Brexit

[Orval Wintermute]

https://twitter.com/bbaschuk/status/1021869965539008518?s=21
For everyone who says "don't worry the UK can fall back on WTO rules"

[Mechelle]

Meanwhile, David Campbell Bannerman, who is a Conservative MEP, has said that the Treason Act should be brought up to date and applied against "extreme jihadis" and "those working against
U.K. through extreme EU loyalty." He subsequently edited the latter sentence to insert the word undemocratically.

I absolutely despair at the arrogance, aggression and hypocrisy of people like this. He has switched from the Conservatives to UKIP and then back to the Conservatives. He lives in Antwerp and takes a salary and presumably plans to take a pension from the EU.

https://mobile.twitter.com/DCBMEP/status/1022044869081083905

[Eye of Horus]

To be fair, Guy Verhofstadt immediately branded him “insane” (as did many, many others on both sides of the Channel). In fact, it’s so insane that I’m not sure if this is just another loony rant against dissenters, or a deliberate dead-cat-on-the-table to distract from everything else that’s gone wrong for Brexit lately.

I’m not surprised to hear that he has bounced between UKIP and the Conservative party - many have. UKIP is, to all intents and purposes, the fruitcake fringe of the Tory party. Beneath their upfront views on immigration and social regressionism (aka “traditional values”), they push all of the same economic dogma as the Conservatives. Most of their candidates are from the same establishment backgrounds as most Tories. By cloaking themselves in a “man of the people” act, they have been able to harness the anger at 30 years of bad economic policy and pull the mainstream Tory party rightwards into their way of thinking.

[Orval Wintermute]

https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/culture-media-and-sport/Fake_news_evidence/Ads-supplied-by-Facebook-to-the-DCMS-Committee.pdf
The letters\documents might seem boring and trivial at first glance but a closer look at the spreadsheets for Vote Leave and BeLeave  shows AIQ were pumping out ads on Facebook during 17-19 June.
But all campaigns had supposedly agreed to suspend activities on those 3 days out of respect for Jo Cox MP who was murdered on the 16th. 

[Eye of Horus]

My initial thought was that the ads were already “out there” at the time, but according to a leaked conversation between BeLeave and AIQ, the campaigners were fully aware and greenlit the ads. Not technically illegal, but disgusting.

What may well be illegal is that these targeted ads were splashed over people’s Facebook feeds without being clearly marked as referendum campaign material. I think it’s high time to make it mandatory for all political ads to go through the Electoral Commission prior to publishing. “Dark ads” like these are incredibly dangerous - they have literally been used to rig elections in several developing countries.

It would be nice if we could crack down on AIQ and Cambridge Analytica (or whatever they’ve rebranded themselves as) alongside the fraudsters who hired them.

[Orval Wintermute]

Campaigning wasn't suspended until later on in the evening of the 16th, so you can forgive ads going out late on the 16th and early on the morning of the 17th because there'd be nobody in the office to turn them off. But after that it becomes indefensible, the problem with AIQ running the ads is that they were so well targeted the people seeing the ads would be those least likely to complain.

The one thing missing from those ads is any kind of imprint, that has to appear on physical ads (the "Printed by X on behalf of Y"). Missing that off or faking an imprint gets you into a lot of trouble with the Electoral Commission. But it's easy for political opponents to see those physical adds and complain if they go over the line, with targeted ads the opposition will never see them if the targeting is perfect. Having the Electoral Commission clear the ads feels over the top but having to provide the opposition with copies of the ads in a timely fashion doesn't feel overly burdensome.

[gaggedLouise]

William Keegan (of The Guardian) on the failure of real political leadership after the Breaxit reverendum - neither the Tories nor Labour have been able to handle the situation in a fair manner: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jul/29/brexit-must-vote-again-second-referendum

I myself have been hesitant about a second referendum, believing with the long-departed Edmund Burke that, as he said in his famous speech to the electors of Bristol, parliamentarians are our representatives, not just our delegates, and should be allowed to exercise their own considered judgment in these matters (it being common – indeed Commons – knowledge that the vast majority of MPs regard Brexit as an act of self-harm, not to say economic suicide).

However, if our prime minister, cabinet and other elected representatives cannot grasp this Churchillian opportunity for national leadership, the only hope is that they delegate the final say, once again, to the people: by which time one can only hope that the message has got through.

There is something truly ridiculous about the government preparing to stock up for a hard Brexit on 29 March 2019 – facing the prospect of wartime shortages of supplies, not least of the vast quantities of food we import daily from “the Continent” – when it is not 1914 or 1939 and the only war we are preparing for is a war on ourselves.

