BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 09:00 PM

If there are any thickies still reading this thread, the Labour position can be easily understood by anyone with a CSE grade five in Media Studies, etc, or even by those who narrowly missed passing the eleven-plus. It is thus: if Labour gets power, they will negotiate a deal with the EU which they will then put to the people, with the alternative of remain on the ballot. How hard is that, chaps? And when it comes to that deal, it will involve a customs union, alignment with the single market and full rights for EU citizens. The EU will love it.

It's been as clear as that for ages. Any questions, leavers? Please let me know if it's too hard for you. Perhaps you'd be better employed trying to work out the plot of Spot The Dog.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 08:50 PM

Jim:
For what am I supposed to be ashamed?
You mention 'foreign interference'. Where have I supported that?
If it is just that I haven't railed against it, then that is a very strange view point for you to take.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 08:13 PM

Isn't it strange that our resident flag-waggers don't give a toss about foreign interference in the forthcoming British election
Maybe they can persuade Putin to send one of his agents with some of their magic potion to rub out the opposition
Nigel - you should be ****** ashamed of yourself - I expected you to rise above your running-mate, who has welcomed it but - no - a matched pair!
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 07:47 PM

The deal did not go ahead because Boris Johnson pulled it petulantly, because he tried, undemocratically, to force it through with a totally unreasonable programme motion. Who knows, had he consented to two or three more days for scrutiny, we could have been out of the EU tonight. A Tory issue, aTory problem, a Tory delay.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 07:43 PM

It's a bit like science, Nigel. Close scrutiny and a search for corroboration. Nothing's perfect, but I was fine with Full Fact on this occasion. Next time could be different. I wonder whether you apply the same principle to your Mail reading.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 07:42 PM

Instead of attempting to make an issue of brexit not happening, (because we all know it was sabotaged by remainer MPs aided by a biased Bercow), why not give us a summary of compo's position on Brexit. I confess that I am a little confused and the long awaited election gets closer by the day. Labour's wobbling is going to eviscerate them at the ballot box.
Libdems to the left, brexit party to the right, the middle ground will will be a blasted wasteland of the shattered remnants of shell shocked labour. Wishful thinking or reality?
I predict the brexit party will now rise in the polls now the die is cast, especially after a ringing endorsement from President Trump.
Meanwhile back at the ranch - another bad day for compo:
On the first day of the campaign trail, Jeremy Corbyn suffered three major election blows. For the first time in its 100-year-history, the Jewish Labour Movement effectively went on strike, saying it would no longer send out activists due to the 'culture of anti-Semitism'. Labour also lost a battle with the BBC after attacking their anti-Semitism documentary and its presenter John Ware for apparent inaccuracy . To make matters worse for Corbyn, Nicola Sturgeon described him as 'completely and utterly useless'

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 07:15 PM

Jonathon Lis in Guardian commented:

We know Halloween is overhyped, but it did promise to be genuinely terrifying this year. Jacob Rees-Mogg warned that the Conservative party would cease to exist. Boris Johnson declared that he would die in a ditch. Mark Francois informed daytime television viewers that the country would explode


Well, did the earth move for you?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 07:14 PM

Bugger. Ten past eleven and nothing's happened. Still, never mind. Boris has PROMISED that we'll leave on 31 January. So that's all right then. A Boris promise. Woohoo! I'll restart the clock. Tick tock...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 07:11 PM

If you find anything wrong with what Jim and I have reproduced from Full Fact, Nigel, let's be having your alternative take. I read it carefully and couldn't find any defects in the piece. So it's over to you.

It is a fairly long piece, and I have not found problems with it.
My comment was much shorter, and you appear to have ignored the final paragraph:

And do remainers trust the "Full Fact" website?


If so we should not have further comments from remainers that the only reason (or even main reason) for Brexit is a forthcoming change in EU tax law:

If so we should not have further comments from remainers that the only reason (or even main reason) for Brexit is a forthcoming change in EU tax law: Full Facts >Full Facts

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 06:40 PM

As I sit here typing this it's 24 minutes to Brexit. I know this because Boris promised me. No ifs, no buts, do or die (he needs to reread that poem properly, actually), or belly-up in a ditch. I'm awaiting with bated breath. Will there be a loud siren? Will every church bell ring out? Will the mountains of the earth be laid low? Or shall I moisten this squib that I bought specially for Guido Fawkes - oops, sorry, GUY Fawkes night - next week? Anyway, I'll miss the moment as I'll be watching the Question Time bearpit, fool that I am! Tick bloody tock!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 02:56 PM

"And do remainers trust the "Full Fact" website?"

