The Brexit Thread

[dpedin]

This could be interesting next week?

Tories deliberately kicking off a war with EU again as an attempt to deflect from all their other shit. Nothing better for them than to get the racists and Brexit Ultras all wired up. Between this, Rwanda, imperial measures and creating strikes with marxist(?) trade unions they are going full steam ahead with the recipe that won them the last election - right wing racism, jingoism and getting the wagons into a circle to fight off the foreigners. This aint going to end well for anyone and national strikes over the summer and a trade war with the EU will be a complete disaster followed by a country full of folk unable to heat their houses next winter. To keep the Blonde Bumblecunt in power they are happy to take us all down with them and create division and mayhem in the process.

With the NI Protocol/GFA hopefully the big boys - the EU and the US - will enter the fray and tell the Blonde Bumblecunt and his mad bunch of Brexit Ultras where to get off.

https://news.sky.com/story/legislation- ... l-12632360

[Hal Jordan]

Arron Banks loses his SLAPP case against Carole Cadwalladr. Oh dear, how sad, never mind.

[SaintK]

Arron Banks loses his SLAPP case against Carole Cadwalladr. Oh dear, how sad, never mind.

Quite!!!

The multimillionaire Brexit backer Arron Banks has lost his libel action against the Observer and Guardian journalist Carole Cadwalladr, which was criticised as an attack on free speech.

Banks, who funded the pro-Brexit Leave.EU campaign group, sued Cadwalladr personally over two instances in which she said the businessman was lying about his relationship with the Russian state – one in a Ted Talk and the other in a tweet.

Her lawyer Gavin Millar QC had argued the case was an attempt to silence the journalist’s reporting on “matters of the highest public interest”, namely campaign finance, foreign money and the use of social media messaging and personal data in the context of the EU referendum.

[I like neeps]

This could be interesting next week?

Tories deliberately kicking off a war with EU again as an attempt to deflect from all their other shit. Nothing better for them than to get the racists and Brexit Ultras all wired up. Between this, Rwanda, imperial measures and creating strikes with marxist(?) trade unions they are going full steam ahead with the recipe that won them the last election - right wing racism, jingoism and getting the wagons into a circle to fight off the foreigners. This aint going to end well for anyone and national strikes over the summer and a trade war with the EU will be a complete disaster followed by a country full of folk unable to heat their houses next winter. To keep the Blonde Bumblecunt in power they are happy to take us all down with them and create division and mayhem in the process.

With the NI Protocol/GFA hopefully the big boys - the EU and the US - will enter the fray and tell the Blonde Bumblecunt and his mad bunch of Brexit Ultras where to get off.

https://news.sky.com/story/legislation- ... l-12632360

The NI protocol isn't working though because the DUP refuse to sit in the Assembly whilst it exists. As bad as the Tories them lot but not sure what the solution is because we need a functioning assembly in NI.

[Insane_Homer]

Arron Banks loses his SLAPP case against Carole Cadwalladr. Oh dear, how sad, never mind.

Yeah that is very enjoyable of a Monday morning

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... xit-russia

must be so happy, makes my day.

[tabascoboy]

/Continued

on these islands and between the U.K. and EU.” Acc to statement he said: “it marks a particular low point in the UK’s approach to Brexit, especially as Secretary Truss has not engaged with negotiations with the EU in any meaningful way since Feb.”. ‘Minister Coveney repeated that the protocol is the negotiated solution, ratified by Westminster, to the hard Brexit pursued by the U.K. government.’. ‘The UK’s unilateral approach is not in the best interest of NI and does not have the consent or support of the majority of people or business in Northern Ireland. Far from fixing problems, this legislation will create a whole new set of uncertainties and damage relationships .’

[Paddington Bear]

Is it almost exactly a year since the UK last unilaterally amended the protocol, to similar howls, before everyone quietly accepted it, realised it was necessary and moved on?

[dpedin]

This could be interesting next week?

Tories deliberately kicking off a war with EU again as an attempt to deflect from all their other shit. Nothing better for them than to get the racists and Brexit Ultras all wired up. Between this, Rwanda, imperial measures and creating strikes with marxist(?) trade unions they are going full steam ahead with the recipe that won them the last election - right wing racism, jingoism and getting the wagons into a circle to fight off the foreigners. This aint going to end well for anyone and national strikes over the summer and a trade war with the EU will be a complete disaster followed by a country full of folk unable to heat their houses next winter. To keep the Blonde Bumblecunt in power they are happy to take us all down with them and create division and mayhem in the process.

With the NI Protocol/GFA hopefully the big boys - the EU and the US - will enter the fray and tell the Blonde Bumblecunt and his mad bunch of Brexit Ultras where to get off.

https://news.sky.com/story/legislation- ... l-12632360

The NI protocol isn't working though because the DUP refuse to sit in the Assembly whilst it exists. As bad as the Tories them lot but not sure what the solution is because we need a functioning assembly in NI.

Majority of Assembly MLAs write letter to Blonde Bumblecunt that they want to retain the NI Protocol and are opposed to the NI Protocol amendments. 52 of the 90 sign letter - 58% about the same as he got in VONC last week. Looks like UK will ignore the democratic will of the people and side with the minority DUP.

[_Os_]

Is it almost exactly a year since the UK last unilaterally amended the protocol, to similar howls, before everyone quietly accepted it, realised it was necessary and moved on?

That's not what happened:
https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-co ... -brussels/

As Frost said at the time the UK would "continue to operate the Protocol on the current basis", he did this by extending grace periods indefinitely. Frost also wrote a command paper on the NI protocol last year, which if it brought about any change in UK law on the protocol is only happening now. The EU reaction was to halt (not end) legal action against the UK and continue to try and negotiate, there's been no negotiations since early 2022.

What the UK is doing now is a return to the 2020 Internal Market Bill's original intention (before it was defeated in the Lords and had parts relating to the NI protocol and WA removed), the UK is setting about changing the NI Protocol in UK law with something at least as strong as the original Internal Market Bill.

As with everything Brexit this is an internal Tory party feud, and in this instance also about the leadership ambitions of Truss. If it was about trying to permanently resolve anything there would be a negotiation, but the point is to keep extracting political capital from Brexit, so the Tories cannot allow Brexit to end.

The direction of Brexit is obvious when people like David Davis say it has failed because it was a "Remainer's Brexit". The equation is still the same on NI though, if a border in the Irish Sea is rejected, then it's either a border in the island of Ireland or the whole of the UK aligned with the EU. Most people in NI do not support the border in the island of Ireland option, and if the UK tried to choose that option without actually having a border (this is what the UK seems to want), then the UK would be risking the TCA with the EU.

[petej]

Is it almost exactly a year since the UK last unilaterally amended the protocol, to similar howls, before everyone quietly accepted it, realised it was necessary and moved on?

Did we actually amend the protocol? I thought we gave ourselves the ability to amend it but the government waved their willies around, threatened to a bit and did nothing but it excited their brexitty base. The main aim is to be seen to be doing something, promise jam tomorrow and get the Mick's and bimbo's of the uk all excited.

[_Os_]

This could be interesting next week?

Tories deliberately kicking off a war with EU again as an attempt to deflect from all their other shit. Nothing better for them than to get the racists and Brexit Ultras all wired up. Between this, Rwanda, imperial measures and creating strikes with marxist(?) trade unions they are going full steam ahead with the recipe that won them the last election - right wing racism, jingoism and getting the wagons into a circle to fight off the foreigners. This aint going to end well for anyone and national strikes over the summer and a trade war with the EU will be a complete disaster followed by a country full of folk unable to heat their houses next winter. To keep the Blonde Bumblecunt in power they are happy to take us all down with them and create division and mayhem in the process.

With the NI Protocol/GFA hopefully the big boys - the EU and the US - will enter the fray and tell the Blonde Bumblecunt and his mad bunch of Brexit Ultras where to get off.

https://news.sky.com/story/legislation- ... l-12632360

The NI protocol isn't working though because the DUP refuse to sit in the Assembly whilst it exists. As bad as the Tories them lot but not sure what the solution is because we need a functioning assembly in NI.

Majority of Assembly MLAs write letter to Blonde Bumblecunt that they want to retain the NI Protocol and are opposed to the NI Protocol amendments. 52 of the 90 sign letter - 58% about the same as he got in VONC last week. Looks like UK will ignore the democratic will of the people and side with the minority DUP.

The DUP oppose the GFA. Their Brexit positioning only makes sense if their desired outcome is a return to a hard border on the island of Ireland. They've been incredibly stupid throughout the Brexit process, and are now losing support in their heartland areas.

It's not wise of the Tories to follow their lead.

[I like neeps]

This could be interesting next week?

Tories deliberately kicking off a war with EU again as an attempt to deflect from all their other shit. Nothing better for them than to get the racists and Brexit Ultras all wired up. Between this, Rwanda, imperial measures and creating strikes with marxist(?) trade unions they are going full steam ahead with the recipe that won them the last election - right wing racism, jingoism and getting the wagons into a circle to fight off the foreigners. This aint going to end well for anyone and national strikes over the summer and a trade war with the EU will be a complete disaster followed by a country full of folk unable to heat their houses next winter. To keep the Blonde Bumblecunt in power they are happy to take us all down with them and create division and mayhem in the process.

With the NI Protocol/GFA hopefully the big boys - the EU and the US - will enter the fray and tell the Blonde Bumblecunt and his mad bunch of Brexit Ultras where to get off.

https://news.sky.com/story/legislation- ... l-12632360

The NI protocol isn't working though because the DUP refuse to sit in the Assembly whilst it exists. As bad as the Tories them lot but not sure what the solution is because we need a functioning assembly in NI.

Majority of Assembly MLAs write letter to Blonde Bumblecunt that they want to retain the NI Protocol and are opposed to the NI Protocol amendments. 52 of the 90 sign letter - 58% about the same as he got in VONC last week. Looks like UK will ignore the democratic will of the people and side with the minority DUP.

Sure but in the terms of the GFA you need unionist parties in government and they reject the protocol. Minority opinion or not, you have a constitutional crisis.

[_Os_]

Sure but in the terms of the GFA you need unionist parties in government and they reject the protocol. Minority opinion or not, you have a constitutional crisis.

To protect the GFA, the UK government has decided to support the position of the second largest party (DUP). The DUP being same party that opposes the GFA.

If the UK government imposes a solution most in NI don't want, which is some form of border in the island of Ireland (the logical outcome of no border in the Irish Sea, which is why the DUP don't want a border in the Irish Sea). Then NI will not have a government, because Nationalist parties will walk out. Does the UK government then support Sinn Fein (the largest party) to preserve the GFA after they refuse to form a government? It seems unlikely given Johnson until recently made a point of visiting NI and refusing to speak to Sinn Fein.

The reason this is all dumb from the DUP (and the UK government which supports them, Frost when he was Brexit minister even met with the Loyalist Communities Council, which is an umbrella group for all the Loyalist paramilitaries, this group has withdrawn their support for the GFA). Is because it's a simple majority for a united Ireland to happen, if the shit storm they seem to want actually happens, there won't be a GFA2 that's any better for them.

[Paddington Bear]

Is it almost exactly a year since the UK last unilaterally amended the protocol, to similar howls, before everyone quietly accepted it, realised it was necessary and moved on?

Did we actually amend the protocol? I thought we gave ourselves the ability to amend it but the government waved their willies around, threatened to a bit and did nothing but it excited their brexitty base. The main aim is to be seen to be doing something, promise jam tomorrow and get the Mick's and bimbo's of the uk all excited.

There doesn’t appear to be anyone in a position of influence demanding the end of the extended grace periods and the rigorous implementation of the protocol as written, put it that way.

My prediction is that the Tories will announce something to great fanfare in their side of the press. Their opponents will howl and howl. The proposals will turn out to be much less explosive in reality than either side has briefed. Nancy Pelosi will issue a statement that can best be summarised as ‘sad face’ and the trade deal which will never happen will continue to never happen. And most of us will have forgotten this particular incident within a few weeks.

[fishfoodie]

Is it almost exactly a year since the UK last unilaterally amended the protocol, to similar howls, before everyone quietly accepted it, realised it was necessary and moved on?

Did we actually amend the protocol? I thought we gave ourselves the ability to amend it but the government waved their willies around, threatened to a bit and did nothing but it excited their brexitty base. The main aim is to be seen to be doing something, promise jam tomorrow and get the Mick's and bimbo's of the uk all excited.

There doesn’t appear to be anyone in a position of influence demanding the end of the extended grace periods and the rigorous implementation of the protocol as written, put it that way.

My prediction is that the Tories will announce something to great fanfare in their side of the press. Their opponents will howl and howl. The proposals will turn out to be much less explosive in reality than either side has briefed. Nancy Pelosi will issue a statement that can best be summarised as ‘sad face’ and the trade deal which will never happen will continue to never happen. And most of us will have forgotten this particular incident within a few weeks.

Don't give up your day job.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/b ... 220012.pdf

[_Os_]

There doesn’t appear to be anyone in a position of influence demanding the end of the extended grace periods and the rigorous implementation of the protocol as written, put it that way.

There's some problems with this.

1. It depends on the UK not wanting to improve its relationship with the EU which means at a minimum improving the TCA, which means building trust with the EU. The EU has only suspended legal action against the UK, it hasn't agreed with the UK or ended its legal action, there hasn't been enough negotiation for that to happen (because the Tories don't want negotiations or a solution).

2. The Tories are riding the tiger again, it's starting to look like the May years again. Internally the ERG is dictating quite a lot now (the Times reported Johnson opposed Truss on this, and instead backed Gove/Sunak who also opposed her, then he caved and supported Truss). Externally the DUP are dictating their policy on NI and by extension their Brexit policy, the DUP have said this doesn't go far enough and there needs to be action for them to form an NI government, they are still saying "no" to forming a government. Because both the ERG and the DUP gain politically from this situation, neither want it resolved. The ERG is the same ERG who endorsed this deal, every Tory candidate had to pledge their support for it to stand for election, those who refused (the ERG's opponents) were purged. The DUP oppose the GFA and will always do whatever they can to undermine it.

3. It all depends on the EU not reacting, which is something the Tories have no control over. The same Tories who've got absolutely everything wrong on Brexit from "the German car manufacturers will demand a deal" on.

[I like neeps]

Sure but in the terms of the GFA you need unionist parties in government and they reject the protocol. Minority opinion or not, you have a constitutional crisis.

To protect the GFA, the UK government has decided to support the position of the second largest party (DUP). The DUP being same party that opposes the GFA.

If the UK government imposes a solution most in NI don't want, which is some form of border in the island of Ireland (the logical outcome of no border in the Irish Sea, which is why the DUP don't want a border in the Irish Sea). Then NI will not have a government, because Nationalist parties will walk out. Does the UK government then support Sinn Fein (the largest party) to preserve the GFA after they refuse to form a government? It seems unlikely given Johnson until recently made a point of visiting NI and refusing to speak to Sinn Fein.

