Brexit negotiations thread

[callan]

I haven't finally admitted anything - I'm very open about the fact that Labour don't need a fixed Brexit policy - if you scroll through you'll see that.


Some of those who would not be keen on voting Labour seem very keen on Labour having a definitive policy - presumably to take their share of the **** show that is two years of post Brexit chit chat still no government policy.


Labour couldn't stand in the way of Article 50, it would seem undemocratic. Labour didn't need a plan for what came after that - they aren't in government.


It's not their's to share. It's 100% a Tory **** up until they get to the point that they want to throw the towel in.


Brexit belongs to the Tories.


They just don't know what to do with it.

Sorry was it an imposter writing under your name this morning that was trying to tell us that Labour's policy was close to EEA membership?

As far as voting for Labour , anyone who feels strongly about Brexit whether remain or leave couldn't do so without understanding what their position is, even you don't know do you?

You constantly repeat the same line that Labour aren't the government so don't have to have to take a position or have a plan, I would argue that as an opposition you can't be against something unless you know what you're for....and the long and the short of it is that Labour are just as split and muddled as the Tories.

Can you elaborate a bit more on why Labour voted for triggering article 50, I get the undemocratic bit but please don't tell me they don't need a view on how we should exit.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Sorry was it an imposter writing under your name this morning that was trying to tell us that Labour's policy was close to EEA membership?

As far as voting for Labour , anyone who feels strongly about Brexit whether remain or leave couldn't do so without understanding what their position is, even you don't know do you?

You constantly repeat the same line that Labour aren't the government so don't have to have to take a position or have a plan, I would argue that as an opposition you can't be against something unless you know what you're for....and the long and the short of it is that Labour are just as split and muddled as the Tories.

Can you elaborate a bit more on why Labour voted for triggering article 50, I get the undemocratic bit but please don't tell me they don't need a view on how we should exit.

An imposter? No, that's a bit childish.


We can have discussions about Labour Brexit policy, but it's not fixed because it doesn't need to be because they have no meetings lined up with the EU where they need to announce policy.


Being in government and opposition have very different pressures, responsibilities and deadlines.


There is no election due and as I already stated only the LibDems have a fixed Brexit policy so in terms of voting movements between the two 40%+ parties again there is no pressure to fix a policy.


If you watch PMQs for the last two (maybe three) weeks and read the reaction from political commentators you see that in fact when in opposition you can criticise the government without declaring your own fixed policy. May has fallen apart trying to swerve Corbyn's questions on Brexit. She still hasn't produced the white paper, he still doesn't need one.




Article 50 - needed to be triggered to start the Brexit process, but the process was Conservative negotiations with EU and Parliament to scrutinise those negotiations. Again - governmental responsibility, with Parliamentary checks, only the government could set the policy that they wished to follow so if the government had not formulated their policy then the government should not have triggered article 50.

 

[callan]

An imposter? No, that's a bit childish.


We can have discussions about Labour Brexit policy, but it's not fixed because it doesn't need to be because they have no meetings lined up with the EU where they need to announce policy.


Being in government and opposition have very different pressures, responsibilities and deadlines.


There is no election due and as I already stated only the LibDems have a fixed Brexit policy so in terms of voting movements between the two 40%+ parties again there is no pressure to fix a policy.


If you watch PMQs for the last two (maybe three) weeks and read the reaction from political commentators you see that in fact when in opposition you can criticise the government without declaring your own fixed policy. May has fallen apart trying to swerve Corbyn's questions on Brexit. She still hasn't produced the white paper, he still doesn't need one.




Article 50 - needed to be triggered to start the Brexit process, but the process was Conservative negotiations with EU and Parliament to scrutinise those negotiations. Again - governmental responsibility, with Parliamentary checks, only the government could set the policy that they wished to follow so if the government had not formulated their policy then the government should not have triggered article 50.

I'm lost completely now AAS, you told us this this morning that Labour has a policy which is like EEA membership and I have pressed you into revealing to us all what that means, time and time again you have frustrated, and dodged the question completely.

You then contradicted your initial position by telling us there is no need for a policy from Labour, and not content with contradicting yourself once you have done it on several occasions since.

What is clear as much is it can be is that there is no policy from Labour, nor even a position that can be supported or agreed by Labour's mp's or iits supporters.

As far as pmqs are concerned I suspect Corby performs to the best of his abilities.....

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I'm lost completely now AAS, you told us this this morning that Labour has a policy which is like EEA membership and I have pressed you into revealing to us all what that means, time and time again you have frustrated, and dodged the question completely.

You then contradicted your initial position by telling us there is no need for a policy from Labour, and not content with contradicting yourself once you have done it on several occasions since.

What is clear as much is it can be is that there is no policy from Labour, nor even a position that can be supported or agreed by Labour's mp's or iits supporters.

As far as pmqs are concerned I suspect Corby performs to the best of his abilities.....

No need to be confused. If you interpreted something I wrote as being a detailed policy then I apologise for not being clearer in that post. My position has been stated many times so I wasn't expecting any confusion.

The policy is not fixed because it doesn't need to be. That's the position.


Labour took 40% of the vote a year ago and one of the reasons for that is because they didn't jump too soon on a Brexit policy and instead tried to appeal to both sides.


I'm sure that all of those involved in PMQs try to perform to the best of their abilities - odd thing to have to say. If you take a look - Corbyn asking 'where is the white paper' is a valid question for which May has no plausible answer, and her retort of 'Labour want a second referendum' is factually incorrect.


