Support NeoGAF

[Moosichu]

Ye.......es?

Wait, is the "new proposed design" simply to rip out all the flowers? I'm a bit confused.



I used to work in the Civil Service, and I reckon you could comfortably fire every third person and it would still work moreorless the same.

It's quite a tenuous analogy in the first place. With regards to the flowers thing, it's viewing Brexit as the process of removing many established deals and partnerships (flowers), in the hope that in the space where those flowers once were, better ones will grow in their place. (new deals and partnerships). We don't know that, we can only hope.

But this analogy does start to fall apart if taken any further because international politics is very unlike gardening.

 

[Royal_Phalanx]

Ye.......es?

Wait, is the "new proposed design" simply to rip out all the flowers? I'm a bit confused.



I used to work in the Civil Service, and I reckon you could comfortably fire every third person and it would still work moreorless the same.

The best possible outcome for the UK is not to leave the EU though.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

The best possible outcome for the UK is not to leave the EU though.

It's not a commitment to "the best possible outcome for the UK" though. It's a commitment to "the best possible outcome for the UK following its departure from the EU". It's predicated on the departure from the EU happening.

It's quite a tenuous analogy in the first place. With regards to the flowers thing, it's viewing Brexit as the process of removing many established deals and partnerships (flowers), in the hope that in the space where those flowers once were, better ones will grow in their place. (new deals and partnerships). We don't know that, we can only hope.

But this analogy does start to fall apart if taken any further because international politics is very unlike gardening.

Both seem to involve Bushes quite often though.

 

[DarthMasta]

Anyway, it's officially March. Any idea when we might expect for Article 50 to be invoked?

 

[anonymous_abc]

Anyway, it's officially March. Any idea when we might expect for Article 50 to be invoked?

My money is on the 20th.

 

[Xando]

Anyway, it's officially March. Any idea when we might expect for Article 50 to be invoked?

Was reading on or around march 15 in the guardian a few days ago

 

[Royal_Phalanx]

At this stage I'm weary of waiting. If you're going to press the Article 50 button do it now. I'm tired of speculating about the future. I want some kind of clarity here.

 

[Dougald]

At this stage I'm weary of waiting. If you're going to press the Article 50 button do it now. I'm tired of speculating about the future. I want some kind of clarity here.

I suspect "clarity" is not something we'll get in spades from May, article 50 or not!

 

[Uzzy]

The Lords are voting right now on an amendment to the Brexit bill, to guarantee the rights of EU nationals living in the UK now. It's likely to pass, thus giving the Government their first defeat over the Brexit bill.

They've voted for the amendment by 358 votes to 256, a majority of 102.

 

[mclem]

The Lords are voting right now on an amendment to the Brexit bill, to guarantee the rights of EU nationals living in the UK now. It's likely to pass, thus giving the Government their first defeat over the Brexit bill.

They've voted for the amendment by 358 votes to 256, a majority of 102.

Glad to hear this; my parents are British living in France, and I'm not overjoyed with the idea of them being a bargaining chip; making the guarantee one way encourages the members of the EU to in turn make the same guarantee back.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

I guess those Art. 50 estimates will need to be pushed back a couple of weeks? :-/

 

[theaface]

The Lords are voting right now on an amendment to the Brexit bill, to guarantee the rights of EU nationals living in the UK now. It's likely to pass, thus giving the Government their first defeat over the Brexit bill.

They've voted for the amendment by 358 votes to 256, a majority of 102.

Good. A chance for one small shred of dignity for this country on the global stage. The fact that we were willing to use EU citizens as bargaining chips is one of the most disgusting things about the whole Brexit shitshow. I'm sure the 'enemies of the people' rhetoric will be loud and clear in the rags tomorrow.