The reason this is all dumb from the DUP (and the UK government which supports them, Frost when he was Brexit minister even met with the Loyalist Communities Council, which is an umbrella group for all the Loyalist paramilitaries, this group has withdrawn their support for the GFA). Is because it's a simple majority for a united Ireland to happen, if the shit storm they seem to want actually happens, there won't be a GFA2 that's any better for them.

They can't force said party into a government and therefore there would be elections every six months and a totally powerless assembly.

The DUP are clearly idiots. The conservative party are also clearly idiots. But there's a clear problem if you have unionists refuse to go into government and elections twice per year.

Agree with your point above that the DUP nor Tories want a solution they want the forever wars. So unless the ERG lose their seats or the unionists in NI vote for a less hard-line party it won't be resolved.

[fishfoodie]

An example of how, this is not just minor tweaks, but wanton vandalism, & specifically designed to provoke Dublin, & Brussels

Read this carefully.

(3) Regulations under this Act may not create or facilitate border arrangements
between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland which feature at the
border—
(a) physical infrastructure (including border posts), or
(b) checks and controls,
which did not exist before exit day.

Now at first glance you may say; well we never planned on building any border posts, so what's the big deal ?

But that's not whats happening. The DUP took control over the DoA in NI, & Poots was the Minister, & he was conspicuous by his inaction on putting into place the border controls the NIP is all about, to the point where his Officials were afraid that they were breaking the law by not proceeding.

So now, this Bill is actually making it, illegal, for anyone to put in place the infrastructure necessary to do the inspections that the UK agreed to !

[_Os_]

They can't force said party into a government and therefore there would be elections every six months and a totally powerless assembly.

The DUP are clearly idiots. The conservative party are also clearly idiots. But there's a clear problem if you have unionists refuse to go into government and elections twice per year.

If that's what the DUP wants and thinks that will strengthen the argument for NI remaining part of the UK and make it much more easier arguing for the Union. Then they must go for it.

If you search their social media, it's not hard finding out what they're about. Up to Unionists if they support that and think it helps them.

[I like neeps]

They can't force said party into a government and therefore there would be elections every six months and a totally powerless assembly.

The DUP are clearly idiots. The conservative party are also clearly idiots. But there's a clear problem if you have unionists refuse to go into government and elections twice per year.

If that's what the DUP wants and thinks that will strengthen the argument for NI remaining part of the UK and make it much more easier arguing for the Union. Then they must go for it.

If you search their social media, it's not hard finding out what they're about. Up to Unionists if they support that and think it helps them.

I agree.

Anyway this plan is stupid it won't get the Tories anymore support and none of the brexit press want to report on it. You can't campaign and celebrate that you "will get/did get brexit done" and then try and win support on renegotiations.

[dpedin]

The NI protocol isn't working though because the DUP refuse to sit in the Assembly whilst it exists. As bad as the Tories them lot but not sure what the solution is because we need a functioning assembly in NI.

Majority of Assembly MLAs write letter to Blonde Bumblecunt that they want to retain the NI Protocol and are opposed to the NI Protocol amendments. 52 of the 90 sign letter - 58% about the same as he got in VONC last week. Looks like UK will ignore the democratic will of the people and side with the minority DUP.

Sure but in the terms of the GFA you need unionist parties in government and they reject the protocol. Minority opinion or not, you have a constitutional crisis.

I think we all know that!

However the support from the majority of the democratically elected MLAs, who were only voted for weeks ago by the NI population, for the NIP hardly makes the 'necessity' case the UK Gov are suggesting! Given it is the implementation of the NIP which the UK Gov helped write, voted for and won a GE on the back off and is fully supported by the majority of NI elected officials, NI business leaders and organisations it is going to be very difficult for the UK Gov to win any legal argument for its current draft legislation. The Tories have set a dangerous precedent in NI in siding with the DUP nutters and using their failure to form an assembly as an argument for breaking an international treaty and international law - just think the fun other dodgy Govs can have in using the same argument! Putin for one will be thinking he can use the same UK Gov argument for his 'liberation' of the Russian minority in the Dombas. Utter madness.

[fishfoodie]

Majority of Assembly MLAs write letter to Blonde Bumblecunt that they want to retain the NI Protocol and are opposed to the NI Protocol amendments. 52 of the 90 sign letter - 58% about the same as he got in VONC last week. Looks like UK will ignore the democratic will of the people and side with the minority DUP.

Sure but in the terms of the GFA you need unionist parties in government and they reject the protocol. Minority opinion or not, you have a constitutional crisis.

I think we all know that!

However the support from the majority of the democratically elected MLAs, who were only voted for weeks ago by the NI population, for the NIP hardly makes the 'necessity' case the UK Gov are suggesting! Given it is the implementation of the NIP which the UK Gov helped write, voted for and won a GE on the back off and is fully supported by the majority of NI elected officials, NI business leaders and organisations it is going to be very difficult for the UK Gov to win any legal argument for its current draft legislation. The Tories have set a dangerous precedent in NI in siding with the DUP nutters and using their failure to form an assembly as an argument for breaking an international treaty and international law - just think the fun other dodgy Govs can have in using the same argument! Putin for one will be thinking he can use the same UK Gov argument for his 'liberation' of the Russian minority in the Dombas. Utter madness.

Will they stop fucking with the NIP, if Sinn Fein, refuse to enter Stormont without the NIP ?

I don't fucking think so !

[Uncle fester]

Lot of folks here making the mistake of thinking "DUP = unionism". DUP are only one of the unionist parties.

[_Os_]

Lot of folks here making the mistake of thinking "DUP = unionism". DUP are only one of the unionist parties.

The UUP's position has been all over the place. They originally supported Remain then later switched to support Brexit (I definitely remember some pro-Remain stuff from them at some point). They supported the NI Protocol, finding technical ways to improve it but not rejecting it. Then they were part of the joint unionist letter rejecting the Protocol outright. I think the point you're making is all unionist parties oppose the Protocol, but with the UUP it seems to be more that they're chasing a constituency that may no longer exist they seem to want attract moderate unionist voters but can't find any, so get desperate and chase the same voters the DUP and TUV are chasing and fail there too (because they're not the DUP or TUV).

In the NI election they lost vote share and won the lowest amount of seats they ever have in a Stormont election. Alliance ate their lunch.

[tabascoboy]

Well Truss wants to discuss this with the Tea-Sock so hope's not lost yet

[fishfoodie]

The Governments, legal argument of, “necessity”, is fucked !

The State must also establish, as the government accepts, that it has not substantially contributed to the situation of necessity.

Uh Oh !

Anderson links to a digest of the applicable law which sets out the four conditions that all have to be met together:

– the State’s act is to safeguard an essential interest against a peril; (1)
– the peril shall be grave and imminent; (2)
– the course of action followed shall be the only way available; and (3)
– no other essential interest shall be seriously impaired as a result of the breach. (4)

1. What fucking Peril ?
2. What fucking, imminent, Peril ?
3. Article 16 ????
4. Well there's just the 60% of the population that disagree ! ... and the EU, Ireland, the US .....

https://davidallengreen.com/2022/06/the ... -no-sense/

In summary; they went shopping for a Lionel Hutz, & they found one; but that doesn't make the opinion they bought, any more correct.

[tabascoboy]

The Governments, legal argument of, “necessity”, is fucked !

The State must also establish, as the government accepts, that it has not substantially contributed to the situation of necessity.

Uh Oh !

Anderson links to a digest of the applicable law which sets out the four conditions that all have to be met together:

– the State’s act is to safeguard an essential interest against a peril; (1)
– the peril shall be grave and imminent; (2)
– the course of action followed shall be the only way available; and (3)
– no other essential interest shall be seriously impaired as a result of the breach. (4)

1. What fucking Peril ?
2. What fucking, imminent, Peril ?
3. Article 16 ????
4. Well there's just the 60% of the population that disagree ! ... and the EU, Ireland, the US .....

https://davidallengreen.com/2022/06/the ... -no-sense/

In summary; they went shopping for a Lionel Hutz, & they found one; but that doesn't make the opinion they bought, any more correct.

The peril of needing forms to move sausages from GB to N Ireland, clearly

[Rhubarb & Custard]

In summary; they went shopping for a Lionel Hutz, & they found one; but that doesn't make the opinion they bought, any more correct.

Word is they literally found one after shopping globally for anyone who'd put up a legal argument they felt they could use, and the only one they found was a weirdo Trump fan

It's not even 8 out of 10 lawyers don't like the reasoning Truss is relying on, it's much, much worse than that

[Hal Jordan]

Well Truss wants to discuss this with the Tea-Sock so hope's not lost yet

The Irish had Thin Lizzy, we get Thick Lizzy.

(Stolen)

I see Commercial barrister (and Conservative Councillor, curiously never mentioned by him or when being introduced) Steven Barrett is spouting shite all over the place about international law, which he has no experience of. It's the equivalent of an electrician being held out as an authority on plumbing.

[Biffer]

[dpedin]

Just trying to be helpful!

[Insane_Homer]

Gammonaty apoplectic this morning that the Rwanda flight didn't go ahead, because apparently that's what they voted for (hint, they didn't). While also spewing mass ignorance of what the EHCR is (It's not an EU court), why it was setup & by his party, their esteemed leaders hero (Churchill) and that his grandfather (James Fawcett, lefty lawyer) was the president(for 9 years) of said org.

Meanwhile is 2016....
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/b ... on-8033527

Passionate Boris Johnson defends European Convention on Human Rights

[tabascoboy]

Many a vein, on many a temple must be on the verge of exploding in outrage this morning...

[ia801310]

Gammonaty apoplectic this morning that the Rwanda flight didn't go ahead, because apparently that's what they voted for (hint, they didn't). While also spewing mass ignorance of what the EHCR is (It's not an EU court), why it was setup & by his party, their esteemed leaders hero (Churchill) and that his grandfather (James Fawcett, lefty lawyer) was the president(for 9 years) of said org.

Meanwhile is 2016....
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/b ... on-8033527

Passionate Boris Johnson defends European Convention on Human Rights

One prediction for the future

If the ECHR ultimately stops the Rwanda flights policy permanently the UK will cease to be a member of the ECHR within the next 5 years.



