EVNow
Well-Known Member
Wasn't this N Ireland problem an issue during the Brexit elections ?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Brexit
- Thread starter Buckminster
- Start date
YoungStranger
Member
The Irish Border is the only land border with the EU and complicted by recent political violence. The Good Friday Agreement is a peace settlement that amongst other things guarantees an open border.. It was hardly mentioned during the Campaign in mainland Britain. The Brexiters also only ever talked vaguely about these things (taking control of borders .. ie controlling immigration and promised access to the Single Market. Northern Ireland itself voted for Remain, as did Scotland.
There were no elections... just a simple majoritarian advisory referendum. Most constitutional referendums have safeguards but not this one. It was a ruse to shut the Brexiters in the Tory Party up. Didn’t work.
There was a subsequent election in which the pro Brexit Tory Party löst it’s majority, and Labour did better than expected. Unfortunately as a leftist, the leadership of the Labour Party is pro Brexit (although they pretend not), whilst the majority of the Labour Party is pro Remain. It is widely thought that Labour got a boost from Remainers, but the leadership argues that it was their leadership and socialist p9icies gave them the edge (although they still lost )
The Mainstream Media including the Murdoch owned titles are unrelentingly pro Brexit.. despite this Remain seems to be consistently ahead in the polls.. but it lacks leadership and a cohesive power base, being spread across the two main parties..
Being stuck with first-past-the-post single-member districts sticks you with a two-party system, means that the parties always contain people at ideological loggerheads with each other, and means that frequently the more popular points of view never manage to get a party representing them and get underrepresented.
This defect is fixed in proportional representation systems.
This defect is fixed in proportional representation systems.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
India has a first past the post system - and a multi party system - though the coalitions are basically around 2 major parties (the third one got dissipated - though they actually had 2 unfinished terms of power).
Proportional representation systems have other issues ofcourse (like in Italy). Just think DUP - but a multitude of them.
With a CAST system firmly in place..... Only a revolution will solve India's lack of freedom and opportunity. Sad, but history has proven time and again, that power entrenched is only removed by force.
Singer3000
Member
If you didn't hear any debate about the Northern Ireland border problem in the run-up to the referendum then you weren't paying attention. I heard it from the other side of the world! For example, Blair and Major, two ex PM's from opposite sides, gave a somewhat historic joint statement from Derry saying that the issue threatened the Northern Ireland peace process and could split the UK.
There are clear ways around the problem. Corbyn favours a customs union with the EU, which does solve the specific problem but creates a whole lot more. The likes of Boris Johnson favour the technology solution, with so-called invisible customs checks. This has been described by many as either technologically impossible or incompatible with WTO obligations, so it was curious to see one its biggest opponents, the Irish Premier, advocating this week this very plan, should the UK leave on a "No-deal" basis:
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
The May government and European Commission favour the fudge of the Northern Ireland backstop, which is essentially Corbyn's plan until Johnson's can be proven to be workable.
During the subsequent 2017 election, parties that had manifesto commitments to implement Brexit received >85% of the vote. This includes the Labour Party, which quite explicitly had (and still has) a policy of implementing Brexit. I quote from its manifesto: "Labour accepts the referendum result and a Labour government will put the national interest first".
The only mainstream nationwide party that was seeking a second confirming referendum was the Lib Dems, who received only 7% of the vote, with their vote share reduced by 0.5% points on even their catastrophically poor 2015 result.
Drilling in on Scotland, the very pro-EU Scottish Nationalists lost 21 of their 56 seats losing a massive 13% of their vote share. The major beneficiaries there were the Tories.
Saying that the decision to hold a referendum was a political game of a single party is to re-invent history. In 2015, Parliament voted by 544 to 53 to hold a referendum on Britain's EU membership, with the only MPs voting against being the Scottish Nationalists. Even the Lib Dems voted in favour of the referendum. Both Labour and the Conservative Party were equally fearful of UKIP at the ballot box. It was also generally recognized that the issue needed to be resolved, with all main parties having previously promised and failed to deliver on promises for a referendum on EU related treaty change.
