Think that was dumb for Labour. Something as complicated as this? You can't rush it; you only get one shot. The line should have been: it's done when it's done.
Think that was dumb for Labour. Something as complicated as this? You can't rush it; you only get one shot. The line should have been: it's done when it's done.
You're talking about the A50 bill... Sorry, Act? I mean, what can be "done"? It seems that everyone's intending to actually stick to the whole "don't negotiate til it's triggered" stuff. So what is there to wait and get right?
To have a comprehensive, coherent plan before we actually enter into the most complicated legal undertaking in history? As it is, even the government doesn't have a singular vision for what they want from Brexit. To say it has two visions would be generous. Basically - "I'm seeing double here - four Brexits!"
Well, it's too late now, but what could've been done is Labour demanding a second referendum to activate article 50.
People said it couldn't get that bad in Greece. People said that it couldn't get that bad in Spain. Brexit will forever impoverish the country and break up the union.
All the evil this country has done, all the benefits accrued from it? Flushed down the toilet. Willingly handing over our creation and status of literally centuries worth of being the banking capital of the world. Poverty and homelessness is genuinely exploding in this country. And the axe hasn't even dropped yet. We will feel Greeces pain.
Why not?But how does that present itself, practically? We can't have May come out and say "Here's what we want from Brexit - financial passporting, mutual domicile for existing resident migrants, control otherwise over borders, free movement of goods and services, extraction from the ECJ and membership of the European patent system."
Why not?
But that's always the case, isn't it? If you could get evwrything you wanted there would be no negotiation. You can't even start a negotiation without claiming to want something.Because she'll never get all that she wants, and she'll look like a fool.
But that's always the case, isn't it? If you could get evwrything you wanted there would be no negotiation. You can't even start a negotiation without claiming to want something.
Right, but that's different to what you're ok settling with. We are all making the assumption that May doesn't know what she wants, but what's that based on? If she did have an ideal list, would we know? If so, how would we know? Feasibility studies are hard to conduct when the other side won't even informally agree to a mutual immigrant domicile situation.
If she doesn't like that, she can go to the country and get a mandate for her authoritarian, xenophobic views. Best of luck to her.
I just don't understand what you guys think "a plan" looks like, given the obvious suicidal negotiating tactic that showing one's cards is. I've heard drips and drabs from people about various policies the government is planning to pursue, and I don't know if they're a) accurately being reported to me or b) are being accurately reported to me but not necessarily going to be the actual position of HM Government by the time negotiating starts. But none of these are "public" in the sense that they aren't disclosed in departmental briefings or written up in newspapers. So, yeah, what does a plan look like?
I just don't understand what you guys think "a plan" looks like, given the obvious suicidal negotiating tactic that showing one's cards is. I've heard drips and drabs from people about various policies the government is planning to pursue, and I don't know if they're a) accurately being reported to me or b) are being accurately reported to me but not necessarily going to be the actual position of HM Government by the time negotiating starts. But none of these are "public" in the sense that they aren't disclosed in departmental briefings or written up in newspapers. So, yeah, what does a plan look like?
Jesus fucking Christ David Davis. "It's like threading a needle. If someone bumps your elbow it's harder. If 650 people do it it's even harder."
I wish this government would stop talking in whimsical fucking metaphors. It's not really helping the discussion when people think that we are literally playing a game of poker with the EU and not sitting down and attempting to negotiate an exit from our existing obligations and subsequently forming new trade and diplomatic agreements.
"We can't show our cards! We need to surprise them!" Yes you fucking can. We have nothing, absolutely nothing that we can surprise them with. Nothing that they won't have already second guessed and have a contingency for and a counterpoint to. It's not a game where we've all been dealt cards at random and we have to call their bluff. We know their cards already. They know our cards already. Because it's all written down in our membership. It's literally all there.
Cross posting from the Brexit thread:
You're talking about the A50 bill... Sorry, Act? I mean, what can be "done"? It seems that everyone's intending to actually stick to the whole "don't negotiate til it's triggered" stuff. So what is there to wait and get right?
Cross posting from the Brexit thread:
Yikes. I can't see the Lib Dems hoovering of Remain voters making them huge gains at a GE if one were held next year, but I can see it splitting the left vote pretty hard.
Yup, which is exactly why the Tories are acting like the 51.9% result was a 91.9% resultYikes. I can't see the Lib Dems hoovering of Remain voters making them huge gains at a GE if one were held next year, but I can see it splitting the left vote pretty hard.
Yup, which is exactly why the Tories are acting like the 51.9% result was a 91.9% result
They know that so long as they continue down this Hard Brexit path (which is contrary to a lot of early pro-Leave rhetoric), that's a voting base that's unlikely to abandon them no matter their policies in all other areas.
It's undoubtedly beneficial for them to do that, but at the same time it's not at all obvious what "the people" want a Brexit to look like. The majority of the official Remain's campaign was about the economic consequences of a Hard Brexit - and that campaign failed to convince over half the voters. Similarly, the mid point between two opposing views is not necessarily the best place to end up. Leaving the EU but keeping our foot in the water risks alienating almost everyone, where no one feels like they have got what they want except those who were stuck in the middle (of which I was actually one, so personally I'd love to see that outcome!) Finally, it's an inherently exclusive thing - whoever does get what they want will inevitably outnumbered by those who don't. That's the way of it when there are more than two possible outcomes, almost always.
Boris Johnson refuses to apologise for Saudi Arabia comments
Foreign secretary hits out at critics in the Conservative party on visit to Bahrain after outcry over proxy wars remarks
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...efuses-to-apologise-for-saudi-arabia-comments
Looks like he really does want to get fired. No one would argue that SA fund terror, and this way he goes out looking like the underdog standing up to suck-up May.
Anything to get out of doing a real job.
Plenty of people would agree with him though