If you find anything wrong with what Jim and I have reproduced from Full Fact, Nigel, let's be having your alternative take. I read it carefully and couldn't find any defects in the piece. So it's over to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 02:30 PM

Boris and Farage have Trump on their side. Far more useful doncha think?

and even more importantly the polls ( not that they mean much this far from polling)
Ipsos MORI: CON: 41% (+8) LAB: 24% (-) LDEM: 20% (-3) BREX: 7% (-3)
YouGov: CON: 36% (-) LAB: 21% (-2) LDEM: 18% (-) BREX: 13% (+1)
Survation: CON: 34% (+2) LAB: 26% (+2) LDEM: 19% (-2) BREX: 12% (-1)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 02:08 PM

JOHNSON HAS GOD ON HIS SIDE

Don't suppose Nigel and his democrats would care to comment on this !!
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 01:55 PM

BREXIT AND OFFSHORE ACCOUNTS
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 01:40 PM

Full Facts is a website set up by Tory Donors and is backed by a network of major investors with their spoons dipped deeply into the Tory soup-bowl so any support for it's findings needs to take that into consideration
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 01:36 PM

The Full Facts about Full Facts Claim
Jim Carroll

We checked Boris Johnson's claim that a Brexit extension will cost £1bn a month – and yes, it's wrong
Full Fact: The PM is misleading you. If you’re going to make such a comparison, then you do need to actually compare the costs of both things
Tom Phillips @flashboy
Thursday 5 September 2019 12:50

In Boris Johnson’s first prime minister’s questions yesterday he claimed it would cost a net £1bn per month for Britain to stay in the EU beyond 31 October.
The claim echoes similar comments from foreign secretary Dominic Raab. Speaking on BBC Radio 4 earlier this week, he also said that the bill put forward by Hilary Benn and others – intended to rule out a no deal Brexit unless parliament consents – would cost British taxpayers £1bn a month. That’s based on the fact that we would be paying into the EU budget for longer.
This is an example of how a claim can be misleading without necessarily being incorrect. It needs more context.
The figure is based on a comparison with a no deal scenario – something that the government itself has said it doesn’t want. It relies on the assumption that under no deal, the UK won’t pay the “divorce bill” agreed with the EU. And it completely ignores a pretty fundamental point: that no deal itself would have significant costs.
The “divorce bill” agreed by Theresa May’s government already includes the UK’s normal payments into the EU budget until December 2020. The legislation currently before parliament itself proposes an extension only until January 2020.
As such, any payments into the EU budget following an extension during this period would reduce the final “divorce bill” paid upon leaving the EU by the same amount. And so, leaving with a deal in January 2020 wouldn’t cost more in EU budget contributions than leaving with a deal in October 2019 would.
This has already happened once: the original settlement was around £39 bn, but this is now down to £33bn, largely as a result of extending Brexit from March to October this year.
The government could of course plan to try and renegotiate this financial settlement before 31 October, but we aren’t aware of any indication so far that they hope to do this. The government position is that it still wants to leave with a deal, and any renegotiation efforts are focused on the question of the Irish backstop.
If Johnson is comparing the cost of any extension to a no-deal exit at the end of October, then his figure of £1bn for monthly EU contributions is in the right ballpark. However, as BBC Reality Check has pointed out, this doesn’t factor in payments received from the EU, which would reduce the amount by about a quarter.

It’s also not entirely clear that leaving with no deal would mean we could avoid paying the “divorce bill”, something which Boris Johnson has said several times would be his plan in a no-deal scenario.

When Full Fact looked at this question earlier this year, we found that under international law it’s not clearly set out that the UK has to pay anything once it has left the EU. However, the EU would be within its rights to take the case to the International Court of Justice on the grounds of the UK’s repeated commitments to pay, and the outcome of such a case would be hard to predict.
Like a lot of what’s said by all sides in the Brexit debate, context is everything. While not necessarily wrong to compare the potential cost of an extension to a no-deal exit, it’s misleading to do so given that the government’s stated intent is still to leave with a deal.
And if you’re going to make such a comparison, then you do need to actually compare the costs of both things – you need to factor in the fact that no deal itself will have both direct costs, and a broader economic impact. Most studies predict that the negative economic effects of leaving the EU will exceed the benefits of not having to pay the EU membership fee.
Tom Phillips is editor of Full Fact, the UK's independent fact checking charity

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 12:53 PM

From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 08:09 AM
And Johnson has repeatedly lied by claiming that every month of brexit delay costs the country £1 billion. From the Full Fact website:
In the House of Commons this week, Boris Johnson has twice repeated his claim that extending the date of Brexit for three months would cost £1 billion a month.


And do remainers trust the "Full Fact" website?


If so we should not have further comments from remainers that the only reason (or even main reason) for Brexit is a forthcoming change in EU tax law: Full Facts

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 09:36 AM

More of Johnsons supporter's are jumping ship.
This is a fine example of what happens when relabeling a newspaper article and not having a clue as to what is going on. One of tho MPs had the whip withdrawn and the other, a staunch remainer in a leave constituency, voted against the government in several pieces of recent legislation.
Along with many other denizens of the swamp they are leaving before being unceremoniously pushed by their constituents.
Neither, by the wildest stretch of the imagination can be regarded as Boris supporters.
So the attached link, as it is retitled, is simply false news.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 08:26 AM

"Unfortunate things, facts, aren’t they Steve?"

Dunno, John. Know anyone here I could ask? :-). Oddly, I thought I could hear a clock ticking too but it appears to have stopped...Maybe the battery was only designed to "do" until October 31, then die...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 08:19 AM

MORE OF JOHNSON'S SUPPORTERS ABANDONING SHIP have had enough and are doing a runner
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 08:12 AM

Unfortunate things, facts, aren’t they Steve?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 08:09 AM

And Johnson has repeatedly lied by claiming that every month of brexit delay costs the country £1 billion. From the Full Fact website:

In the House of Commons this week, Boris Johnson has twice repeated his claim that extending the date of Brexit for three months would cost £1 billion a month.

This is false, as we have said repeatedly. A three month extension costs the UK the same amount in EU budget payments as leaving under Boris Johnson’s own deal on 31 October would have.

Mr Johnson should correct his untrue statements to the House.

Why it’s wrong

The claim is based on the amount that the UK pays into the EU budget. Those payments are worth roughly £1 billion a month, although this doesn’t take into account some money that the UK gets back from the EU, as BBC Reality Check has pointed out.

But under Boris Johnson’s proposed deal, the UK will pay these budget contributions even after we’ve left the EU, until the end of December 2020. This is part of the financial settlement (better known as the “divorce bill”).

This is the same situation as under Theresa May’s deal—Boris Johnson’s government did not renegotiate the financial settlement.

That means the budget payments made during a Brexit extension to January 2020 simply have the effect of reducing the total divorce bill upon the UK’s departure. This has already happened before: the divorce bill was estimated at around £39 billion in March 2019, but is now down to around £33 billion as a result of extending the Brexit date by six months.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 07:15 AM

I note that the latest Dominic Cummings edict to all prominent Tories, in every soundbite to come, is that they must characterise Corbyn via the words "dither and delay." If they can work in "get brexit done" as well, that would be a bonus. Be prepared to hear both expressions emanating from the mouths of Tory sheep 20,000 times in the next few weeks.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 07:08 AM

The conservative party have reported momentum to the Electoral Commission. Tory vice-chairman Paul Scully has written to the Electoral Commission to raise their concerns about Momentum’s failure to register as a non-party campaigner for the upcoming election. In less than 12 hours, Momentum claimed they’ve already raised £100,000.

If a non-party campaigner intends to spend more than £20,000, the law requires that they should be registered with the Electoral Commission. Momentum have already been spending money over the last couple of months so could well have already committed a technical breach. The law clearly states that under Political Parties Elections Referendums Act 2000 (PPERA) non-party campaigners are required to register with the Electoral Commission if they incur ‘controlled expenditure’ over a prescribed threshold during the ‘regulated period’ prior to an election. We are now in the regulated ‘long campaign’.
I wonder how long it takes the electoral commission to react?

It should be pointed out that The electoral watchdog has been accused of anti-Brexit bias for having raided Nigel Farage's party HQ within hours of Gordon Brown demanding an investigation back in May.

No doubt many will be watching.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: peteglasgow
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 05:49 AM

me too, steve. and also your own post at 5.37

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 05:42 AM

And I fully agree with DMcG's post of 03.10am.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 05:37 AM

"Steve Shaw wrote: Brexiteers are ultra-tribalists. They IGNORE the sixteen-plus million who voted remain"

"And Remainers? They ignore 17.4 million who voted leave."

This is completely skewed. We can't "ignore" the 17 million, because they are getting their way. What they decided impacts leavers and remainers equally. We challenge the referendum result because we see it as illegitimate. We make the argument that the question asked was way too simplistic with regard to the sheer complexity of the issue. We contend that the successful leave campaign was predicated on xenophobia, even using racist material at times, and was essentially a pack of lies and propaganda intended to deceive the large numbers of the electorate who have a tangential transaction only with politics and who are thereby vulnerable to that propagandising. I hasten to add that I don't defend the remain campaign in the slightest, a point which actually reinforces my contention that the referendum was illegitimate. On the other hand, remainers have been told, including on a number of occasions here, that we lost, even that we're losers, our desire to remain will be completely ignored and that we should get over it. I could predict that this post will provoke that response yet again. Losers are easy to ignore. Winners impose their will on winners and losers equally and can't be ignored.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 04:12 AM

Interesting survey a couple of days ago
When do you think the UK is most likely to leave the European Union?
On 31st January
10%
Before 31st January
13%
After 31st January
23%
Not at all
22%
Don’t know
32%

I would treat all polls as suspect until the last minute, and even then if percentages are close the outcome cannot be predicted.
The joker in the pack this time is the Brexit party, and perhaps the millar tactical voting site.


I hope Compo's clutch of clots is obliterated. We shall see!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 03:56 AM

Wot's a compromise between in or out?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jFGjC2MpUU
A ghastly thought!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 03:22 AM

Tuck off is of course the famous correction by the more prudish spell checkers.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 03:17 AM

And Remainers? They ignore 17.4 million who voted leave.

I never have, Stanron. My preferred outcome is not to leave but I have said from the outset that 17 million people should not be ignored and some sort of compromise is needed. Not only have I been told that "you lost, get over it" but I have been told to tuck off to Poland where I belong, that I am a traitor and that I should be shot. Not by you, Stanron, but that attitude seems prevalent amongst you brave brexiteers.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 03:10 AM

Steve Shaw wrote: Brexiteers are ultra-tribalists. They IGNORE the sixteen-plus million who voted remain

And Remainers? They ignore 17.4 million who voted leave.

Brexiteers also ignore what is probably a big chunk of the 17.4 million (perhaps even a majority of it if there was any way of checking.) Many who voted leave wanted a Norway-style deal, as was talked about at the time. They are ignored as well: only the hardest of Brexits or no deal is allowed) That is one of the reasons I try (in vain it must be said) to distinguish Brexiteers from those who voted leave.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: robomatic
Date: 31 Oct 19 - 12:01 AM

I think given the gravity of the subject and the extension into 2020 another thread is warranted sequential-like.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Stanron
Date: 30 Oct 19 - 08:47 PM

Steve Shaw wrote: Brexiteers are ultra-tribalists. They IGNORE the sixteen-plus million who voted remain

And Remainers? They ignore 17.4 million who voted leave.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Oct 19 - 08:32 PM

Not responding necessarily to that last post.

But.

The mantra of brexiteers for the last three and a half years has been "we won, you lost, get over it." Clearly, they forgot that they got just over a third of the electorate and about a quarter of the country as a whole, but hey ho. Arsenal were beaten by Liverpool this evening, so came out with nothing whereas Liverpool came out with everything. Yet the thing was decided by the very last kick of a penalty shootout. As narrow a victory as is possible to achieve in the beautiful game. Well I don't live life like that. Passionate and tribalistic Liverpool fan that I am, I saw the merits of the young Arsenal team and will be looking out for them in future matches. I think that's pretty fair. Brexiteers are ultra-tribalists. They IGNORE the sixteen-plus million who voted remain. We are remoaners and we don't count and we should shut up about it. Well no we shouldn't. If leavers regard their precious referendum result as sacred, they should now have the humility, the conscience and the confidence to let the people have another say. I mean, lads, what are you scared of? That the will of the people doesn't coincide with yours any more?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 30 Oct 19 - 11:21 AM

The right to vote is the most immovable of the tenets of democracy
So why the insistence on ignoring the referendum vote?

You seem to get upset when Brexiteers hold to the tenet tenaciously.
Is it the wrong sort of vote, as you allude to above, and therefore should be ignored?

Unlike the illustruous Maggie(Blessed be her name) Labour is for turning - constantly.


