Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[crazy canuck]

Just checking in to reiterate that making major national decisions (like Scotland leaving the UK, or Britain leaving the EU), should never be subjected to a simple majority rules referendum. One instant in history a bunch of people can choose something stupid and they end up causing dire consequences for untold millions of future generations. For this level of national decision I am glad the United States has so many blockers in its government system. 3/4ths of the states to alter the constitution and it requires 2/3rds of the Senate to enter into treaties.

Completely agree. Ridiculous that the UK is moving forward with this insanity with so weak of a popular mandate. I mean if everybody knew it was going to be a hard Brexit would they still have gotten the same percentage vote? The Brexiteers were able to promise 10,000 unicorns and all sorts of things because nobody knew what the hell Brexit meant.  How can a vague election with a narrow margin of victory be a determining factor for something like this?

You are both making the mistake of thinking the referendum is binding on Parliament.  It is not.  The only reason the referendum has any force is because the MPs in Parliament choose to act as if it does.  Brexit would end if that was the will of parliament.  But both Labour and the Conservatives seem quite content to watch this slow motion train wreck unfold.

[garbon]

Can we focus on the truly awful bit?

And asked how she unwinds from the "world's most stressful job", she said she enjoyed walking, cooking and watching US crime TV series NCIS.

I think that's just calculated to appeal to the core DM reading conservative party members; I doubt she watches that pap.

The first time I ever saw it was here in the UK!

[garbon]

Just checking in to reiterate that making major national decisions (like Scotland leaving the UK, or Britain leaving the EU), should never be subjected to a simple majority rules referendum. One instant in history a bunch of people can choose something stupid and they end up causing dire consequences for untold millions of future generations. For this level of national decision I am glad the United States has so many blockers in its government system. 3/4ths of the states to alter the constitution and it requires 2/3rds of the Senate to enter into treaties.

Completely agree. Ridiculous that the UK is moving forward with this insanity with so weak of a popular mandate. I mean if everybody knew it was going to be a hard Brexit would they still have gotten the same percentage vote? The Brexiteers were able to promise 10,000 unicorns and all sorts of things because nobody knew what the hell Brexit meant.  How can a vague election with a narrow margin of victory be a determining factor for something like this?

You are both making the mistake of thinking the referendum is binding on Parliament.  It is not.  The only reason the referendum has any force is because the MPs in Parliament choose to act as if it does.  Brexit would end if that was the will of parliament.  But both Labour and the Conservatives seem quite content to watch this slow motion train wreck unfold.

I'm not sure though if Britain views 'non-binding' referenda in the same way as the term suggests. I think the British public might view deviating from a non-binding results as a subversion of democracy.

[Tamas]

I just find it astonishing that the British government and consequently the public are debating the same stuff on this as they did 2 years ago. Even things that May supposedly agree on with the EU in the first round are now full of question mark. There truly has been no progress whatsoever.

[Josquius]

The Checker's plan at last seemed to be progress, something that could be debated on.
But no. They pull it back and here we go again with demands for unicorns.

[The Minsky Moment]

They took the "through" out of "muddling through"

[crazy canuck]

Just checking in to reiterate that making major national decisions (like Scotland leaving the UK, or Britain leaving the EU), should never be subjected to a simple majority rules referendum. One instant in history a bunch of people can choose something stupid and they end up causing dire consequences for untold millions of future generations. For this level of national decision I am glad the United States has so many blockers in its government system. 3/4ths of the states to alter the constitution and it requires 2/3rds of the Senate to enter into treaties.

Completely agree. Ridiculous that the UK is moving forward with this insanity with so weak of a popular mandate. I mean if everybody knew it was going to be a hard Brexit would they still have gotten the same percentage vote? The Brexiteers were able to promise 10,000 unicorns and all sorts of things because nobody knew what the hell Brexit meant.  How can a vague election with a narrow margin of victory be a determining factor for something like this?

You are both making the mistake of thinking the referendum is binding on Parliament.  It is not.  The only reason the referendum has any force is because the MPs in Parliament choose to act as if it does.  Brexit would end if that was the will of parliament.  But both Labour and the Conservatives seem quite content to watch this slow motion train wreck unfold.

I'm not sure though if Britain views 'non-binding' referenda in the same way as the term suggests. I think the British public might view deviating from a non-binding results as a subversion of democracy.

