Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

[clubchamp98]

Main issue is nothing was decided on what Brexit actually meant prior to the referendum.

Ultimately if the government had delivered on the referendum result by moving the UK to a relationship similar to that of Norway, then they would probably have gotten a clear majority for that in the HoC and the country would have gone 'ok then, fair enough' - with only the fringes on each side unhappy with that.

The problem with a Tory government doing that is that it wouldn't have satisfied Farage and he would still have been beating the drum (as he's entitled to do) that this was not delivering on the result etc. And while it wouldn't have made enough of an impact to win many seats for Farage, it might have done enough damage to make it tough for the Tories to win too many future elections.

So, then we had May painting herself into a corner as a Remain voter but trying to make sure everyone knew she wasn't going to take us out on a technicality and it had to be full steam ahead with getting out. Trigger A50 straight away without a proper plan or even working out what she could get through parliament.

Then she had an election which ended up leaving her having to rely on DUP votes. Which made NI a very inconvenient problem and one that they could no longer sling under a bus - as they almost certainly would have done if she'd got her 60 to 100 majority she thought she might get.

Ultimately a compromise from the start of the UK leaving the EU and but staying in Customs Union / EFTA is the only possible form of Brexit there is or could be a majority for. There is clearly not a majority for No Deal and given the water that has flowed under the bridge since 2016, there may well be a majority for Remain now, even if Brexit remained as this blank canvas that it was in 2016.

If the EU had conceded a few tit bits to Cameron when he went there we would not have had a referendum.
But they proved you can’t change them from within .
They called Cameron’s bluff and we are where we are.

 

[IanM]

I think the issue was that Mrs May wasnt really trying to leave.

When you look at the balance of trade between us and the UK, her position was too daft to be an accident.

 

[Foxholer]

If the EU had conceded a few tit bits to Cameron when he went there we would not have had a referendum.
But they proved you can’t change them from within .
They called Cameron’s bluff and we are where we are.

They did! But those concessions were not particularly great and simply ignored by devoted Brexiteers!

Anyway! It's pointless trying to analyse what caused the chaos! 'We are where we are' indeed! Let's get on and get it done! Preferably with a deal, but without one if necessary!

 

[Tashyboy]

well well well... so after 1 week facing the scrutiny of elected representatives, Boris has decided enough is enough, and has packed up the whole place for 5 weeks.

In terms of Boris's week last week, surely no strategy involved it going as badly as that;
* the threat of removal of the whip still resulting in the loss of 21 (now 22) Tory MPs
* his brother not being able to stomach things and packing it in
* the opposition denying him the early election
* being put under so much pressure by MPs and journalists at every opportunity (and generally not coping well enough on those occasions)

It's clear now Boris's strategy was to go to the country on 15th October as the voice of the most pro-Brexit political force, with the Brexit Party standing down. Winning a lot of pro-Brexit seats from Labour and possibly holding onto a few coin tosses by playing on the Corbyn factor to middle or higher income remainers. Also banking on Lib Dems being strong enough to stop Labour winning a few seats in remain areas and Tories to win a few 3 way marginals due to being the only pro Brexit candidate).

The arithmetic is tricky, but it's entirely possible he could have won a comfortable majority on 35% of the vote. (assuming votes were split Con 35%, Lab 30%, Lib Debs 20, others 15%).
Blair won a majority of around 60 seats in 2005 with a 35 / 32 / 22 split for the 3 main UK parties (albeit that was with 40 odd Scottish seats).

He could then have gone to the EU that week and claimed to have a clear mandate for No Deal on 31st October and threatened very plausibly to pull that trigger if a better deal was not forthcoming. Not sure if this would have worked, but it's possible. At the very least, even in the event of No Deal happening, he has 5 years in office with a reasonable majority to try and reduce the impact of No Deal and create a completely different narrative in 5 years time.

Now, it is more likely there will be an election in November or December when he will have broken his 'no if's, no buts' 31st October promise. The Brexit Party will be less likely to stand candidates down and even the ideologues in his own party might have abandoned him. Also gives more time to the opposition to potentially agree a strategy in England & Wales not to split the pro-EU vote.