Here is little toon for compo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4ga_M5Zdn4

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 30 Oct 19 - 11:20 AM

Quite so, Steve. I am sure there were those in New Zealand back in 1893 saying women should not have the vote because other countries did not give it to them.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Oct 19 - 10:51 AM

The right to vote is the most immovable of the tenets of democracy. I sit in front of the telly some nights and hear the vox pops which include people who clearly haven't a clue what they're talking about. It's perfectly obvious that millions of people who voted leave didn't know what they were really voting for. I happily resist the urge to shout out that they don't deserve the vote. Millions of people who don't follow politics at all still vote. This is a matter of principle that has been fought for over centuries. To me, the principle is that I can vote because I live here, pay taxes here, work(ed) here and am affected by government policy. That applies equally to EU citizens who live and work here. There couldn't be much objection to a minimum period of residency of several years and an insistence that they must relinquish the right to vote in another country as well. I'm aware that no other EU country affords such a right. But in my view they should. That's where I am on this. I don't care to be told that I can't propose something more fair and just than what we do now simply because others don't propose it.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 30 Oct 19 - 08:12 AM

voting rights for EU citizens is an injustice issue that needs urgent fixing. It won't be fixed, of course, while we have a bunch of eurosceptics running the show. We'll remember that next time we hear Tories burbling on about their concept of "democracy."

It is worth knowing no other EU country offers other EU citizens voting rights in its general elections - as here, locals and European elections yes, general elections, no.”Why should EU citizens in the UK be an exception in Europe?”

No.10 is opposed to the idea of extending the vote to EU nationals on similar grounds and said it would give EU citizens “wider voting rights” than UK nationals.
It seems you advocate creating an injustice.
Fact dear boy, fact!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Oct 19 - 08:02 AM

"Labour is way ahead among those aged 18 to 34, where student finance looms large, according to Ipsos Mori, although that is more than offset by a clear Conservative lead among the over 55s and a marginal lead among 35- to 54-year-olds. Pledges made to pensioners and older working age voters by both sides will be critical – particularly after the Tory disaster of the dementia tax in 2017."

Why Tories don't want to lower the voting age, despite the solid arguments for it. Why Tories wanted the 12th, not the 9th. Tories, the party of the wrinklies. Brexit, the policy for the wrinklies...

Steve (no Tory but still wrinkly)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Oct 19 - 07:39 AM

At 16 you can leave school and go into paid employment, when you will be subject to the same income tax regime as everyone else. You can join the army as a soldier at 16. You can marry and have children at 16. I note that the voting age for the Scottish independence referendum was 16. Whilst I support lowering the age to 16, I feel that it's a matter for more "leisurely" debate in Parliament than was possible yesterday. Trying to push it there and then risked putting off the election by months to allow for the bureaucracy of updating electoral registers. That would have been vexatious, though these things are always worth a shot, which at least puts the issue on the agenda for the future, a legitimate ploy in a democracy. I also note that this is an issue that has been pushed more by the SNP than by other parties, though there is wide cross-party support for it.

To me, voting rights for EU citizens is an injustice issue that needs urgent fixing. It won't be fixed, of course, while we have a bunch of eurosceptics running the show. We'll remember that next time we hear Tories burbling on about their concept of "democracy."

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Oct 19 - 06:05 AM

"I don't agree with giving 16/17 year olds the vote. Some of them are level-headed, but have little experience of life. They will still be guided by their teachers."


Well now, let's take a little look at this. Nigel, a Tory, doesn't want 16-year-olds to vote and gives us a vacuous reason as to why not. The real reason that Tories like Nigel don't want 16-year-olds to vote is that they know that 16-year-olds on the whole are very unlikely to vote Tory (what's more, they're far more likely to be remainers). Not only that, but they'd vote in droves because of the sheer novelty of just having been accorded the privilege. Dig into any Tory's expressed viewpoint and you will find self-interest at the core of it. Nigel feels uneasy that 16-year-olds will be under the influence of teachers. Presumably, Nigel thinks that teachers, on the whole, are a scruffy bunch of rabid leftie revolutionaries. So he doesn't trust their influence. Yet he has nothing to say about the influence on voters of the gutter mass media, four-fifths of whom are virulently anti-Corbyn, who routinely reproduce Boris's lies and who routinely mangle news and right-wing sentiment together to propagandise. Well I ask you, who do trust more to have useful and honest influence, the Sun/Daily Mail (try Richard Littlejohn some time), or a body of qualified, professional, carefully-selected teachers who are subjected to constant appraisal?