In terms of the Murdoch media, broadsheet The Times has been generally anti-brexit, tabloid The Sun pro-brexit and since long before its recent sale, Sky News has been willing to whip up a sensationalist frenzy on any side of the debate. If you follow its anchor presenters on Twitter you will see plainly their personal views (strongly pro Remain). Of the rest of the UK media, the very pro Brexit Daily Mail had a change of editor in June 2018 and is now run by a heavily leaning Remain supporter, which is reflected in a far more complicated editorial line than previously. By far the most influential media group in the UK of course is the BBC, which is an institutionally Remain leaning organisation, evident not just in its coverage of political debates but in the output from its entertainment presenters and comedy stars.
You can have more than 2 stable parties in a first-past-the-post system if the other parties are regional (think Scottish National Party). That's what happened in India.
It's math (game theory to be specific).
I think history shows that the Italy type problems with proportional systems are preferable to the catastrophic failure mode of FPTP systems, which is where neither major party represents the majority view on the crucial issues of the day. When neither party represents the second-largest, near-majority view it's almost as bad.
In particular, Spain managed to handle a massive political transition without disaster *only* because it had a mostly-proportional system; the changes which have happened in the political system in recent years , making the parties in Parliament reflect the views of the people far more than it did before, would not have been possible in an FPTP system without significantly more violence.
(Please, nobody bring up Israel; its proportional system is definitely no good, but that's at least partly due to disenfranchising half the population, meaning that the second-most-popular view isn't represented; there aren't any similar countries.)
Last edited:
May could resign to get her deal through. Boris and Rees-Mogg ready to back her - history will then record May as the single point of failure. DUP won't but maybe some Labour MPs, with Corbyn's unofficial permission. Other votes today - will be fascinating.
My update:
No deal - 20%
Hard Brexit following Article 50 extension - 10%
Theresa May deal - 45%
Norway/Soft Brexit following extension - 15%
Remain following referendum - 10%
My update:
No deal - 20%
Hard Brexit following Article 50 extension - 10%
Theresa May deal - 45%
Norway/Soft Brexit following extension - 15%
Remain following referendum - 10%
EVNow
Well-Known Member
India’s caste system now has made the representatives proportional to the make up of the electorate by caste ! Of course the lower castes still face stupendous economic and social distress - not unlike blacks/Latinos here. Would you recommend power in the US be removed by force as well ?
I believe this is out of character for May, who seems to be more focused on her own personal position than on accomplishing anything.
I would never recommend US force...it must be organically created....The US should shut down their Bases in the world...and let the rest of the world collapse for lack of taking care of themselves.
Out of character maybe - but she has only gone and done it! She will resign once we have left (with her deal being the carrot) - unclear on all the edge cases.
TEN!!! posts moved to Snippiness. That is because I was feeling charitable, although 1 or 2 of them needed to go with the rest solely out of continuity.
===>When someone posts something egregiously pathetic, ignore it and move the thread back onto track. If the next person refuses to avoid taking up the bait, ignore that one, too. The number of you who just can't resist, and pile on helterskelter, make every last one of you qualified to be taken back to junior high school.<===
===>When someone posts something egregiously pathetic, ignore it and move the thread back onto track. If the next person refuses to avoid taking up the bait, ignore that one, too. The number of you who just can't resist, and pile on helterskelter, make every last one of you qualified to be taken back to junior high school.<===
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Seems to me - they need to hold a series of 2 choice votes to get the best option since no solution gets a majority.
Last nights' votes can be split into 2 groups:
Those relevant now:
No deal 160-400
Revoke Artixle 50 184-293
Second vote 268-295
Malthouse 139-422
Those relevant following accepting May's deal:
Common Market 2.0 188-283
EFTA 65-377
CU 264-272
Labour Plan 237-307
This group is relevant after accepting May's deal according to May and EU. However, had there been a majority, they could have altered the exit deal. The underlying elephant in the room remains.
People and MPs have not voted for a simpler version of these:
My update:
No deal - 20%
Hard Brexit following Article 50 extension - 20%
Theresa May deal - 40%
Norway/Soft Brexit following extension - 15%
Remain following referendum - 5%
Those relevant now:
No deal 160-400
Revoke Artixle 50 184-293
Second vote 268-295
Malthouse 139-422
Those relevant following accepting May's deal:
Common Market 2.0 188-283
EFTA 65-377
CU 264-272
Labour Plan 237-307
This group is relevant after accepting May's deal according to May and EU. However, had there been a majority, they could have altered the exit deal. The underlying elephant in the room remains.
