Brexit

Sorry Steve I dont think it is over stating it, Labour should be strong favourites but even with the May fiasco and dodgy Boris PM they are still well behind, simply because die hard Labour supporters have seen just what they (and others) are capable of to disregard the referendum result.
When we were having banter about me only speaking to leavers and you said you have only spoken to remainers I can assure you down South Yorkshire Labour will come 3rd at best, the likes of Yvette Cooper will not be re elected, but I'm sure in blind faith they will put her forward in the Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford constituency.

 

I mean, that wasn’t the point.

There’s a non-trivial chance of two things happening:
A) Under terms of GFA, a referendum in a united Ireland happens. Not this year, or next year, but over time the two may begin to culturally merge. Since Northern Ireland is not treated the same as the rest of the UK, Unionist tendencies wane and the Republican element burns strong. Let’s say the UK fails to provide any compelling reason for them to avoid this too, regulatory divergence renders the current arrangement farcical. They have to make a choice.

B) Special deal for one part of the union you say? Well the SNP want some of that, thanks. Independence referendum incoming to a part of the UK with a majority remain contingent.

There’s a trajectory to both.

 

Interesting post and yes some danger of what you say happening and one of the reasons the DUP are up in arms but the Unionist feeling in the North is very strong and think they would vote like the last referendum to stay with the UK, The Scotland idea not so much, They are an intelligent nation and know that staying in the UK is best for them despite windbags in the SNP,

 

Isn't that what the SNP want regardless of the referendum result.
I am sick of hearing the likes of the SNP saying Scotland voted against leaving in the referendum as if that should count for something, seriously someone should tell them its all votes counted and the side that gets the most votes win, are they thick up there or think the SNP have a divine right to be the exception and Scotland stay in the EU because the majority vote remain, its getting so tedious.

 

Don’t entirely disagree, but they’re effectively a single issue party. I’m not entirely sure what we expect when people keep voting for them.

 

I’ll hold my hands up and say that they’re projections, and I could be wrong. I probably will be, but they’re both non-trivial.

But to repose the question, would the breakup of the Union be an acceptable price to pay for this deal?

 

I'm not sure because people vote for them it gives them a mandate to demand another referendum in Scotland, keep getting told be fellow poster on here who live in bonny Scotland the silent majority don't want independance.
Isn't it a similar situation to the DUP in Northern Ireland, the silent majority don't want to leave the EU.

 

But the unionist community in Ulster is shrinking, relative to the Catholic, republican community. And there is very strong support for keeping free trade/ customs alignment in the border areas, even amongst traditional unionists, because so much of their economy is dependent on movement between the two parts of Ireland.
A significant factor is that the Johnson agreement with the EU gives the Ulster Assembly (assuming it sits) a role in voting whether to continue the customs alignment with Eire after the initial four year period. But, unlike the usual arrangement under the Good Friday Agreement, any vote on that issue would not require approval by all parties at Stormont. It would be decided on a simple majority (at EU insistence). This would give a clear advantage to Sinn Fein/SDLP, the larger faction, and likely result in an extension to the customs alignment with Eire. Given that the unionist vote is going to keep shrinking, for demographic reasons, it's highly unlikely that they would ever have the votes at Stormont to get Ulster out of the customs union. So, regardless of a referendum, they would be effectively economically wedded to Eire for the foreseeable future and it would surely only be a matter of time before the full reunification with Eire happens.

 

Bravo! An excellent post and at last someone understands why the DUP are so against this deal, At present any party having 30 seats ( DUP & Sinn Fein ) have the power of a veto on any proposed legislation so in effect can stop dead any move for a referendum etc, Under the new legislation the power of the veto is removed which means a simple majority only would be needed which transfers a possible power advantage from the DUP to the nationalists

 

In my opinion if a break up occurs it will have little to do with Brexit and will be more to do with the politics of the last 80 years or so, Nationalism is on the increase in most parts of the world including the UK

 

Disagree with @trevor , as the norn irish and sweaty socks had a majority to remain then Brexit will play a very large part of any break-up of the UK.
Any job losses to Small Business Units or a recession will not go down well in remain areas and even in parts of Wales as well.
One of the "Unintended Consequences" of Nationalism in the UK is the response of many English to the efforts of the Scots/Welsh/Irish to improve their lot.
Brexit can be seen as the English idea of gaining independence and doing it our way, our IndyRef.

 

Agree with this. England has always seen itself as the HQ of the Union and this has always pissed off the rest to various extents.

Never before though has it been codified to this extent.

 

In a way, the only fitting outcome for today would be to have the farcical situation whereby Labour rebels block the Labour supported amendment and Tory rebels block the Tory supported deal.

 

It's farcical at the moment with party politics getting in the way of getting this done. For the sake of democracy I think it has to happen in one way or another.

The way we're going about it isn't working at all so if and when this latest one doesn't go through I think a change of approach is needed. Can't really see an election helping either. A second vote will only muddy the water further. They need an all party group, not led by any political party to sort this out.

 

Think that’s partly our fault as the electorate. As long as ‘thing we want’ happens at the expense of things we don’t want’ then it becomes a blunt instrument.

If you wait long enough, every single interested party will possess every single possible position at one point or another. Makes it impossible for government to function

At one point “nobody is talking about leaving without a deal”, then the next minute we’re supporting no deal. The Labour Party have tended to have each position on a near weekly basis by way of proxy for having no view at all. As a people we don’t allow compromise.

 

No Deal was never an option in the pre-referendum debates. We were told that the EU would be desperate for a deal and we could have our cake and eat it. Millions of undecided voters voted to Leave on that basis. So the idea that the referendum result gives any kind of mandate for No Deal Brexit is a sick joke.

 

The situation/blame has to be put firmly at Cameron/Osborne's door, they both sold the referendum as a complete break away from the EU, and stating we can't pick and chose, if we voted leave that meant leaving the EU, Customs Union and Single Market, that was their interpretation of a clean brexit, so we can hardly blame voters for amusing anything less is not brexit.
It's turned into a right bag of worms now Letwin is putting an amendment to Parliament, it has changed completely from the animal we were told with regards the referendum, it was a one off and the country would not get another referendum, yet the majority of the remain parties are now saying it has to go to second referendum for the people to decide if our MPs have made the correct decision, you couldn't make it up MPs don't trust the electorate on the first referendum but are quite happy to act on a second referendum.
I'm not sure why a general Election would not make it clearer to the electorate, each party would tell the electorate they are either for remaining and would revoke article 50, or the leaving party openly states they will leave with or without a deal, we go to the country and if it is a hung Parliament I'm sure the largest party would take the option of a coalition.
You would have two clear choices no comebacks "in or out" then on with any other business, or is that too simple?.

 

I think the failure was primarily in not putting forward any agreed Brexit plan, allowing a sort of Brexit you can imprint any kind of impression onto. Considering they campaigned for Remain, it was an enormous tactical error.

We then didn’t put forward any preferred flavour of Brexit before invoking Article 50 which by that point backed us into a corner.

We had a number of people through the campaign saying this, that or the other. Norway plus, Canada plus plus, WTO terms, single market, against a single remain option.

But following that, all political parties have changed their views a number of times and we have followed them every time. As a people we have completely lost the art of nuance.

 

That Letwin amendment doesn’t really change too much at all I don’t think.

The government will probably still ask for the extension, and the EU will just suspend their decision until the meaningful vote has come to be voted on.

 

Why would they, I believe they once again treated the electorate with contempt and thought there was any way we would vote leave, they didn't do their job by getting out amongst their constituents and hearing their concerns.