Commons explaining what happens next:

 

[Lianne Marten]

It was a nonbinding referendum that passed within the margin of error, everything on the Leave campaign's side has been shown to be a complete and total lie, and opposition to it has only increased since then.

How is "let's just not do this stupid-ass thing" not being shouted from the rooftops by an opposition party? At least Democrats are fighting against Donald, it feels like Labour is just arguing to hang themselves instead of shooting themselves in the head. Half the population or more seems to think this is a stupid idea and no one is representing their views in their government.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

The problem is that both the Conservative and Labour Parties went into the referendum saying that, whatever the outcome was, they'd respect it. That was when they both expected Remain to win and meant that if Leave lost, then the matter would be off the table for the foreseeable future.

That's politically very difficult to resile from. Most Labour MPs, and most Labour Party members (including me), want to remain in the EU but the problem is how to get into power to implement that.

Labour have chosen to attack the government's position rather than to advance the case for Remain because they've thought -- probably correctly -- that it's been better to let the Conservatives fight amongst themselves than to allow things to turn into a Leave vs Ignore Referendum Result fight.

Now the Government has finally had to commit to a position, and people can see how bad the results are, more and more people on the Government side are talking about remaining being a better option than leaving on these terms. But we've had to get to this point by allowing the Government to demonstrate the truth of what Remain has said all along -- that any deal is going to be considerably worse than remaining.

 

[Daniel Voyager]

Theresa May today saying she's still focused on the commons vote on 11th December.

Interview with BBC's Laura Kuenssberg at the G20 summit.

 

[Govi]

Nope, I think that misstates Jeremy Corbyn's position, and certainly Labour Party policy, such as it is.

Labour policy -- at the moment -- is to accept the result of the referendum (primarily because a lot of Labour MPs outside London represent constituencies that voted to Leave) but only to agree to terms that meet Labour's six tests:


Keir Starmer: Labour has six tests for Brexit – if they're not met we won't back the final deal in parliament | LabourList

So the plan is to defeat the present proposals in the forthcoming vote and then follow up with a vote of no-confidence in the government, which would mean a general election.

Obviously Labour intend to win that, or at least come out of it in a position to form a minority government with the help of the other opposition parties, especially the SNP. Then they would seek to renegotiate with the EU seeking a relationship similar to the one Norway has with the EU.

At that point more and more senior Labour figures are saying they would want to have a referendum on the revised deal, and I think the two options would be "Accept the Norway-style deal" and "Remain" -- under which circumstances Remain would almost certainly win.

But a lot has to happen before we get there.

I'm sorry that the UK is putting the rest of the EU through this, and because David bloody Cameron thought he could solve the Conservative Party's internal feuding by having a referendum.

I am glad you find my attempts to explain this stupid mess helpful.

Here's a helpful infographic from the House of Commons explaining what happens next:

Frightening that there is no path on that chart to remaining in the EU, that is unless the "government statement" after rejection of May's Brexit deal involves some form of do-over on the referendum. How that referendum ever passed a comparison with the original referendum to join the EU is beyond me. Common sense would dictate that if 60% voted to join the EU way back when, then 60% should be required to leave the EU.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

And what didn't we have for over one week? A resigning minister, so now one of the remaining decided to fill this gap - Sam Gyaimah, universities minister, resigned reluctantly.

He's against the deal, because it means no freedom for the UK like many Brexiteers hope in his opinion, but still the UK being bound by EU's rules&regime.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Eurosceptics warn that EU judges will rule over Britain after Brexit while high on legal cannabis

 

[Free]

Eurosceptics? People who don't believe there's a Europe?

 

[Dain Shan]

Its a branch from the Flat Earth Community, i think.
Maybe some of that Bogfoot folks found a way in also.

 

[Sid]

I leave it at that.

 

[Dain Shan]

Im sorry i slipped

 

[Essence Lumin]

So, er, hard brexit needs some little blue pills?

That article also claims that olive oil is better than viagra. It's a slippery situation for sure.

 

[Free]

That article also claims that olive oil is better than viagra. It's a slippery situation for sure.

It all depends on what you're putting it into.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

A very patient James O'Brien tries to get some sense of of a Brexit enthusiast. It does not go well.

 

[detrius]

Here he's talking with what sounds like the anthropomorphic personification of stomach ulcer:


(That guy's name is Philip Pinto and he's real.)

 

[Myficals]

Eurosceptics? People who don't believe there's a Europe?

Rosencrantz: I don't believe in it anyway.
Guildenstern: What?
Rosencrantz: England Europe.
Guildenstern: Just a conspiracy of cartographers, then?

 

[Kara Spengler]

What part of "withdraw Article 50" is hard to understand?

It would seem to be the fastest way to resolve it with the minimum mess. Actually the best would have been to treat the vote as what it was advertised as: ADVISORY. Not something that needed to be triggered right away, debate the pros and cons first.

The problem is someone needs to fall on their sword to withdraw it. Politicians as a subspecies are notorious for not doing that often, no matter what country they are from.

 

[Kara Spengler]

So, er, hard brexit needs some little blue pills?

What the? If I was running a pharmacy and had to stockpile drugs top priority would go to lifesaving ones. I would not even worry about drugs like that until I already had at least a year's supply of every lifesaving drug on hand.

 

[Kara Spengler]

Eurosceptics warn that EU judges will rule over Britain after Brexit while high on legal cannabis

Looks like I was not the first person to think of this: