Zompist Bboard Again

Thank god only the Spelman/Cooper amendment passed and the Malthouse lunacy failed. For a second I thought both might pass, even though one tries to rule out no deal and the other is a trojan horse by the ERG designed to create no deal by making un-negotiable demands. MPs who want no deal should have the courage of their convictions and not turn the country into a laughing stock by demanding a negotiating position that everyone knows isn't going to work.

It would be typical of the entire process is Parliament simultaneously objected to no deal and demanded a plan guaranteed to produce no deal. At least now the message is consistent, although it still leaves open the question of how to achieve a deal.

There are only two obvious options to achieve that, May's deal and remain. May has said that if Parliament doesn't back a deal by next week, she'll ask for a long extension, but the EU isn't going to renegotiate absent a massive change in red lines, and maybe not even then, and they're also not going to agree an extension without an appealing reason. Parliament doesn't want May's deal, but they're unable or unwilling to replace May, and May would need to cooperate to either revoke article 50 or to drop some big red lines. So I guess it's a question of who blinks first, or if no-one does and we're still fighting on brexit day.

To be fair to May, her recent semi-surrender to Parliament is the first time she's seemed sane and living in the same reality as the rest of us since losing her majority. Her dictatorial and mulish style is what's created this mess, and if in despair she'll actually give ground to people other than the ERG that's probably a good thing.

The easiest way to solve this would be a referendum on Irish Reunification. But, last I heard, there were three "no"s. While I remember reunification and a hard boarder, I can't remember the third. 'Course, something may have changed since then.

yangfiretiger121 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:01 pm The easiest way to solve this would be a referendum on Irish Reunification. But, last I heard, there were three "no"s. While I remember reunification and a hard boarder, I can't remember the third. 'Course, something may have changed since then.

Do you seriously believe that the DUP would be up for Irish reunification?

Honestly, no. I believe it's another disconnect between politicians and constituents, though, because the vid I saw on it mentioned the majority of Northern Irish citizens favored a referendum and would vote for reunification.

yangfiretiger121 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:20 pm Honestly, no. I believe it's another disconnect between politicians and constituents, though, because the vid I saw on it mentioned the the majority of Northern Irish citizens favored a referendum and would vote for reunification.

Does the Republic really want them back right now though? They definitely don't want a hard border, but NI is a moneypit and I imagine there's a lot to like about having someone else subsidise the place.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:10 pm

yangfiretiger121 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:01 pm The easiest way to solve this would be a referendum on Irish Reunification. But, last I heard, there were three "no"s. While I remember reunification and a hard boarder, I can't remember the third. 'Course, something may have changed since then.

Do you seriously believe that the DUP would be up for Irish reunification?

Of course not. But if some kind of majority for it could be somehow cobbled together in the UK Parliament, the results of the referendum itself might be closer than you'd guess from past political results. Apparently the Nationalist and Unionist communities are pretty close to parity in the North now.

If there was a referendum - let's say, one called by a future PM Corbyn - it might turn out that the only, and crucial, group of "swing voters" would be the most moderate of the moderate Protestants. And if there should be any signs of that in the runup to a referendum, we might get to see the spectacle of Sinn Feiners making speeches about how much they love protestants. Which might be fun to watch.

chris_notts wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:22 pm

yangfiretiger121 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:20 pm Honestly, no. I believe it's another disconnect between politicians and constituents, though, because the vid I saw on it mentioned the the majority of Northern Irish citizens favored a referendum and would vote for reunification.

Does the Republic really want them back right now though? They definitely don't want a hard border, but NI is a moneypit and I imagine there's a lot to like about having someone else subsidise the place.

Not to mention that, if Dáil elections in a united Ireland would produce a hung Dáil (pretty likely), one or more Unionist parties (if they don't boycott the election) might get to decide who governs Ireland.

But in the end, I guess south of the border nationalist/patriotic feelings would win out over such concerns in a referendum.

Meanwhile, repeating something I posted elsewhere earlier: The attitude of the British Parliament towards Brexit reminds me of the phases during my depression when there was nothing I felt like doing, but I didn't feel like doing nothing, either.

Raphael wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:33 pm Meanwhile, repeating something I posted elsewhere earlier: The attitude of the British Parliament towards Brexit reminds me of the phases during my depression when there was nothing I felt like doing, but I didn't feel like doing nothing, either.

Do you think a bit of parliamentary CBT might help matters? Or perhaps a straight-jacket and a padded cell in a few specific cases.

Ireland would indeed accept Northern Ireland if it came to it, in my opinion. My impression is that while there's no active appetite to do anything about the Partition, there's still very much a feeling that NI is part of Ireland. Ulster is taught as one of the four kingdoms of Ireland, NI people are Irish citizens if they want to be, there are many All-Ireland organisations (since we're in rugby season at the moment: "Ireland" are the national rugby team of the Island of Ireland, not of the Republic of Ireland), and the GAA operates in both countries.

I think that it would be much like the re-unification of Germany - there'd be grumbling about the economics, particularly from technocrats, but ultimately it wouldn't be feasible to try to prevent it.

----

That said, a referendum could be a terrible thing. The majority might side with reunification - but there'd be a minority who didn't. In particular, I'm not sure any UK Prime Minister could ever offer such a referendum - it would probably be seen as meddling in northern irish politics, which is taboo. If Stormont called for it, it would probably have to be granted, but I don't think Stormont could do that, as it would require both sides to agree. Not to mention, there is no Stormont, because they can't even agree on that.

I think NI should be independent with special inter-parliamentary relations with both Ireland and the UK (which I think should be split as well) and having both the President of Ireland and Queen Lizzy as joint heads of state. Currently it already has a special inter-parliamentary relationship with Ireland even though it isn't independent; this could just deepen after independence without necessarily joining the country.

mèþru wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 8:55 am I'd have imagined that the failure to effectively oppose no deal would weaken Labour and Corbyn's position within Labour. The Conservatives obviously will also be hurt and to a much greater extent. I think that Brexit will stay a top issue for at least a year after it actually finishes, so I don't think any party who is suffering from Brexit being an issue will benefit from no deal for a while.

I'm sure you guys know British politics better though, so if Sal's version sounds more realistic I guess Labour wins.

Well, I mean, I can see your theory, and it does make sense. I guess if Corbyn were weaker, I might agree with it - "you didn't stop No Deal!" could be the party's way of trying to get rid of him, in the same way that "you didn't stop Leave!" was. But the thing is, I can't see how Labour can now get rid of Corbyn without a disasterous election - and No Deal would make it hard to see Labour doing terribly at the local elections. There's no serious opposition to Corbyn, other than the machinations of Watson, who I don't think has much support, and the existence of TIG now means that the Blairites are being pulled toward leaving rather than rebelling. So I don't think Labour will have a civil war over this. I mean, don't get me wrong, they might, they can have a civil war over anything.

Absent a civil war, I think Labour are fine. Yes, there'll be an 'a pox on all your houses' share of the vote, but it's a two party system, you've got to vote for someone, and there'll also be a 'get rid of the Tories at all costs' impulse too. In the long run, I hope some people will drift to the Lib Dems, but they don't seem in a position to go out and grab Labour voters right now (nor the Greens). And the sooner the whole issue is dead and buried, the sooner that danger for Labour goes away.