 

[TimmmV]

<3 unelected bureaucrats. Sad that they're the only defence we have at the moment

 

[killer_clank]

I guess those Art. 50 estimates will need to be pushed back a couple of weeks? :-/

There's definitely no chance it'll be at the EU summit next week now

 

[Dougald]

Prepare for lots of grumbling from the government, vague allusions to reforming the Lords, Parliament stripping any amendments from the bill and sending it straight back, and maybe the odd threat to use the Parliament Act

 

[phisheep]

Prepare for lots of grumbling from the government, vague allusions to reforming the Lords, Parliament stripping any amendments from the bill and sending it straight back, and maybe the odd threat to use the Parliament Act

Well, partly.

But they know very well that the threat of the Parliament Acts in this case is wholly ineffective (as it would lead to a delay of about a year). Grumbling and vague allusions might be as far as it gets. It would be pretty risky for the Commons to strip the amendment out and send it back - it could come back even stronger.

I suspect this one will get through, because the Commons vote on it will no longer be about "supporting the will of the people" but about "stripping residents of their rights", which is rather less defensible.

 

[Royal_Phalanx]

wish the single market one got through just for troll purposes, the government would remove it anyway so not likely to do much good if it did pass

 

[Huw_Dawson]

This screws over May quite badly. She'll probably make belligerent noises towards the Lords getting reformed away now.

She has to either concede right-to-remain (w/o securing equivalent for expats...), mangle the Lords or massively delay the Brexit talks. Entertaining stuff.

 

[phisheep]

This screws over May quite badly. She'll probably make belligerent noises towards the Lords getting reformed away now.

She has to either concede right-to-remain (w/o securing equivalent for expats...), mangle the Lords or massively delay the Brexit talks. Entertaining stuff.

Not really. It just changes the negotiating stance a bit.

She doesn't have time (practically) to mangle the Lords or (politically) to delay art 50, so she concedes right-to-remain as of now and uses that as a reason on put an immediate stay on EU immigration.

If the rest of the EU cuts up rough it can always be reversed.

 

[Protome]

<3 unelected bureaucrats. Sad that they're the only defence we have at the moment

Ironically, due to the fact they are hated by voters from both parties, the House of Lords is kinda incredibly democratic. Doing things like this, which voters want, appeases voters so they're less likely to care much about reforming the House of Lords and parties are less likely to run with it as a promise (or keep it after being elected if they do.)

They basically do what the electorate want most of the time out of fear of losing their cushy unelected positions.

 

[killer_clank]

wish the single market one got through just for troll purposes, the government would remove it anyway so not likely to do much good if it did pass

Though the Labour Party would have to explicitly vote against the single market, therefore confirming beyond doubt their patheticness.

 

[Lagamorph]

The BBC article on the Lords vote,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39133400

One particular tidbit,

The vote, by 358 to 256, is the first Parliamentary defeat for the government's Brexit bill.
However, MPs will be able to remove their changes when the bill returns to the House of Commons

They also have a handy chart to explain how the bill moves through the various levels of UK Government before becoming law,

 

[phisheep]

The BBC article on the Lords vote,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39133400

One particular tidbit,

They also have a handy chart to explain how the bill moves through the various levels of UK Government before becoming law,

One thing they missed in that was that it is a really good idea to start constitutionally important bills in the Lords rather than the Commons (because of the Parliament Acts, which only work the other way). Wasn't done this time because of the big controversy stuff, and also, maybe, because the government doesn't have a majority in the Lords.

Looking forward to the vote breakdown and the Labour Party demanding the return of Hereditary Peers!

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Just to be clear how the HoL works.

Bill gets passed to HoL. A clock starts ticking.

Bill gets amended and returned to the HoC.

The HoC strips out the amendment and fires the bill back.

The HoL amends the bill again and it's sent back.

Now, this can carry on happening for a year after the Lords begin delaying the bill. After that year, the HoC can just get royal assent for the bill law without the HoL.

Insanely this does not apply to private member's bills, where the Lords, a bunch of unelected people, can shoot down some MP's pride and joy.

We already know that Labour's MPs are three-line whipped to back May on this. But yeah, May will have to threaten the HoL with something nasty like flooding or abolition to get this passed by the end of March...

Or Corbyn forces his peers to vote against the amendment.

 

[Lagamorph]

Or Corbyn forces his peers to vote against the amendment.

I don't think he's able to do that is he?

