Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Gups]

Moderator fainted part way through.

[The Brain]

Moderator fainted part way through.

Odd. They must have known that the candidates would be insane.

[crazy canuck]

Moderator fainted part way through.

Odd. They must have known that the candidates would be insane.

It is one thing to read about, or even see it online, but seeing it in person has to be traumatic.

[The Brain]

Moderator fainted part way through.

Odd. They must have known that the candidates would be insane.

It is one thing to read about, or even see it online, but seeing it in person has to be traumatic.

 

[Gups]

Moderator fainted part way through.

Odd. They must have known that the candidates would be insane.

There was originally going to be two mods. One pulled a sickie beforehand with covid leaving the other with no choice but to press the self-destruct button.

[Josquius]

Regionalist parties - you already do get various northern Regionalist parties popping up and getting sub 5% of the vote.
In local elections regionalists of a different sket often do well, basically fascists being very coy about their true leanings and claiming to be neutral and just a good alternative to more of the same labour stuff.
I once half arsedly voted for them. Though in a recent election had one of their leaders sending masked threats over Facebook, he wanted to do a voice call with me which I sadly had no interest in setting up, really should have done and recorded.
Andddd they got into the ruling coalition of the county and made decisions that would be global news for how awful they are if it was in London.

But overall was just thinking for something vaguely comprehensible as an example :p

Repercussions for leaving the EU? Why I never!

Brits freaking out that they have to prove they have money and return ticket to enter Spain.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11049249/British-tourists-able-prove-spend-85-day-enter-Spain.html

I know Daily Mail is a cluster, but I like reading for a laugh

 

See I am telling you, a lot of Brits just took it for granted that they can go wherever the heck they please because they are Brits and the EU had nothing to do with that. And most of them aren't really arrogant or mean about this - it's just the natural order of things.

Yes.
And all the shit going on now is the EUs fault. They're just angry we got out and being vengeful and petty or some nonsense.
Rather than, you know, exactly what we asked for.

[mongers]

Regionalist parties - you already do get various northern Regionalist parties popping up and getting sub 5% of the vote.
In local elections regionalists of a different sket often do well, basically fascists being very coy about their true leanings and claiming to be neutral and just a good alternative to more of the same labour stuff.

And all the shit going on now is the EUs fault. They're just angry we got out and being vengeful and petty or some nonsense.
Rather than, you know, exactly what we asked for.

Wessex nationalists FTW.

[Sheilbh]

The Wessex regionalists are actually anti-Brexit and have quite a lot of ambition for "a Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals"

I think the Yorkshire Party were pro-EFTA (they were neutral on Brexit itself but acknowledge that Yorkshire was above average leave - and think EFTA was the best deal). There's Mebyon Kernow too.

But I think Jake's right, none of them would necessarily do well with PR - ideological splits plus nationalists in Wales, Scotland and distinctive Northern Irish politics is more likely.

[Sheilbh]

Really interesting reading about focus group responses to Sunak-Truss. It seems like the wealth, wife's tax status and his perceived failure to do enough on cost of living really hurt him - lots don't necessarily disagree with him but think he just doesn't get their situation so won't act to help them.

They also think he comes across as too polished and slick.

Interesting that things MPs had largely moved on from in round one - and thought he'd recovered from - are still big issues for voters.

[Josquius]

Watching Dutch TV this morning caught a bit of a program where a guy is visiting England.
Goes to a traditional chip shop and asks about brexit.
Chip shop guy says - I just don't like people telling me what to do and Europe is another layer of that.
Naiivety of course. If nobody is telling you what to do then nobody is telling the guy coming to rob you what do either.
But a hard one to tackle.

[Gups]

The Wessex regionalists are actually anti-Brexit and have quite a lot of ambition for "a Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals"

I think the Yorkshire Party were pro-EFTA (they were neutral on Brexit itself but acknowledge that Yorkshire was above average leave - and think EFTA was the best deal). There's Mebyon Kernow too.

But I think Jake's right, none of them would necessarily do well with PR - ideological splits plus nationalists in Wales, Scotland and distinctive Northern Irish politics is more likely.

There would be a lot fewer SNP MPs as well under PR.

[Sheilbh]

I think the Sam Tarry/strikes issue is really interesting and tough for Labour.

My immediate thought is that it's not unreasonable for workers to strike over being offered 3% pay increases suring a period of 10% inflation, particularly in the context (especially in the public sector) of a decade of real term pay cuts. Similarly a party founded by and named after organised labour should not have much reluctance in supporting strike action over that (but not necessarily every strike by everyone). I feel like they're getting this wrong on both the principle and the politics.

I get there's a political risk to being seen to support strikes that inconvenience people and this might get even more serious with other strikes such as teachers, royal mail workers, BT workers, nurses etc. But I worry this is an example of Starmer just copying the 80s/90s Labour modernisation project. I feel like the politics/public opinion is different after covid - especially in relation to key workers - with high inflation and following a long period of pay freezes for many people than it was in the 80s/90s.

As with other bits of the economy it's an area where I think Labour need to be a bit bolder. Again it just feels like they're going through the New Labour playbook without the underlying thinking that went into it.