I guess where I would agree is in Scotland (and I guess maybe Wales), where the SNP's strong anti-Brexit message and Labour's vacillation may harm the latter north of the border.

~~~And so it waaaaaaaaaa-as that later
As the PM told her tale
That her face, at first just ghostly
Turned a whiter shade of pale~~~

Anyway: now everything is fucked up.

So, the vote today was meant to be: will we have No Deal on the 29th?

Instead, the Spelman (/Cooper) amendment changed this to: will we ever have No Deal?

At this point, the government reversed its promise to allow its MPs a 'free vote' of conscience, and issued a three-line whip against the motion. A three-line whip is the strongest exhortation a government can issue - it means not just that anyone who defies it must resign any government post, but that they may be in danger of being kicked out of the party if they do it again.

In this case, however, May's MPs, and even her own ministers basically said 'fuck you' and voted their conscience anyway (or in some cases abstained, which is usually considered the same as a vote against once it gets to three-line-whip level, unless you're actually undergoing life-saving surgery at the precise time of the vote or something).

Convention dictates that those ministers all be sacked immediately. In fact, convention dictates that they resign immediately, and that failing that they then must be sacked. Because if the government has demanded they vote one way in the most threatening and imperative terms it is possible to issue, and they ignore it, and they're not in any way punished for that, then there is then no incentive for anyone to obey the government ever again. It's saying "even if you do the absolutely unthinkable, we still won't even rap you on the wrist".

On the other hand, sacking a dozen ministers overnight might well mean the end of the government.

So... it's all fucked up.

----------------

That's just it's all fucked up one. It's all fucked up two: nobody really knows what just happened. Apparently some No 10 aides were briefing ministers that it was ok to defy a three-line whip, which is... the opposite of what those words mean. Apparently, neither the Chief Whip nor the Prime Minister actually knew what the fuck was going on, and now it's not entirely clear what did go on... it seems as though the Whips were briefing one way, and No 10 was briefing directly against them, but it's not clear what, if anything, the Prime Minister was saying, or whether she had any control over what the different wings of her government were doing. Apparently Cabinet was in "pandemonium".

-----------

It's all fucked up three: this motion declares Britain will NEVER leave with no deal. Which effectively says, we'll postpone Brexit until we've agreed to whatever the EU offers us. Not a great negotiating position. And although it's a clear message from Parliament, it has no legal force - we're still leaving with no deal on the 29th. Then again, it does seem like an indicator that Parliament will take action to prevent that, and sod what the PM wants. But then again, that action is either agreeing with the PM, or postponing Brexit. And that takes a new vote, like the one tomorrow, and it's not clear THAT can pass EITHER!


-----

It's all fucked up four: the PM says, not unreasonably, that the length of the proposed extension has to depend on what it's for. If we agree a deal but too late, we'll need a short 'technical extension' of a couple of months to implement it. If we don't agree a deal, we'll need a longer extension to restart negotiations.

So, the deadline she's set is the 20th. To avoid a 'long' postponement, we need to agree a deal. But what deal? Is there a deal?

Oh, look, the Prime Minister has found a deal! It's the same deal. But it hasn't been accepted. So between now and the 20th, i.e. next week, we need a third "meaningful vote" to accept it.


Oh, and the rumours are that the PM is expecting to lose that, so is making plans for a fourth Meaningful Vote before Brexit Day.

But! At this point we run into the problem that this is brazenly unconstitutional. Erskine May clearly states that the same bill may not be debated twice in the same session. Exceptions might be made when circumstances have changed (making it no longer, as it were, the same), but voting one week on the same proposal that was rejected by a historic margin only the week before is a clear and unambiguous no-no. Constitutionally, May would need to prorogue Parliament and start a new session (thus stopping all her other legislation dead in its tracks). She currently looks set to ignore that rule. But the Speaker, Bercow, who seems to be a total arsehole but has at least shown himself able to stand up to the PM, is ultimately in charge of what Parliament votes on, and seems likely to tell the government to fuck off.




------

EDIT: oh, in a marvellous twist of Everything Is Fucked Up Now, it turns out that one of the Whips actually defied himself and abstained, in spite of commanding himself not to.

EDIT: so, last year a guy called Andrew Griffiths was found to have sent thousands of "depraved" text messages of a "violent sexual nature" to his female constituents, and accused of bullying and inappropriate touching, and as a result he was suspended from the Conservative Party. They allowed him to rejoin in December, the night before the vote of no confidence in the PM, because they needed every vote they could scrape out of the barrel. Tonight, exhaustion and chaos and recriminations meant that the whips were all summoned out of the chamber... and the party turned to Griffiths to act as a substitute whip for the remaining business of the evening. Not a great look.

EDIT: so, the person who allegedly said it was OK to defy the whip was May's right hand man - many MPs have personally named him as the one who spoke to them. But No 10 have instead blamed a random underling.

EDIT: so, some in the ERG have said they've vote for MV3, or at any rate MV4, to prevent postponement. However, other ERGers are apoplectic with rage that their side had to resign as ministers, but Remainers are being allowed to defy a three-line whip with no repercussions. One suggestion is that ERG may vote for MV3 only on the explicit promise of May's immediate resignation.

EDIT: so, coincidentally, Sajid Javid chose today to sent out helpful advice to all Tory MPs graciously offering himself to appear in any electoral or party-political pamphlets they might need to send out in order to highlight his role as saviour of the nation from the scourge of knife crime. He's dedicated a whole hour of his time tomorrow for posing for photos with other MPs.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Salmoneus wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 5:47 pm Anyway: now everything is fucked up.

Monumentally so. I agree with the article in a Czech newspaper a few days ago which said that the "stupid" decision to hold a referendum in the first place has brought British politics to a place where its brand of democracy cannot function.

At least the Sun has its priorities right: "MADDIE'S ALIVE" says today's front page,

Salmoneus wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 5:47 pm EDIT: oh, in a marvellous twist of Everything Is Fucked Up Now, it turns out that one of the Whips actually defied himself and abstained, in spite of commanding himself not to.

I've been searching for the ideal metaphor for the whole business, and this seems to be it.

Well, we've now voted to postpone Brexit.

Some issues here:

- we haven't postponed Brexit. MPs have commanded the Prime Minister to seek a postponement from the EU. The EU don't have to say yes. And MPs can't force the PM to try as hard as possible to convince them. The PM may now be ringing up EU leaders and begging them to refuse her own request...

- the PM gets to choose how long that postponement is. She says that if MPs accept Meaningful Vote III (This Time Its Meaningful) she'll seek a postponement until June; if they refuse, she'll make it be much longer (if the EU let her)...

- if MV3 is rejected, it's not clear what happens. Since the PM won't put forward any alternative plan, and MPs won't take charge (an amendment to do that lost by two votes; it's not clear how a negotiation with the EU using the PM as a proxy who opposed Parliament's policies would really work anyway), it's hard to see how this can ever end.

- MV3 remains unconstitutional.

According to the Telegraph, moreover, an extension requires approval from every single EU member state. I can easily imagine some wild card--Hungary? Italy? Bulgaria? vetoing an extension and casting the UK into the abyss. Particularly with only two weeks to go, there's little time for negotiation or threats from the responsible members of the union.

Frislander wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:02 pmAt this point I would rather have the Queen march into the House of Commons, proclaim "fuck the lot of you you cunts" and bring back absolute monarchy than this satanic torture

it is good that ten years down the line we can finally all agree that moldbug was right

Everyone, rejoice! All problems have been solved! There's no longer any need to worry! A glorious future awaits Britain!

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... new-guinea