[Eye of Horus]

I like the idea, though how another referendum would be organised in time for Brexit Day next March (a date which the Tories insisted on writing into the EU Withdrawal Bill) is an issue, as is the choice of question - No Deal vs Remain would have to stress that a Remain vote couldn’t simply return things to exactly how they were (even if that’s just a pledge to implement some of the immigration powers that we already had within the EU), while No Deal vs Whatever May Cobbles Together would be a gun to the head of the electorate (“endorse my deal which will leave you worse off, or suffer even worse under No Deal”).

For now though, it’s academic because another vote remains categorically off the table. Of course, a snap general election was also categorically off the table until it wasn’t, but I have no faith in Theresa May and her cabinet to do what is better for Britain rather than what will placate the eurosceptic Tories and keep them in power for one more miserable day.

There is justifiable blame aimed at Labour for ducking the question of Brexit while they try and decide if coming out for Remain is electoral suicide or not, but at the end of the day the buck stops with the sitting government, not with the opposition. This holds true from the stonewalled negotiations to the wasted time on infighting to calling the referendum in the first place - all of which happened under the Tories.

[gaggedLouise]

I like the idea, though how another referendum would be organised in time for Brexit Day next March (a date which the Tories insisted on writing into the EU Withdrawal Bill) is an issue, as is the choice of question - No Deal vs Remain would have to stress that a Remain vote couldn’t simply return things to exactly how they were (even if that’s just a pledge to implement some of the immigration powers that we already had within the EU), while No Deal vs Whatever May Cobbles Together would be a gun to the head of the electorate (“endorse my deal which will leave you worse off, or suffer even worse under No Deal”).

For now though, it’s academic because another vote remains categorically off the table. Of course, a snap general election was also categorically off the table until it wasn’t, but I have no faith in Theresa May and her cabinet to do what is better for Britain rather than what will placate the eurosceptic Tories and keep them in power for one more miserable day.

There is justifiable blame aimed at Labour for ducking the question of Brexit while they try and decide if coming out for Remain is electoral suicide or not, but at the end of the day the buck stops with the sitting government, not with the opposition. This holds true from the stonewalled negotiations to the wasted time on infighting to calling the referendum in the first place - all of which happened under the Tories.

Sure, the Tories, May and Johnson etc are the main culprits, but Labour have their share too - and both Labour and The Tories had a fairly weak (and smug?) party leadership even before the latest election. I'm not sure Corbyn would make a great prime minister, but he's not been a great opposition leader either.

Also, I think the Brexit mess highlights a wider problem that's also seen in the US and in many other countries - even in Sweden. Political parties have become more and more of election-winning machines - they used to be anchored to local branches of the party, and to ideas and popular movements - and their top tier see it as their chief job not to represent the will of the people or to wisely lead the country in dialogue with the people, but instead their job is seen as winning the election and getting/staying in government, by whatever means needed. Which is not going to be conducive to a foresighted, fair and intelligent political conversation. And even if many ordinary citizens can see that many in the top bunch are self-serving, more or less corrupt and unwilling to handle real political and economic challenges, or to get into fair negotiations, well if there isn't a useful opposition able to act on this, the government cronies (and the top bureaucrats they have appointed) will remain essentially safe until the next election.

Maybe this weakness used to be seen as acceptable because after all the opposition and the newspapers' political reporting would mostly, finally get their act together, but when the political gameplay beings nothing but sour apples for a big share of the citizens, and especially those citizens who don't have loads of money, then it gets less and less easy to stomach for the common people. And a hard or semi-hard Brexit is not going to be anywhere near what many of those who voted Leave thought it would be.

[Eye of Horus]

Some of the highlights (and lowlights) of last week’s Brexit news:

As expected, French president Macron kept to the long-agreed position of the EU 27 on rejecting the cherry-picking aspects of the UK’s Chequers brexit deal. The next round of talks are scheduled for the 16th and 17th of August.

The government has now suggested a so-called “blind brexit” where apart from the Northern Irish border and pre-agreed contributions from the UK, all aspects of the deal would be to be determined after the UK leaves. A number of Brexiteer MPs are backing this plan, possibly because it is essentially a delayed No Deal (which on a personal level they stand to profit from substantially).

Meanwhile, Labour members plan to pressure Jeremy Corbyn to support a People’s Vote on the final brexit deal. This could provide a democratic mandate to remain in the EU, but would be risky in any upcoming snap-election as it could allow the Conservatives to position themselves as the only “real” brexit party and thus stem their current hemorrhage of voters back to UKIP.

A group of fascist protestors have smashed up a bookshop in London, apparently after breaking off from a march against Info Wars being banned from Youtube. Comparisons to Nazi book burnings are inevitable. Luckily, the idiots filmed themselves prior and during the attack, and so are likely to be caught.

Tensions are boiling over on the left as well, as unknown protestors vandalised the house of hard-right MP (and prominent brexiteer) Jacob Rees Mogg. Graffiti was left, along with condoms, the latter apparently in protest of Mogg’s hardline anti-abortion stance.

And, deliberately relegated to last, Boris Johnson has returned to his Katie-Hopkins-style offensive clickbaiting as a Telegraph journalist. Some speculate that he is laying the ground for a leadership challenge, though IMHO this remains unlikely; he will know that most Tory MPs are likely to close ranks rather than risk a government collapse and another election. Plus, Johnson and the other brexiteer MPs have already been quite effective at dictating government policy from behind the scenes, while allowing the hapless prime minister May to take all the blame.

[Eye of Horus]

The Leave.EU campaign believe that a leadership challenge among the governing party is “inevitable” - and have actually openly encouraged UKIP supporters to join the Tory party to influence it.

In other news, leading Brexit supporter and former minister Steve Baker has moved a large sum of his money into gold to guard against the expected drop in the value of the £ post-Brexit. Taken together with the recent manoeuvres of other brexiteers - Jacob Rees-Mogg has moved his investment firm to Ireland to retain the benefits of single market access, Vote Leave chairman Nigel Lawson has applied for French residency to preserve his personal freedom of movement, and billionaire donor Michael Ashcroft and MP John Redwood have both advised their financial sector clients to divest from Britain - I feel that actions speak louder than words for those touting the “advantages” of Brexit.

[Mechelle]

I was amused by Conservative grandee Nicholas Soames' (who, besides being Prince Charles's best friend is quite right wiñg, but a remainer) tweeting that "the problem with Jacob Rees-Mogg is that people confuse his undoubted fluency and a moderately well cut suit with wisdom but sadly he's plain wrong."

I had never thought that "moderately" could be so harsh a word.

[Oniya]

I had never thought that "moderately" could be so harsh a word.

'Damning with faint praise', if I recall the technique correctly.

[Eye of Horus]

"the problem with Jacob Rees-Mogg is that people confuse his undoubted fluency and a moderately well cut suit with wisdom but sadly he's plain wrong."

It’s unfortunate that people in general are quite bad at mistaking someone who speaks confidently for someone who is actually competent.

[Orval Wintermute]

I was amused by Conservative grandee Nicholas Soames' (who, besides being Prince Charles's best friend is quite right wiñg, but a remainer) tweeting that "the problem with Jacob Rees-Mogg is that people confuse his undoubted fluency and a moderately well cut suit with wisdom but sadly he's plain wrong."

I had never thought that "moderately" could be so harsh a word.

Soames is Churchill's grandson and seems to have inherited some of his grandfather's knack for a well tailored put down.
Also with Rees-Mogg, Brexit and the looming economic clusterfuck, it's worth remembering that Rees-Mogg's father literally wrote the book on on how to make money off the back of an economic crisis.

[Mechelle]

Soames is Churchill's grandson and seems to have inherited some of his grandfather's knack for a well tailored put down.

Very good!

Meanwhile, Theresa May is gamely dancing in South Africa and avoiding answering any questions as to whether or not she would vote for Brexit now.

[Orval Wintermute]

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/brexiteers-happy-for-uk-to-go-into-recession-poll/
It's hard not to paint all Brexiters as ideological nut-jobs when there are polls like this. I mean who in their right mind wants increased food prices or that stockpiling medicines is a good move or that a recession is good for country.

[Skynet]

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/brexiteers-happy-for-uk-to-go-into-recession-poll/
It's hard not to paint all Brexiters as ideological nut-jobs when there are polls like this. I mean who in their right mind wants increased food prices or that stockpiling medicines is a good move or that a recession is good for country.

This applies more to the USA, but there are some ultra-right Trump supporters who are more than happy to live at a lower standard of living if it means not having to share a neighborhood or office space with Latinos, Muslims, or any handful of other groups conservatives hate.

I take it that Brexiters are the same, in that Slavic and Muslim immigration where one of their big talking points.

[Eye of Horus]

It may be related to the tired old trope of the WW2 “Blitz spirit” - make do, keep calm and carry on. It may or may not be coincidence that this mentality is most popular with the Boomer generation who grew up with romanticised tales of their parents’ experiences of WW2, but never actually had to live through it.

The Blitz spirit has even been deliberately invoked by Brexiteers like Johnson and Rees Mogg (who, despite his highbrow-sounding references to obscure history, can’t even get the facts of those right). This article from the Irish Times shows how ignorant this all looks from the outside.

[Mechelle]

Yes, one of the most pronounced differences between remainers and leavers seems to be the level of education, and it has been said of prominent leavers such as Johnson and Rees-Mogg that they fit an uneducated person's idea of what an educated person is like, with their random incorrect but authoritative sounding statements and lapses into Latin.

Boris Johnson said today that Theresa May's proposed Chequers agreement would be the first time since 1066 that our leaders deliberately acquiesced in foreign rule, and then goes on about the UK being an ancient parliamentary democracy.

All very confident sounding, but neither the UK nor parliament  existed in 1066, and I think the change then was due to battle and conquest rather than acquiescence. 1066 is probably the least obscure date in history, but they come out with stuff like this again and again.

[gaggedLouise]

Yes, one of the most pronounced differences between remainers and leavers seems to be the level of education, and it has been said of prominent leavers such as Johnson and Rees-Mogg that they fit an uneducated person's idea of what an educated person is like, with their random incorrect but authoritative sounding statements and lapses into Latin.

Boris Johnson said today that Theresa May's proposed Chequers agreement would be the first time since 1066 that our leaders deliberately acquiesced in foreign rule, and then goes on about the UK being an ancient parliamentary democracy.

All very confident sounding, but neither the UK nor parliament  existed in 1066, and I think the change then was due to battle and conquest rather than acquiescence. 1066 is probably the least obscure date in history, but they come out with stuff like this again and again.

Nice observation, they do like to speak in that kind of flashy and fluffy hyperbole, emotionally charged but usually low on actuial content - or hinting downright falsehoods.

And apparently Johnson hasn't even thought about the other most famous year of British history, 1603 - when Queen Bess died without any children and was succeeded on the throne by a younger relative of the Scottish queen she'd had beheaded sixteen years earlier. Nice reversal. :)

Or by the way, when Henry VII became the first Tudor king, it was with heavy support of French troops and defeating a crowned English king, Richard III - whose soldiers and knights were then declared traitors to the country for having done their duty. :( Foreign interference, anyone?

[Mechelle]

I must admit that I stole somebody else's comment, but that sort of language is evidently attractive to quite a few people who vote against what you might think are their own interests.

While I wouldn't want to defend Richard III, (and am resisting going off on a tangent), you can easily find many examples in history, as you have, which don't fit Jacob Rees-Mogg's narrative. I think he is a charming and oddly likeable man, but wouldn't want him to run anything.

[Orval Wintermute]

Sir Keir Starmer has caused a bit of stir with Labour's position on Brexit and ratifying referendum.
Over the weekend Corbyn & Macdonald said that another referendum was a possibility but that relied on there being no deal agreed and there being no subsequent General Election. Both were implying that the terms of the referendum would be either take the deal that Parliament just rejected or leave the EU and drop out to WTO rules.
Today Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Minister for Exiting the EU, gave his speech to the Labour party conference. Like all speeches it had to be cleared by Corbyn's office, which was fine but during the speech Starmer dropped in a line about all options were still open including staying in the EU. It got a huge round of applause but Corbyn & co. are not entirely happy.

[Mechelle]

It's all very curious. Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is happy with the speech and that it had been cleared with his office, if I have understood his interview correctly.

Certainly some of his leading colleagues did not look happy, although the majority of people in the hall gave Starmer rousing applause.

It might even do Theresa May a favour, as she can say to the extremist brexiters that if they don't support he, they will have to face another referendum.

As I say, it's all very curious, and indicates the splits within parties here. At least, none of the audience laughed.

[Eye of Horus]

Various sources have confirmed that the Labour leadership has reached a consensus - which if I’m reading it correctly is to push for a general election as plan A, and a people’s vote (with possible Remain option) as plan B. Appealing though Plan A is, Parliament needs a 2/3 majority to call an early election, and Conservative MPs are not known for putting country before party - as much as they hate Theresa May, or Brexit, or that Brexit isn’t as “hard” as they would like, they must know that they stand a good chance of losing a new election.

If for the sake of argument Labour were able to greenlight an election, one estimate indicated that they would pick up ~2 million new votes on a Stop Brexit ticket, while losing ~700k. On the face of it that’s a good trade, but they also have to consider the knock-on effects of where these voter demographics are (many target seats still have a lot of pro-Brexit voters), and a possible surge of voters from UKIP back to the Tories if they can make it a single-issue election and position themselves as the “only party for Brexit”.

I can’t really find fault with an “all options open” stance on a public vote, once people have had a chance to examine the future deal. And whether Labour is attempting Remain by stealth or not (Kier Starmer must know that the only way to truly meet his Six Tests is to not leave), I can’t fault them for voting against every BS proposal that has so far come out of DExEU either.