Current Politics in the United Kingdom

[DrSerizawa]

Jeremy Hunt's latest waffle to Laura Kuenssberg, where he claims to be trustworthy on Brexit:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48760055

There's nothing there that's particularly inspiring. Frankly, if Mr Hunt becomes PM I'll need to drink copious amounts of coffee in order to get through a speech.

[frankoboff]

Originally Posted by palo5

Although this would dignify him if you thought he would do it himself. There is no evidence of personal courage from Johnson anywhere

Same as this charlatan:

"Nigel Farage has said he would, “don khaki, pick up a rifle and head for the front lines” if Theresa May fails to deliver Brexit in the fashion he wants"

The truth is, Farage has no military experience, probably couldn't tie his boots, and couldn't run 100 m either. That's aside from not knowing how to use a rifle

In light of increased xenophobia, a death, numerous death threats and a couple of attempted deaths, I really think Nigel Farage's 'free speech' needs curtailing.

[squirrel72cd]

You were half way in, you want brexit to be half way out, someone explain to me the difference and I will try to care...

[Dr Pepper]

Originally Posted by frankoboff

In light of increased xenophobia, a death, numerous death threats and a couple of attempted deaths, I really think Nigel Farage's free speech needs curtailing.

Thank you for finally coming out into the daylight.....

[frankoboff]

Originally Posted by Dr Pepper

Thank you for finally coming out into the daylight.....

I'm sorry, alluding to violence from the sidelines isn't on.

[scoundrel]

The right of free speech can be a tricky one when someone is saying something you don't like. I find Nigel Farage's jingoism pretty tiresome as well, but I have to comment that he isn't inciting violence or anywhere near. He has an inalienable right to talk bollocks, and those who don't like this will have to lump it. After all, Farage has to listen to and put up with people such as Guy Verhofstadt, so it isn't always one way traffic. Likewise, I frequently have to read and even approve posts on threads such as this one which get right up my nose - but I still approve them because the esteemed member has every bit as much right to speak his/her mind as I myself.

These people, Farage, Boris Johnson and their ilk are basically all mouth and no trousers. We are presently getting a lot of insight into the poverty of ability and poverty of character of the vast majority of those who govern us. There was a vote; people said what they wanted; and no one can agree on what we should do next. Unless the EU seriously believes Britain is determined to leave even without a deal, they have no reason to consider any concession on their current offer.

There is still a realistic chance that Britain will be forced to Remain by her own paralysis, and by making no concessions the EU is maximising the chance that this will be the end result. Farage is an irrelevance but Boris Johnson is relevant if he becomes the next Tory Leader. There is no reason now why the EU would respect him or take him seriously, because he is so clearly a tosser. Only if the EU starts to believe Boris Johnson even can take Britain out of the Union with no agreement in place will the EU start listening with any attention.

[frankoboff]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

The right of free speech can be a tricky one when someone is saying something you don't like.

It's not down to his political viewpoint on Europe but the way he conducts himself on Twitter. His tone pushes into militancy quite often- inferring people should 'take to the streets' etc. This is not conducive to the UK getting a good deal on exit from the EU.

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Farage is an irrelevance but Boris Johnson is relevant if he becomes the next Tory Leader.

His main ambition is to stay relevant. Whatever the outcome of negotiations it's in Farage's best interests to call the deal 'a betrayal'. The Brexit debate will continue for as long as Farage is politically active.

There is also Russia, disaster capitalists and other interested parties lobbying for a hard Brexit and political and social chaos. Egos like Farage and Johnson are extremely useful to them.

Originally Posted by scoundrel

There is no reason now why the EU would respect him or take him seriously, because he is so clearly a tosser. Only if the EU starts to believe Boris Johnson even can take Britain out of the Union with no agreement in place will the EU start listening with any attention.

The EU aren't stupid. We do not have the upper hand.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by frankoboff

The EU aren't stupid. We do not have the upper hand.