Fair, but that is the political judgment being made by the Parliamentarians.  If anything being bound by a non binding referendum is the subversion of parliamentary democracy.  And everyone seems to be playing along.

[Tamas]

Oh and the funniest thing is, that according to The Economist, UKIP is on the rise again. ALL of this will have been in vain.

[Valmy]

Oh and the funniest thing is, that according to The Economist, UKIP is on the rise again. ALL of this will have been in vain.

David Cameron screwed his country to enhance the power of the Tories and then he failed even to do that? Impressive.

[Zanza]

https://www.ft.com/content/30c793d8-8e6e-11e8-bb8f-a6a2f7bca546

UK's incredible talk about 'No Deal' with EU
Ministers risk alarming the public if they reveal too much of their plans

   Two weeks after the Chequers cabinet meeting, Theresa May's Brexit strategy is mired in confusion. In few areas does it seem quite as muddled as the government's planning for a "No Deal" outcome.

On the one hand, hard Brexiters in Mrs May's cabinet believe it is vital for the government to advertise what kind of plans it is drawing up for No Deal, so as to put pressure on the EU in the Brexit negotiations.

Their argument is that Britain's threat to walk away from the talks will appear far more convincing to Brussels if the UK is seen to have prepared for such an eventuality.

On the other hand, ministers know they run a risk if they advertise the details of their No Deal plans too much. After all, the more the public gets to see some of the detail —  such as the need to safeguard the supply of food and medicines; or the need to close off whole motorways — the more alarming such a scenario looks.

That, in turn, risks making the idea of a No Deal outcome look literally incredible.

This inherent contradiction in the government's approach to No Deal was evident on Sunday, when Brexit minister Dominic Raab appeared on the BBC's The Andrew Marr Show.

Mr Raab was asked whether the government was planning to stockpile food for a No Deal eventuality, but he gave no clear answer.

"That kind of selective snippet that makes it into the media I think is . . . unhelpful," he said.

Instead, Mr Raab offered another vague response to what No Deal would mean. "I'm confident . . . we will have the planning in place, the preparation in place, the operational matters in place, from the infrastructure to the planning laws, to deal with that."

Ministers have got away with such vagueness up to now, but they will be under far more pressure to provide detail come the autumn, as Brexit Day approaches.

Mr Raab will doubtless do his best to strike a balance, in which he tries to convince the EU about Britain's readiness for No Deal, while at the same time not alarming the British public.

But even as he does so, other cabinet ministers are already deriding the idea that No Deal, with all its catastrophic consequences, is a viable option.

Asked about the government's No Deal preparations last week, one cabinet minister mused wryly: "Perhaps we could issue a paper saying we will be doing our utmost to limit the number of deaths due to the NHS running out of some medicines."

When Mrs May returns from the summer, she could adopt a different — and far more credible — approach. She could tell MPs that they face a straight choice in the critical Commons vote ahead. They can either accept her Chequers proposal; or there will be a second referendum in which the public can decide whether to have a Canada-style deal, the Chequers halfway house or a return to the EU.

Hardliners in her party would hate such a move, as they dream of Britain making a sudden clean break from Brussels. But in reality, that is the choice the UK faces come the autumn.

No Deal is not an outcome that a serious British government could possibly contemplate. The EU has long known this. And there are senior figures in the UK government who think the idea is well past its sell-by date.

No deal is not a credible scenario for a responsible government. And the EU knows that.

That said, a good quarter or so of the Conservatives are extremists and cannot be counted upon to be responsible.

[Valmy]

Pity a quarter of less than a half of Parliament gets to dictate the future of the country.

[Zanza]

UK public will blame EU for no-deal Brexit, says Jeremy Hunt

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/23/uk-public-will-blame-eu-for-no-deal-brexit-says-jeremy-hunt

A quarter of Brits would back a far-right political party because they think the mainstream has let them down
26 per cent of those surveyed said they would throw their weight behind an anti-Islam, anti-immigrant party because they feel alienated from every other group

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6842013/a-quarter-of-brits-would-back-a-far-right-political-party-because-they-think-the-mainstream-has-let-them-down/

[Valmy]

25%? Sounds about right these days.

[The Brain]

The UK is going full no deal. A... mistake.

[dps]

Why would a "no deal" exit require them to close oof whole motorways?