Edit: Worth pointing out that in the specific Tarry case there are reports he might have been trying to get sacked. He's facing an open reselection and a challenge from the left in his constituency, so becoming a martyr over this isn't a bad look.

[crazy canuck]

I think the Sam Tarry/strikes issue is really interesting and tough for Labour.

My immediate thought is that it's not unreasonable for workers to strike over being offered 3% pay increases suring a period of 10% inflation, particularly in the context (especially in the public sector) of a decade of real term pay cuts. Similarly a party founded by and named after organised labour should not have much reluctance in supporting strike action over that (but not necessarily every strike by everyone). I feel like they're getting this wrong on both the principle and the politics.

I get there's a political risk to being seen to support strikes that inconvenience people and this might get even more serious with other strikes such as teachers, royal mail workers, BT workers, nurses etc. But I worry this is an example of Starmer just copying the 80s/90s Labour modernisation project. I feel like the politics/public opinion is different after covid - especially in relation to key workers - with high inflation and following a long period of pay freezes for many people than it was in the 80s/90s.

As with other bits of the economy it's an area where I think Labour need to be a bit bolder. Again it just feels like they're going through the New Labour playbook without the underlying thinking that went into it.

Edit: Worth pointing out that in the specific Tarry case there are reports he might have been trying to get sacked. He's facing an open reselection and a challenge from the left in his constituency, so becoming a martyr over this isn't a bad look.

The NDP in this province turned support for public sector workers (especially teachers and nurses) very much to their advantage.  They were very effective at communicating that the strikes when the right wing party was in power were both justified and the grievances would be fixed if they formed government.  But as effective as that was, they are now in a hard bargaining position with many public sector unions in, as you point out, a high inflation environment.  It is going to be interesting to see how this works out.  The unions have an interest in not making the NDP look too bad, because a return of the right wing government will likely be worse for them in the long run.  But on the other hand, since an election result two years from now is uncertain, from the unions' perspective, maybe its better to strike while the iron is hot.   

[Sheilbh]

The NDP in this province turned support for public sector workers (especially teachers and nurses) very much to their advantage.  They were very effective at communicating that the strikes when the right wing party was in power were both justified and the grievances would be fixed if they formed government.  But as effective as that was, they are now in a hard bargaining position with many public sector unions in, as you point out, a high inflation environment.  It is going to be interesting to see how this works out.  The unions have an interest in not making the NDP look too bad, because a return of the right wing government will likely be worse for them in the long run.  But on the other hand, since an election result two years from now is uncertain, from the unions' perspective, maybe its better to strike while the iron is hot.   

Yeah - I think I lean more to the strike while the iron's hot argument. Also in the UK there's been a bit of a shift in the unions - a number of elected general secretaries who have campaigned as "industrial" union leaders. Their argument has been that they intend to be far more focused on things like pay and conditions, rather than focusing on the politics (and particularly spending lots of time on the internal politics of the Labour party).

I think that's a good and better approach but it does mean they may well end up clashing with Labour - or in your case the NDP - even if they are politically arguably better for them. I also think the public are more sympathetic to unions that are focusing on their members rather than more politically focused.

The Labour line is incidentally that these strikes wouldn't happen if they were in power and they would be negotiating with the unions and employers to reach a settlement. But they don't support the strikes and have banned shadow ministers from the picket line (which is where Tarry did media appearances from this morning). I think they've said being on a picket line wasn't the sacking offence, instead it was breach of collective responsibility because Tarry basically pay settlements should be at or above inflation (Labour's policy is it should be negotiated by the companies and unions).

I got it wrong on Tarry - he's facing a challenge from the right so needs to rally the left.

Edit: And more generally I don't think it matters where parties are politically and I think there's a limit to what anyone can do - but I think cost of living, supply chain issues, industrial unrest etc or some combination of it is going to be really challenging for any party in power. I'd be surprised if any incumbents survive elections in the next couple of years.

[garbon]

I think the Sam Tarry/strikes issue is really interesting and tough for Labour.

My immediate thought is that it's not unreasonable for workers to strike over being offered 3% pay increases suring a period of 10% inflation, particularly in the context (especially in the public sector) of a decade of real term pay cuts. Similarly a party founded by and named after organised labour should not have much reluctance in supporting strike action over that (but not necessarily every strike by everyone). I feel like they're getting this wrong on both the principle and the politics.

I get there's a political risk to being seen to support strikes that inconvenience people and this might get even more serious with other strikes such as teachers, royal mail workers, BT workers, nurses etc. But I worry this is an example of Starmer just copying the 80s/90s Labour modernisation project. I feel like the politics/public opinion is different after covid - especially in relation to key workers - with high inflation and following a long period of pay freezes for many people than it was in the 80s/90s.

As with other bits of the economy it's an area where I think Labour need to be a bit bolder. Again it just feels like they're going through the New Labour playbook without the underlying thinking that went into it.

Edit: Worth pointing out that in the specific Tarry case there are reports he might have been trying to get sacked. He's facing an open reselection and a challenge from the left in his constituency, so becoming a martyr over this isn't a bad look.

I don't really see how standing for pay increases in line with inflation for select unions (like transport) would play all that well with the rest of the country.