On the other side of the coin, the EU doesn't have an upper hand if Britain has clearly committed itself to leave regardless of whether or not there is a deal. The EU had its own reasons for needing a deal - were it not so, Britain would not have been allowed an extension on 29 March. It has used the Irish border as a wedge issue, quite artfully and with success. But the risk of that is that the Irish border issue will be a problem for the EU rather than for Britain if Britain leaves with no agreement. Britain won't impose a hard border, but the EU might need to, and that would impact the Irish Republic probably worse than Britain.

Preferable to do a deal than not; but we can be satisfied now that the current deal has been puked up by Parliament and is never ever going to ratified. I'm fine with that because it is a really shit deal. The trouble is that it is equally clear now that Parliament has no preferred alternative, and there is no possible deal which will pass the House of Commons. I don't think the Lib-Dem holy grail of a 2nd referendum would actually solve this problem because if the people vote to Leave a second time, Parliament will still refuse to cooperate; and if they vote to Remain the backlash against such a blatant swindle will last a long time.

The most realistic solution is a general election, though one doubts if either Mr Johnson or Jeremy Hunt would voluntarily hold one. Perhaps we should hope the story of the rebels willing to vote No Confidence is true.

Theresa May tried to follow the general election road but ran a crazy and irrelevant campaign which focused on all the wrong issues. A general election could flush the cache but only if it focuses on the central dilemma - will Britain leave the EU or continue to have one off the wrist? If the party which commits itself to following through on the 2016 referendum loses out to the masturbation parties, then there will be a majority in the Commons to Remain, the Commons can vote for rescission, and it will have been a democratic process. Conversely, if the party committed to Leave gets a working majority large enough to control its own rebels, then a deal Brexit can be passed or a no-deal Brexit not be blocked; that too will be the outcome of a democratic process.

[frankoboff]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

On the other side of the coin, the EU doesn't have an upper hand if Britain has clearly committed itself to leave regardless of whether or not there is a deal.

Preferable to do a deal than not; but we can be satisfied now that the current deal has been puked up by Parliament and is never ever going to ratified. I'm fine with that because it is a really shit deal. The trouble is that it is equally clear now that Parliament has no preferred alternative, and there is no possible deal which will pass the House of Commons. I don't think the Lib-Dem holy grail of a 2nd referendum would actually solve this problem because if the people vote to Leave a second time, Parliament will still refuse to cooperate; and if they vote to Remain the backlash against such a blatant swindle will last a long time.

The most realistic solution is a general election, though one doubts if either Mr Johnson or Jeremy Hunt would voluntarily hold one. Perhaps we should hope the story of the rebels willing to vote No Confidence is true.

Theresa May tried to follow the general election road but ran a crazy and irrelevant campaign which focused on all the wrong issues. A general election could flush the cache but only if it focuses on the central dilemma - will Britain leave the EU or continue to have one off the wrist? If the party which commits itself to following through on the 2016 referendum loses out to the masturbation parties, then there will be a majority in the Commons to Remain, the Commons can vote for rescission, and it will have been a democratic process. Conversely, if the party committed to Leave gets a working majority large enough to control its own rebels, then a deal Brexit can be passed or a no-deal Brexit not be blocked; that too will be the outcome of a democratic process.

No deal would mean:- fuel shortages, food shortages, flight cancellations and backlogs, extremely heavy tariffs under WTO rules, a 3 day week for most manufacturing due to part shortages, The £ would drop to less than $0.25.... The list is endless.

We'd be the only country trading under WTO rules btw. Every country in the World has trade agreements.

We do not have the upper hand.

[charliels531]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

The right of free speech can be a tricky one when someone is saying something you don't like.

Both the U.S. and Britain are afflicted with the insane idea that either has free speech.

A recently-deceased friend lived in London and we used to have good laughs trying to understand what "free speech" meant to the other.

In the U.S. naked boobies and money given to politicians are "speech" and protected, but pictures of naked boobies of 17-year-olds are a federal felony. In Britain saying something that hurts people's feelings is actionable, but naked 16-year-old boobies are fine.