"If there is one lesson from British public opinion over the last decade, it is that people don’t like it when others tell Britain what it can and can’t do — even if people have more nuanced opinions about the particular thing in question."

[fishfoodie]

One prediction for the future

If the ECHR ultimately stops the Rwanda flights policy permanently the UK will cease to be a member of the ECHR within the next 5 years.



"If there is one lesson from British public opinion over the last decade, it is that people don’t like it when others tell Britain what it can and can’t do — even if people have more nuanced opinions about the particular thing in question."

Ben Youngs owes his career to this particular obstinate stupidity

[ia801310]

One prediction for the future

If the ECHR ultimately stops the Rwanda flights policy permanently the UK will cease to be a member of the ECHR within the next 5 years.



"If there is one lesson from British public opinion over the last decade, it is that people don’t like it when others tell Britain what it can and can’t do — even if people have more nuanced opinions about the particular thing in question."

Ben Youngs owes his career to this particular obstinate stupidity

Reason why I mentioned the ECHR is that I can see exactly the same thing happening with the ECHR as what happened with the EU.

Progressives will misjudge the electorate and forget that the electorate is not made up of 60million human rights lawyers and then in 6 years time when we have left the ECHR be left wondering how the hell it happened as everyone they knew were in favour of staying in the ECHR

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/bo ... 01609.html

"Don’t blame Boris Johnson for the mess over Rwanda – it’s what the public wants
Blame the progressive politicians for not taking the battle of ideas to the enemy and winning elections

In politics, it tends to help if you can win an argument. So it is with the government’s Rwanda plan. It may be depressing, indeed appalling, to send vulnerable people to Rwanda to be settled, with many having a valid claim to asylum in the UK. It’s certainly illiberal. Our own bishops say it’s immoral. I happen to think it’s unspeakably cruel. But none of those arguments has much traction with the Great British Public.

The polling shows that most of them support the policy. I’ll repeat that: the polling shows that a significant proportion support the policy. I have the uneasy feeling that Ukrainians only get more sympathy because they’re white; the abandoned Afghans certainly don’t. Polling by Savanta ComRes indicates that 40 per cent plus of the population support the Rwanda policy, and more than half of 2019 Conservative voters.

However, despite the overall, albeit slim, net support, the polling also tells us that the public see faults in the Rwanda scheme: 67 per cent say that it’s likely that most of the migrants who end up in Rwanda will attempt to leave and return to Europe, and a significant 42 per cent say it’s unlikely the plan will drastically reduce the numbers of migrants arriving in the UK.

So even if these voters don’t think the policy will even work, they still back it. What they really want is a policy to stop people coming in that does work; not to have an unlimited right to asylum. It is just as the Conservative ministers say to Labour: “What would you do? Got any better ideas?”

It deserves an answer. When Amol Rajan asked David Lammy if Labour would repeal the removal of the right to asylum from British domestic law he said he couldn’t answer that because he’s not Yvette Cooper. This is not winning the argument.

A very significant chunk of the British electorate voted Conservative precisely because of things like Brexit, cutting benefits and the Rwanda policy, not despite them. These voters are not moved by being called cruel, immoral, appalling, fascistic, racist, evil or any other (justifiable) label you can stick on them. They’re not, in truth, that bothered about whether the deportees have been tortured. They don’t want them here because they believe, variously, that they’re economic migrants, they can happily live freely in France or Greece, and if they’re not and are genuine refugees they are anyway scroungers, criminals, and the rest, who’ll end up in overcrowded housing, overwhelming public services, undercutting wages and generally degrading the quality of life of what is termed the “indigenous” population.

These are precisely the same kinds of false arguments that have been used by the racist right for decades, and for a reason – they find a ready audience with people prepared to believe in scapegoating myths and propaganda. Some of those very same people – Patel, Johnson, Raab, Farage – may well have refugees back in their own family histories, but no matter to them. The Jews and Ugandan Asians were once demonised, but now it’s supposed to be different. It’s not, obviously. Yet the myths about migration won’t die while left unchallenged.

By merely asserting that these policies, and by implication the people supporting them, are immoral and so on isn’t going to kill those myths, and is probably counterproductive. It’s how the Brexit referendum was lost. What you need are some arguments about why migration is good for Britain, in the national interest, and makes the country better off.

An awful lot of people aren’t bothered about what the European Convention on Human Rights, the United Nations, the European Union or anyone else thinks about the Rwanda plan, Brexit or anything else for that matter. They would cheerfully quit the lot if it meant lower migration into the UK. You increasingly hear people wanting “food security”, “energy security”, self-sufficiency, and cutting ourselves off from trade and investment with the rest of the world. Nigel Farage and like-minded figures in the Tory party think that getting out of the European convention is part of Brexit.

No one seems to be explaining why being signed up to the Convention helps protect people in this country, rather than the ones who want to come here. Again, the argument is lost by default.

“Global Britain” is really about becoming a hermit English kingdom, the ultimate gaslighting exercise. Don’t blame the Tories or Johnson, though – blame the voters. Or more to the point, blame the progressive politicians for not taking the battle of ideas to the enemy and winning elections. The Conservatives may be the nasty party, but Britain is a nasty country. Or at least until it’s persuaded there’s a better way.