There's definitely a debate to be had about what the voting age should be. Personally, I'm in favour of lowering it, but I sort of agreed that trying to bring it in yesterday would have appeared to be vexatious. What I vehemently disagree with is that EU citizens who live, work and pay taxes here shouldn't be allowed the vote. That's an outrageous injustice in m'humble and I would have liked to see that one discussed. Had it been a successful amendment it would have severely delayed the election, but in my view that would have been justified. Again, of course, one expects that most of the 3.4 million would not be Tory voters...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 30 Oct 19 - 03:19 AM

since all the most experienced election analysts ar ed saying this is the most unpredictable election ever, I am not foolhardy enough to give a detailed prediction. But at a broad level Johnson will do well if he can keep the focus on Brexit and fight off both Farage and the consequences of all the hostages to fortune quotes he, Patel and Raab have made in the last few years. The other parties will not forget about the WAB either and could pull some tricky stuff out of that. But, as I say, keep it on Brexit and avoid the detail and Johnson will do well.

Get onto all the other things in life and the problems for them become apparent. The simplest rejoinder to all the wonderful things promises in the Queen's speech for Labour heartlands is "When did you ever know the Tories to do any of that?"

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 29 Oct 19 - 05:35 PM

So Corbyn and his fellow turkeys have finally voted for christmas.
This will go down in history as the great cull. Will Labour be both roasted and basted? They obviously do not require the provision of a rotisserie - they are well used to spinning!
All we need now is the Lords to attempt to frustrate the election by attaching further amendments. Boris will have a busy time ahead!
If I had my way I would:
increase the voting age to 25
Ban postal votes to all but the infirm, service personnel and students.
Students voting in university towns skew the vote.
I would insist they vote only in their home constituency.
I would also insist that those wishing to vote provide ID to be checked against the electoral roll before being allowed to. participate
Provision of foreign observers to ensure no voting irregularities.

Has anyone informed Putin so he can arrange interference?

Another bit of superb news is that 47 of the swamp rats are standing down including the squeaker.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 29 Oct 19 - 04:43 PM

No "deal" has gone through, Stanron. Johnson pulled the further debate on it before it was approved and with the election all incomplete bills fall.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Oct 19 - 04:02 PM

" how did they live?""
It's been agreed to in principle - it's a long way from having gone through
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Stanron
Date: 29 Oct 19 - 03:34 PM

Backwoodsman wrote: Living in the past seems to be a Thing with the Brexit-Bunch.

Since the 'Deal' has now gone through, surely it's the remainers who are living in the past.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 Oct 19 - 03:08 PM

Living in the past seems to be a Thing with the Brexit-Bunch.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 29 Oct 19 - 02:26 PM

Since the 16/17 amendment has not been considered, this is a little academic. But of course there are degrees of adulthood - just look at the age of consent compared to the age where you can get a provisional licence to getting a full licence. Almost every society recognises there is a gradual transition to become a fully developed adult. The exceptions are those where there is some ceremony, often religious in nature, which define crossing from one stage to another.

As for only voting if you pay taxes, I can't think this is a fully developed idea, Nigel. Maybe a gut feel, but let's just take one real life example. My wife is too young to claim state pension, and has not drawn her pension from work, but retired some three years ago. Sounds like you would rule she has no vote. Then let's try a thought experiment. Two people on zero hour contracts earning very little. Jack is under the tax threshold, so no tax, but Jill paid £1 over the entire year, so you are happy for Jill to vote but not Jack? Or do you want to set a threshold - so you have to be rich enough to vote?   

And then why not more votes if you pay more taxes?   After all, the logic seems to be those who contribute taxes are the only ones with a vote, so more votes for more taxes just takes that a step further.

Sounds like you want to get back before the Great Reform Acts in some ways.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Oct 19 - 02:24 PM

"but have little experience of life. They will still be guided by their teachers."
You mean the teachers can't be trusted ?
Interesting insight to a conservative's view of British education
Roll on the day the Prime Minister can appoint all our teachers eh, Nigel
I thought it was only Communist countries who sought to control the minds of the young (and teh Church, of course)
"curioser and curioser" as Alice was once heard to remark
"not be out earning their keep "
Heah, 'bout time those lazy bastards drawing the dole had the vote taken away too
Jim Carroll