 

[QuicheFontaine]

It seems more likely that the govt just accepts the amendment and the bill goes for royal assent.

 

[chadskin]

French presidential hopeful Macron:

 

[oti]

French presidential hopeful Macron:

Très bien, Macron.

 

[DarthMasta]

French presidential hopeful Macron:

Britain to pursue soft-Brexit now to stick it to the French confirmed?

 

[Uzzy]

It seems more likely that the govt just accepts the amendment and the bill goes for royal assent.

Doesn't look like the Government has any intention of backing down though. So I imagine we'll see this amendment stripped from the bill once it goes back to the Commons, then the Lords will be challenged to pass it and not force May to break her deadline.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Doesn't look like the Government has any intention of backing down though. So I imagine we'll see this amendment stripped from the bill once it goes back to the Commons, then the Lords will be challenged to pass it and not force May to break her deadline.

The Lords would just argue that EU citizens' rights are more important than an arbitrary and self-imposed deadline. And it seems like kind of an easy argument to win. I think they should just live with the amendment.

 

[Lagamorph]

May has announced that the bill MUST pass unamended.
Yet she's also still committed to her end of March deadline.

 

[Jackpot]

Once again it's the unelected house that protects the public. For like the nth time.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

May has announced that the bill MUST pass unamended.
Yet she's also still committed to her end of March deadline.

Something's got to give!

 

[Uzzy]

The Lords would just argue that EU citizens' rights are more important than an arbitrary and self-imposed deadline. And it seems like kind of an easy argument to win. I think they should just live with the amendment.

I think they should live with the amendment too, hell, I thought Cameron should have unilaterally guaranteed those rights the morning of the result. But given how determined May is to get this amendment and any other amendments removed, it's hard to see how it won't be removed. With the DUP voting with the Government, there'd need to be at least 16 Tory MP's voting against the Government on this matter. That's a tough ask.

I think this amendment, along with the other amendment that's likely to pass, which says that Parliament should be guaranteed a vote on the outcome of the negotiations, will get stripped and the Lords will be challenged to pass the bill. Which by then would have been passed by the Commons twice. The Lords could defy the Commons again, but if you thought the 'enemies of the people' rhetoric was bad before..

 

[Jezbollah]

Part of me thinks this kind of intervention on the Lords part is playing into May's plans...

 

[Number45]

Something's got to give!

Yeah, it shouldn't be the rights of people legally resident in the UK.

Part of me thinks this kind of intervention on the Lords part is playing into May's plans...

Anything that can be used in the press to demonise something other than the government itself plays into her plans as far as I can tell.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

I think they should live with the amendment too, hell, I thought Cameron should have unilaterally guaranteed those rights the morning of the result. But given how determined May is to get this amendment and any other amendments removed, it's hard to see how it won't be removed. With the DUP voting with the Government, there'd need to be at least 16 Tory MP's voting against the Government on this matter. That's a tough ask.

I think this amendment, along with the other amendment that's likely to pass, which says that Parliament should be guaranteed a vote on the outcome of the negotiations, will get stripped and the Lords will be challenged to pass the bill. Which by then would have been passed by the Commons twice. The Lords could defy the Commons again, but if you thought the 'enemies of the people' rhetoric was bad before..

A "replace the HoL" petition has sprung up quickly: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/170686

 

[CyclopsRock]

I love the HoL. I wouldn't change a thing.

 

[D4Danger]

I love the HoL. I wouldn't change a thing.

I don't like the way people are picked but it's not always a bad thing to have a bit of a buffer there sometimes just to keep the government in check. Just as long as they understand they have no real power it's fine.

 

[TimmmV]

The idea that there is a chamber where appointed experts can review law, without having needing to pander to public opinion is pretty good

Peerages being given out for political favours sucks though. Ideally the lords spiritual would be got rid of too, but neither of those are bad enough to warrant scrapping the whole thing

 

[Huw_Dawson]

The HoL is a fundamentally flawed concept that has been patched enough times to make it not intolerable.

In this case it is doing exactly what it is best at - reviewing hasty legislation that has no mandate.