Britain, or at least England, is drifting into becoming what you might call a Millwall nation – with apologies to today’s football club. You may be familiar with the old Millwall chant – “no one likes us, we don’t care” – sung to the tune of “Cwm Rhondda”. Millwall’s iconography – snarling lions and angry bulldogs – suits nasty Britain, and so does the bloody-minded sentiment in their fans’ song.

Understand that and you’re some way into thinking about how tough it is going to be to win the arguments about why there is a housing shortage, why public services are under pressure, and why Britain actually needs migrants to keep its economy and its hospitals running.

Our problems do not exist because of immigrants. Why isn’t anyone explaining why? Legal challenges and marches and protests are easier to organise than winning hearts and minds. That’s why we’re in the state we’re in."

[_Os_]

Reason why I mentioned the ECHR is that I can see exactly the same thing happening with the ECHR as what happened with the EU.

Progressives will misjudge the electorate and forget that the electorate is not made up of 60million human rights lawyers and then in 6 years time when we have left the ECHR be left wondering how the hell it happened as everyone they knew were in favour of staying in the ECHR

If people want to vote to make their lives worse, then they should do so, it's on them alone and ignorance isn't an excuse. This quote is the core of the article you posted, and a view you seem to share:

A very significant chunk of the British electorate voted Conservative precisely because of things like Brexit, cutting benefits and the Rwanda policy, not despite them. These voters are not moved by being called cruel, immoral, appalling, fascistic, racist, evil or any other (justifiable) label you can stick on them. They’re not, in truth, that bothered about whether the deportees have been tortured. They don’t want them here because they believe, variously, that they’re economic migrants, they can happily live freely in France or Greece, and if they’re not and are genuine refugees they are anyway scroungers, criminals, and the rest, who’ll end up in overcrowded housing, overwhelming public services, undercutting wages and generally degrading the quality of life of what is termed the “indigenous” population.

“Global Britain” is really about becoming a hermit English kingdom, the ultimate gaslighting exercise. Don’t blame the Tories or Johnson, though – blame the voters. Or more to the point, blame the progressive politicians for not taking the battle of ideas to the enemy and winning elections. The Conservatives may be the nasty party, but Britain is a nasty country. Or at least until it’s persuaded there’s a better way.

Your argument is there's a large group of unreachable people who are racists, and the people to blame for this isn't them themselves, or the politicians playing into their fears and bigotry ... it's instead the people that oppose this? The racists have no agency, only those opposing them have any responsibility for their actions?

It's a bit of an understatement to say this is all a massive overestimation of what rational debate with fundamentally irrational people can achieve. The fact the UK has a housing crisis simply because it hasn't built enough houses, since 1970 France has built about 17m houses and the UK 7m, France correspondingly has had about half the house price inflation. Not many care about any of this and many other facts. As the article says, many people supporting the Rwanda policy don't even care if it works they just want the cruelty to be inflicted on people. "Blaming the progressive politicians" is massively missing the point here.

This stuff about "the indigenous population" I've seen being repeated on the right (racists that write for the Spectator). If that type of thinking catches on, then it's the quickest way to ruin a multi racial country like the UK. It's an expansion of the anti-migrant rhetoric to any person who isn't white. This type of thinking that says "the indigenous" deserve more rights, has a very bleak history in Africa and Europe during the 20th century.

[Insane_Homer]

[Biffer]

One prediction for the future

If the ECHR ultimately stops the Rwanda flights policy permanently the UK will cease to be a member of the ECHR within the next 5 years.



"If there is one lesson from British public opinion over the last decade, it is that people don’t like it when others tell Britain what it can and can’t do — even if people have more nuanced opinions about the particular thing in question."

Ben Youngs owes his career to this particular obstinate stupidity

Reason why I mentioned the ECHR is that I can see exactly the same thing happening with the ECHR as what happened with the EU.

Progressives will misjudge the electorate and forget that the electorate is not made up of 60million human rights lawyers and then in 6 years time when we have left the ECHR be left wondering how the hell it happened as everyone they knew were in favour of staying in the ECHR

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/bo ... 01609.html

"Don’t blame Boris Johnson for the mess over Rwanda – it’s what the public wants
Blame the progressive politicians for not taking the battle of ideas to the enemy and winning elections

In politics, it tends to help if you can win an argument. So it is with the government’s Rwanda plan. It may be depressing, indeed appalling, to send vulnerable people to Rwanda to be settled, with many having a valid claim to asylum in the UK. It’s certainly illiberal. Our own bishops say it’s immoral. I happen to think it’s unspeakably cruel. But none of those arguments has much traction with the Great British Public.

The polling shows that most of them support the policy. I’ll repeat that: the polling shows that a significant proportion support the policy. I have the uneasy feeling that Ukrainians only get more sympathy because they’re white; the abandoned Afghans certainly don’t. Polling by Savanta ComRes indicates that 40 per cent plus of the population support the Rwanda policy, and more than half of 2019 Conservative voters.