Getting rid of this ineffective, indecisive, weak government is IMO for the good of the country, and exposing their lack of Brexit policy is a valid point to make and exposes their deficiencies. Labour have no need to lock anything in just yet, the Tories needed to do that some time ago.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

The internal government issues on Brexit are proper kicking off with new agreements reached and then reneged. Anna Soubry backing the government position yesterday saying she believed the personal assurances May gave her. Be interesting to see what her next move is...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44490748

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I feel let down by both parties.

Neither has a clear path of direction on leaving and both are split on the best way to enact the will of the people which is to leave.

I have asked with increasing regularity on this thread what is Labours brexit position...the closest we have got so far is that it is something like EEA but not that.

It should, for a nailed on Labour supporter and activist like yourself be easy to answer, so why can't do so?

My take is that they don't actually have a position and are hopping from one foot to another, if they have a position of their own that is potentially better than HMG's surely it would be there for all to see?

You could always vote UKIP (again).:hilarious:

 

[callan]

No need to be confused. If you interpreted something I wrote as being a detailed policy then I apologise for not being clearer in that post. My position has been stated many times so I wasn't expecting any confusion.

The policy is not fixed because it doesn't need to be. That's the position.


Labour took 40% of the vote a year ago and one of the reasons for that is because they didn't jump too soon on a Brexit policy and instead tried to appeal to both sides.


I'm sure that all of those involved in PMQs try to perform to the best of their abilities - odd thing to have to say. If you take a look - Corbyn asking 'where is the white paper' is a valid question for which May has no plausible answer, and her retort of 'Labour want a second referendum' is factually incorrect.


Getting rid of this ineffective, indecisive, weak government is IMO for the good of the country, and exposing their lack of Brexit policy is a valid point to make and exposes their deficiencies. Labour have no need to lock anything in just yet, the Tories needed to do that some time ago.

In normal times I would agree that this government is so inept that they should be put to the sword, but these aren't normal times, and there is plenty of evidence such as the recent rebellion by Labour mp's to suggest that Brexit under Labour would be just as chaotic.

This is the real reason I believe that Labour don't have a position, and they can't use the excuse of sitting on the fence forever.

Just like May they will need to do deals to overcome internal division, should they ever come to power.

 

[callan]

You could always vote UKIP (again).:hilarious:

No need is there Barna, UKIP achieved what they set out to do which was to force a referendum....neither Labour or Tories currently hold any appeal so I will vote for any independent candidate on local issues.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

In normal times I would agree that this government is so inept that they should be put to the sword, but these aren't normal times, and there is plenty of evidence such as the recent rebellion by Labour mp's to suggest that Brexit under Labour would be just as chaotic.

This is the real reason I believe that Labour don't have a position, and they can't use the excuse of sitting on the fence forever.

Just like May they will need to do deals to overcome internal division, should they ever come to power.

Agreed, these aren't normal times. If in power that rebellion may not have been needed as when in power Labour wouldn't need to sit on the fence. Sitting on the fence is a policy in opposition. In power you can get on and do what you are going to do.

What they actually do depends entirely on how abnormal the times are when the Tories finally collapse. The further down the line this goes without the Tories and the EU coming to any agreement the more likely Labour are to say 'its been tried and failed, Brexit is not possible'. That I think is a very possible outcome.

 

[Swiss Tony]

With only 15 more MP's at the last GE Labour would be in government now. :smile:

If your auntie had balls she'd be your uncle.

 

[MK Shrimper]

If your auntie had balls she'd be your uncle.

Not if he identified as a trans-woman Tony. It's a brave new world out there.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

If your auntie had balls she'd be your uncle.

Ha! Got quite a few aunties (and uncles) too.Some of them still alive, so I hear.Working class families are great breeders,don't you know. :winking:

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44486075

See Lewisham East have elected another Labour MP who plans to fight a Tory "hard Brexit."

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44486075

See Lewisham East have elected another Labour MP who plans to fight a Tory "hard Brexit."

the brave new dawn of the ForBritain party who had their leader as candidate for maximum leverage.....got 1.2%

 

[MK Shrimper]

the brave new dawn of the ForBritain party who had their leader as candidate for maximum leverage.....got 1.2%

No doubt the leader will be on Question Time next week. :facepalm:

 

[Supernaut]

the brave new dawn of the ForBritain party who had their leader as candidate for maximum leverage.....got 1.2%

Bet Morrissey's gutted :stunned:

 

[callan]

Agreed, these aren't normal times. If in power that rebellion may not have been needed as when in power Labour wouldn't need to sit on the fence. Sitting on the fence is a policy in opposition. In power you can get on and do what you are going to do.

What they actually do depends entirely on how abnormal the times are when the Tories finally collapse. The further down the line this goes without the Tories and the EU coming to any agreement the more likely Labour are to say 'its been tried and failed, Brexit is not possible'. That I think is a very possible outcome.

Which of course would be ignoring the advice given by the people in 2016, Labour would never be forgiven outside of its metropolitan area.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Which of course would be ignoring the advice given by the people in 2016, Labour would never be forgiven outside of its metropolitan area.

which is why Labour policy should remain fluid until such a point as when the Tories show Brexit up to be unworkable.

That explains everything.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44482652

Wonder if the Tory Brexit rebels will have the courage to actually vote against HMG next week.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44482652

Wonder if the Tory Brexit rebels will have the courage to actually vote against HMG next week.

I love a Tory bun fight.
Fellow backbencher Sarah Wollaston described the change as "a sneaky sting in the tail" while Anna Soubry described it as a "big mistake by the prime minister" adding: "Unfortunately it looks like she's yet again caved into the hard Brexiteers."
Another pro-EU Tory MP, Stephen Hammond, suggested the amendment had been "hijacked" by government figures trying to "force their will" onto the process.