EDIT: Labour just lost a council seat in Salford to the Tories...

Manchester Gorton is looking like a very interesting seat.

 

[Funky Papa]

Brexit could slam door on star footballers

European football’s top official fears superstar footballers with ongoing court cases, like Messi and Neymar, could be refused access to the UK after Brexit. He even indicated that European matches could be held elsewhere in a worst case scenario.

UEFA President Aleksander &#268;eferin told The New York Times that “if Brexit happens, everything changes”.

He warned that if the UK’s exit from the EU makes it harder for players and fans to enter the country, especially if free movement rules are scrapped, then a severe rethink will have to be made about future games and competitions.

&#268;eferin insisted that his organisation is still committed to holding the final stages of the 2020 edition of the European Football Championships in London but said UEFA would be in contact with the British government and the English Football Association in the coming months and years about the issue.

Well, would you look at that.

Spoiler

RIP, Footie-GAF.

 

[Uzzy]

Football Manager already took that into account, quite amusingly.

I found this article over on the New Statesman to be rather interesting. It's about a study into newspaper coverage of the EU over five critical periods. They looked at the Daily Mail, the Financial Times, the Guardian, the Daily Mirror, and the Times

Negative coverage of the European Union almost doubled between Britain's last referendum on membership in 1975 and David Cameron's pledge to hold a second referendum in 2013, a study has found.

Paul Copeland, who co-wrote the study and lectures in politics at Queen Mary University, said the most significant finding was that there were ”no real defenders of the EU to be found" in 2013 as opposed to 1975, while there was a ”significant increase" in negative coverage in the right-wing press. ”The only counter-weight to the noisy and negative minority is factual and neutral reporting: good journalism, but not necessarily effective as a spirited public defence of the EU."

I recall seeing something about how even Tony Blair, the most pro-EU Prime Minister we've had, if not the most pro-EU politician we've ever had, found it difficult to put forward a pro-EU message, fearing the reaction from the press. Not hard to see why.

 

[Halph n Halph]

Brexit could slam door on star footballers



Well, would you look at that.

Spoiler

RIP, Footie-GAF.

Neymar and Messi could be refused entry now if the home office feel the charges are serious enough.
UEFA has nothing at all to do with the European union and all the competitions they host include teams from outside the EU.
European players wishing to play Britain would simply become subject to the same regulations that footballers from the rest of the world are.
It might actually be good for the national teams.

 

[Xando]

This is some gold:

In a speech to the Scottish Tories on Friday seen as an effort to head of growing nationalists' demands for a second Scottish referendum, she accused the SNP of being ”a party resolutely focused on just one thing: independence." The SNP, she said ”plays politics as if it is a game".

Mrs May also noted the close trading relationship between Scotland and the rest of the UK. ”The SNP wants to wrench Scotland out of its biggest market... It simply does not add up," she said, adding that ”a tunnel-vision nationalism that focuses only on independence at any cost sells Scotland short".

https://www.ft.com/content/3edf18d4-ab8b-3446-964a-0923b357ea0a

Does she even understand how stupid this makes her look when she argues against scotland leaving the UK market and argues for brexit?

 

[Dougald]

This is some gold:


https://www.ft.com/content/3edf18d4-ab8b-3446-964a-0923b357ea0a

Does she even understand how stupid this makes her look when she argues against scotland leaving the UK market and argues for brexit?

You can't make it up can you

 

[Zaph]

“plays politics as if it is a game”.

The fucking cheek of her

 

[tuxfool]

Mrs May also noted the close trading relationship between Scotland and the rest of the UK. “The SNP wants to wrench Scotland out of its biggest market… It simply does not add up,” she said, adding that “a tunnel-vision nationalism that focuses only on independence at any cost sells Scotland short”.

*snort*

 

[anonymous_abc]

This is some gold:


https://www.ft.com/content/3edf18d4-ab8b-3446-964a-0923b357ea0a

Does she even understand how stupid this makes her look when she argues against scotland leaving the UK market and argues for brexit?

Is this real life?