However, despite the overall, albeit slim, net support, the polling also tells us that the public see faults in the Rwanda scheme: 67 per cent say that it’s likely that most of the migrants who end up in Rwanda will attempt to leave and return to Europe, and a significant 42 per cent say it’s unlikely the plan will drastically reduce the numbers of migrants arriving in the UK.

So even if these voters don’t think the policy will even work, they still back it. What they really want is a policy to stop people coming in that does work; not to have an unlimited right to asylum. It is just as the Conservative ministers say to Labour: “What would you do? Got any better ideas?”

It deserves an answer. When Amol Rajan asked David Lammy if Labour would repeal the removal of the right to asylum from British domestic law he said he couldn’t answer that because he’s not Yvette Cooper. This is not winning the argument.

A very significant chunk of the British electorate voted Conservative precisely because of things like Brexit, cutting benefits and the Rwanda policy, not despite them. These voters are not moved by being called cruel, immoral, appalling, fascistic, racist, evil or any other (justifiable) label you can stick on them. They’re not, in truth, that bothered about whether the deportees have been tortured. They don’t want them here because they believe, variously, that they’re economic migrants, they can happily live freely in France or Greece, and if they’re not and are genuine refugees they are anyway scroungers, criminals, and the rest, who’ll end up in overcrowded housing, overwhelming public services, undercutting wages and generally degrading the quality of life of what is termed the “indigenous” population.

These are precisely the same kinds of false arguments that have been used by the racist right for decades, and for a reason – they find a ready audience with people prepared to believe in scapegoating myths and propaganda. Some of those very same people – Patel, Johnson, Raab, Farage – may well have refugees back in their own family histories, but no matter to them. The Jews and Ugandan Asians were once demonised, but now it’s supposed to be different. It’s not, obviously. Yet the myths about migration won’t die while left unchallenged.

By merely asserting that these policies, and by implication the people supporting them, are immoral and so on isn’t going to kill those myths, and is probably counterproductive. It’s how the Brexit referendum was lost. What you need are some arguments about why migration is good for Britain, in the national interest, and makes the country better off.

An awful lot of people aren’t bothered about what the European Convention on Human Rights, the United Nations, the European Union or anyone else thinks about the Rwanda plan, Brexit or anything else for that matter. They would cheerfully quit the lot if it meant lower migration into the UK. You increasingly hear people wanting “food security”, “energy security”, self-sufficiency, and cutting ourselves off from trade and investment with the rest of the world. Nigel Farage and like-minded figures in the Tory party think that getting out of the European convention is part of Brexit.

No one seems to be explaining why being signed up to the Convention helps protect people in this country, rather than the ones who want to come here. Again, the argument is lost by default.

“Global Britain” is really about becoming a hermit English kingdom, the ultimate gaslighting exercise. Don’t blame the Tories or Johnson, though – blame the voters. Or more to the point, blame the progressive politicians for not taking the battle of ideas to the enemy and winning elections. The Conservatives may be the nasty party, but Britain is a nasty country. Or at least until it’s persuaded there’s a better way.

Britain, or at least England, is drifting into becoming what you might call a Millwall nation – with apologies to today’s football club. You may be familiar with the old Millwall chant – “no one likes us, we don’t care” – sung to the tune of “Cwm Rhondda”. Millwall’s iconography – snarling lions and angry bulldogs – suits nasty Britain, and so does the bloody-minded sentiment in their fans’ song.

Understand that and you’re some way into thinking about how tough it is going to be to win the arguments about why there is a housing shortage, why public services are under pressure, and why Britain actually needs migrants to keep its economy and its hospitals running.

Our problems do not exist because of immigrants. Why isn’t anyone explaining why? Legal challenges and marches and protests are easier to organise than winning hearts and minds. That’s why we’re in the state we’re in."

The way to tackle folk who have those attitudes is to concentrate on it not being English / British to behave that way. You can present that in many different ways depending on your audience, from an intellectual argument about the protection of other people's rights being an old philosophical English / British thing going back to John Locke, John Stuart Mill, Adam Smith etc whereas the rule of the majority is more of the French tradition of Rousseau and Descartes (and that's what led to the tyranny of the majority and the terror after the revolution) or from a patriotic angle of sacrifice against fascism in WWII or from many other positions.

(yes, you can argue the finer points of those in an intellectually pedantic way but the majority of people couldn't give a shit about that so the headline of it not being British is the key).

[derriz]

"Don’t blame Boris Johnson for the mess over Rwanda – it’s what the public wants
Blame the progressive politicians for not taking the battle of ideas to the enemy and winning elections

That's bollox. It's like blaming a bystander for the crime because they didn't intervene enough and absolving the actual perpetrator of blame.

Why not blame f*cking Boris? He's the PM, he okayed this idea, is backing it and like lots of his actions is watching as it turns to shit.

The reasons a large segment of the public support a policy like this is not because Labour politicians performed poorly on political talk shows or have written unconvincing articles for the Guardian. The idea is just stupid.

A more likely culprit is the incessant anti-immigrant anti-refugee front page imagery dished out by the Tory supporting press going back decades. Or Boris and the Tory party for exploiting, pandering to and justifying this nastiness for political reasons instead of challenging it on principle.