All in all, a very decent week for remain and we are potentially closer to a 2nd referendum with realistic choices on the ballot paper and a WHOLE lot more information for voters to make their mind up on.

You know what Grant, am not to sure it's been a good week for either side of the discussion. Labour still on QT that they are still clueless. Euro MPs shouting about an EU army which will bog some folk off, coz it was scaremongering by ( lying )Farage, who will now love hearing that, but more importantly his supporters will.Amber Rudd resigns because more effort is now spent on leaving than staying. Yet we are only 8 weeks away, what we supposed to do. No planning at All. Yet BJ is in Ireland trying to build bridges. The situation has gone from crap deal to any deal to stopping a no deal coz they cannot agree on any deal, forgetting that EU say there's no other deal. Bercow has chucked out his teddy, which is odd coz I asked a question re him the other day and it didn't get much interest. Nope not seen a great deal to say we won this week on points. All the time the clock is ticking down.

 

[Tashyboy]

If the EU had conceded a few tit bits to Cameron when he went there we would not have had a referendum.
But they proved you can’t change them from within .
They called Cameron’s bluff and we are where we are.

^^^^^ This, I said at the time, when the EU passed the deal offered to TM, it took 20 minutes. I have spent three years listening to remain and Brexiteers arguing who is to blame for this mess. Some may well look towards Brussels and rightly so. I called it three years ago. There will be no deal unless someone blinks and it don't look like it will be Boris. If it does become no deal, I see an almighty fall out in Europe. If the EU had sorted out a deal for all and left the door open we would not be in this mess, nor Europe in years to come.

 

[SocketRocket]

You know what Grant, am not to sure it's been a good week for either side of the discussion. Labour still on QT that they are still clueless. Euro MPs shouting about an EU army which will bog some folk off, coz it was scaremongering by ( lying )Farage, who will now love hearing that, but more importantly his supporters will.Amber Rudd resigns because more effort is now spent on leaving than staying. Yet we are only 8 weeks away, what we supposed to do. No planning at All. Yet BJ is in Ireland trying to build bridges. The situation has gone from crap deal to any deal to stopping a no deal coz they cannot agree on any deal, forgetting that EU say there's no other deal. Bercow has chucked out his teddy, which is odd coz I asked a question re him the other day and it didn't get much interest. Nope not seen a great deal to say we won this week on points. All the time the clock is ticking down.

Bruce made a great point on QT. 'Labour want to form an interim Government, go to the EU and negotiate a good deal to leave then hold a referendum where they will campaign against the deal they negotiated. You couldn't make it up.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Bercow going, before he is pushed.

https://www.politicshome.com/news/u...enied-peerage-following-brexit-feud-ministers

Making it such that this parliament picks his replacement.

 

[spongebob59]

When MPs have been talking a LOT about how its terrible they have no time to talk about important matters of state, not sure it's a great look to then spend an hour and a half (so far) saying how marvellous the Speaker is

 

[Hobbit]

Personally will miss Bercow. He does seem to love himself, but it is hugely important to have a very independent minded individual in that role.

Lets hope his replacement is of a similar mindset.

Watched a lot of Parliament, and him. Thought he was great in the early days but I feel his impartiality is now very much in question. He's right to stand against the Govt if they were breaking parliamentary rules... not sure he's blurred the lines in recent times. The last intervention of his to an MP speaking from a sedentary position went on, and on, and on, and on.

 

[Hitdaball]

Why would you include avoidance? Have you got an ISA? This is one example of perfectly legal tax avoidance. Absolutely nothing wrong with it and within the law.

That you are using an ISA as an example of tax avoidance in the context of this suggests that you don’t really want to have a serious discussion.

 

[Hitdaball]

Twaddle!

Btw. I believe 'incredible' would have been more appropriate!

Sure, I’ll take English language lessons from one of the twaddlers . 😂

 

[Hobbit]

That you are using an ISA as an example of tax avoidance in the context of this suggests that you don’t really want to have a serious discussion.

Both are taking advantage of tax laws. Where do you draw the line on what tax avoidance is ok and what isn't? If the man in the street is saving 20% on his tax, and a company is saving 15% on Corporation Tax who is right? If you've got 5 million people saving 20% on their ISA's won't that add up to a big number?