People and MPs have not voted for a simpler version of these:
- Do we want to do trade deals with the rest of the world and have a reduced relationship with EU (and potentially causing NI problems) - hard - cheap iPhones
- Norway or similar - soft - quality stds retained
My update:
No deal - 20%
Hard Brexit following Article 50 extension - 20%
Theresa May deal - 40%
Norway/Soft Brexit following extension - 15%
Remain following referendum - 5%
Singer3000
Member
I think at this point we can probably amend the immediate odds to:
- Leave in May 2019 with T May's deal - 5%
- Leave in May 2019 with a permanent customs union in the political declaration - 5%
- No deal in Apr/May 2019 - 1%
- Extension period of at least a year - 89%
- Everything else - 0%
May's deal cannot pass as it is without the DUP backing it and they still won't budge. Maybe there's a slim chance they change their mind tonight but reports say this is highly unlikely.
In my view there's an equally slim possibility of an immediate exit according to the customs union plan that narrowly lost the indicative vote this week. While there's a slight chance that Parliament might be able to back it, there's almost no chance that this government would do so, as it would represent a Conservative PM defying almost her entire party to implement a Labour policy, a policy that is explicitly counter to the last Conservative manifesto. The only path I could see to this happening is if the EU refuse any further extensions and say it's No Deal or permanent customs union, and May caves.
While No Deal might be the default position in law, laws are set by the Government and Parliament, neither of which are prepared to leave with No Deal. The 1% chance of immediate No Deal is therefore only there because there's always a black swan possibility of one of the EU nations vetoing any further extension and Parliament still not getting round to signing off the Withdrawal Agreement.
So looks to me like:
1) a long extension, followed by
2) a Tory leadership process, followed by
3) a general election.
What happens after that depends upon the outcome of 2) and 3), both of which are utterly unpredictable. But I'll try anyway:
The chances of a Norway style exit are very low indeed, because neither main party will run in the election with a policy of continuing free movement.
The customs union option is basically the same likelihood as Labour forming the government. Why not second ref? Well, Corbyn has had plenty of time to unambiguously say he wants another referendum with Remain on the ballot and he has not. It's possible in the white heat of an election he caves in and promises this as the only way he can see to win the election. But:
- There's a yawning gap in public opinion between "Would vote Remain in a second referendum" and "Want there to be second referendum".
- Corbyn's media outriders this week (see for e.g. Owen Jones) have made clear that Corbyn doesn't see the need for a second ref if the proposed flavour of exit is according to his own recipe (i.e. customs union).
- The vast majority of Labour's top target seats (and those most vulnerable to loss) voted quite strongly to Leave, which makes explicitly promising a second ref an unpromising electoral strategy.
"No Deal" in 2020 could happen if the Conservative Party choose a strongly pro-Leave candidate (highly likely), win a healthy majority (possible) but then fail to further improve the language on the Irish Backstop (likely). So this might end up being where we get to in 2020, given First Past the Post voting system, something like 45% of the country now thinking No Deal the best outcome and given how poor Corbyn's net favourability ratings have become.
Of further note, the Tory leadership election may end up with a further handful of pro-Remain Tory MPs resigning the whip, in combination with the active de-selection attempts against people like Grieve. So even if the Tory majority is only slim after an election, the parliamentary party may be far more unified in favour of a crunchy bowl of No Deal Brexit than it is today.
Such a "No Deal" outcome would almost certainly not follow the fire and brimstone predictions of some here, as it would be flagged well in advance, with very many side deals to take the sting out of the process. In summary, fellow TSLA stockholders, I think you can quite safely chill out about how Brexit will impact your portfolio value.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Some of the Tory Pols who may replace May have even worse ratings
Singer3000
Member
I would venture that comment being somewhat a mischaracterisation of the data, especially given the very small number of Don’t Knows for Corbyn.Some of the Tory Pols who may replace May have even worse ratings
Under approval voting, it's pretty clear what's most popular with Parliament:
(1) Second vote
(2) Customs union
So, have a second vote. What should you vote on? Well, that was also answered:
"Should we (A) stay in the EU or should we (B) leave the EU and have a customs union with the EU instead"
Of course they will not do anything as sensible as to have a vote on that
Similar threads