Sure, I’ll take English language lessons from one of the twaddlers . 😂

Please have a massive like for this one! Oh, and another massive like too!!

 

[Hitdaball]

Both are taking advantage of tax laws. Where do you draw the line on what tax avoidance is ok and what isn't? If the man in the street is saving 20% on his tax, and a company is saving 15% on Corporation Tax who is right? If you've got 5 million people saving 20% on their ISA's won't that add up to a big number?



Please have a massive like for this one! Oh, and another massive like too!!

ISAs are a government initiative to allow folk to save tax free with fully defined operating limits.

Tax avoidance is looking for loop holes on laws and regulations to not pay tax where the rules and regulations might otherwise expect one to do so.

Clearly in any case potential tax lost on ISA interest is not included in any estimates of tax avoidance.

I honestly just don’t get it, genuinely. We should all be really strongly behind people paying tax as intended and closing down loopholes and offshore banking to hide profits but it seems not.

I think the word I’m looking for is flabbergasted but it’s probably isn’t and someone can come along and correct me in a bit.

 

[Hobbit]

ISAs are a government initiative to allow folk to save tax free with fully defined operating limits.

Tax avoidance is looking for loop holes on laws and regulations to not pay tax where the rules and regulations might otherwise expect one to do so.

Clearly in any case potential tax lost on ISA interest is not included in any estimates of tax avoidance.

I honestly just don’t get it, genuinely. We should all be really strongly behind people paying tax as intended and closing down loopholes and offshore banking to hide profits but it seems not.

I think the word I’m looking for is flabbergasted but it’s probably isn’t and someone can come along and correct me in a bit.

I'm very much in support of people paying tax. I'm not keen on the UK shutting a loop hole if it then drives that business to set up somewhere else. If every country stopped it at the same time, yes I'm all for it, but not the potential to see businesses leave the UK.

 

[Foxholer]

ISAs are a government initiative to allow folk to save tax free with fully defined operating limits.
...

Re the bold bit...
= 'avoid paying tax'.

I think the word I’m looking for is flabbergasted but it’s probably isn’t and someone can come along and correct me in a bit.

No! That's perfect!

As for ISAs versus other, legal, forms of reducing tax liability. There's no difference as far as I'm concerned. Both use the reduction of tax as an incentive to put cash into the specific scheme.

 

[robinthehood]

oof, save tax where you can. i'm in a number of tax efficient savings and share schemes, a SIPP and I also make charitable contributions in a tax fee way as that works out better for me and the charity.

 

[Hitdaball]

Re the bold bit...
= 'avoid paying tax'.


.

Its unclear to me what point you are arguing. Using your “logic” having a tax code is tax avoidance by only paying tax on a portion of salary due to government regulation to allow it?

 

[spongebob59]

Olly Robbins to receive a Knighthood on Theresa May's orders. Why does Westminster continually reward big losers? Olly Robbins failed to grasp the opportunities Brexit provides and sought to trick MPs into voting for an EU Surrender Treaty. He should be jailed, not Knighted.

 

[spongebob59]

In a last-minute desperate attempt to prevent prorogation, remain MPs have submitted a request for a Humble Address motion – an archaic procedure only used three times since 1866 – to force certain Special Advisers to handover their personal and private communications sent via Facebook, Whatsapp, iMessage, and private email, among other methods.

How about the SpAds agree to hand over their private messages but only if the Remain MPs demanding they do so also hand over *their* private messages too. I’d love to see their traitorous collusion with Brussels bureaucrats and foreign politicians in black and white.

 

[ger147]

In a last-minute desperate attempt to prevent prorogation, remain MPs have submitted a request for a Humble Address motion – an archaic procedure only used three times since 1866 – to force certain Special Advisers to handover their personal and private communications sent via Facebook, Whatsapp, iMessage, and private email, among other methods.

How about the SpAds agree to hand over their private messages but only if the Remain MPs demanding they do so also hand over *their* private messages too. I’d love to see their traitorous collusion with Brussels bureaucrats and foreign politicians in black and white.

It is not an attempt to block prorogation, parliament can't block prorogation.