WHats the strategy in calling an election for BJ?

Duke of Marmalade

Frequent Poster
Messages
2,745
????(re partition of Spain if Catalonia secedes)
Can’t see why you are quadruple puzzled.
“Wikipedia” said:
Partition is the division of a territory into two or more autonomous regions
Sometimes this is enforced by external agencies as in India/Pakistan or the two Koreas. Sometimes it is by mutual consent between equals as in Czech Republic/Slovakia. And sometimes it is by secession of a smaller unit from the larger union as in 26 counties and possibly at some future point in Spain or even Great Britain.
It is not necessarily a bad thing but where it has negative repercussions it is natural to look for who was to blame for the partition. In the case of secession of the smaller part that blame must mainly accrue to the secessionists.
 

WolfeTone

Registered User
Messages
394
Sometimes this is enforced by external agencies as in India/Pakistan or the two Koreas. Sometimes it is by mutual consent between equals as in Czech Republic/Slovakia.
Mutual consent is wonderful. But like India/Pakistan, the Korea's etc, are shining examples of disputed borders and the potential for conflict that they bring.

In the case of secession of the smaller part that blame must mainly accrue to the secessionists.
The secessionists being those who were prepared to pull the gun on their neighbors to prevent the implementation of British law, as prescribed by the British parliament.
The seccessionists being those officers in British army who would rather resign than implement the law of His Majesty the King.

Let there be no doubt who the secessionists were.

The alternative is to suggest that Ireland, should yield to the threat of violence and cement its secondary position to Britian, within the UK.
 

joe sod

Frequent Poster
Messages
913
The border in Ireland is insidious, a relic of a sector of people who refuse to accept commonality with their neighbors. It is testament to everything that is wrong with a monarchy.
are you not confirming what the unionists have thought all along, that the backstop is being used by the irish government to force northern ireland out of the UK rather than a technical arrangement to avoid a border. There were decades of violence about the future of northern ireland with the only consensus being that everybody there wanted to live in peace. Surely leo and the government should have been more mature rather than using brexit to open up this can of worms.
As for partition, remember we had a brutal civil war where irishmen of very similar viewpoints and nationalism killed each other, imagine the result if northern unionists were also thrown into this mix. In the case of pakistan it was the best result for them, if the state of pakistan had not been formed the indian muslims would have been wiped out by the new indian state.
 

WolfeTone

Registered User
Messages
394
are you not confirming what the unionists have thought all along, that the backstop is being used by the irish government to force northern ireland out of the UK rather than a technical arrangement to avoid a border.
Unionists can think all they want what they think the backstop to be or mean. Ditto, nationalists.
In a democracy, it is the will of the people that matters. In NI, the will of the people is to Remain in the EU.
The DUP cling to the concept of not being treated separately from the UK. Simultaneously, they are open in supporting no return to a hard border, frictionless trade, CTA - this is totally at odds with Brexit which is set on taking control of borders, ending free movement, making their own rules and regulations for trade.
The DUP position is a minority position in the constituency of NI. It is a flag-waving, drum beating exercise emanating from a mindset that cannot, and will not, accept parity of esteem for those that they live it. As it was in 1914, as it is now.

Surely leo and the government should have been more mature rather than using brexit to open up this can of worms.
Surely David Cameron, UKIP et al, should have been more mature rather than open up this can of worms?
But in fairness to them, they gave absolutely scant, if no consideration to what impact Brexit may have on Ireland.
Nothing inconsistent about that, Ireland's interests have always been secondary to Britains interests in the 'United' Kingdom.
To lay blame at the Irish government for wanting to ensure no return to a hard border is disingenuous. It is the default position of any Irish government considering the history of that border. Its invisibility was hard won. It should not be given up at the behest of English nationalism.

if the state of pakistan had not been formed the indian muslims would have been wiped out by the new indian state.
Without wanting to diverge too far off topic, the acquiring of nuclear weapons by both countries suggests the wiping out of Muslims, or otherwise, is a prospect that still festers.
 

Duke of Marmalade

Frequent Poster
Messages
2,745
Let there be no doubt who the secessionists were.
There is no doubt.
“dictionary” said:
secessionist
/sɪˈsɛʃənɪst/
noun
  1. 1.
    a person who favours formal withdrawal from membership of a federation or body, especially a political state.
    "an ardent secessionist
  1. Are you suggesting that the Curragh mutineers, for example, were secessionists?
 

WolfeTone

Registered User
Messages
394
There is no doubt.
  1. Are you suggesting that the Curragh mutineers, for example, were secessionists?
We can get pedantic about the language all you want, but officers of the Crown, not willing to obey their orders can be called all sorts of things.
synonyms:withdrawal, break, breakaway, separation, severance, schism, apostasy, leaving, quitting, split, splitting, disaffiliation, resignation, pulling out, dropping out, desertion, defection
 

WolfeTone

Registered User
Messages
394
But I was hoping to avoid such rudimentary discourse in order to keep flow.

Ulster Volunteers, in direct threat of violence, were prepared to usurp the law of parliament, supported by senior officers of the British Army.
 

AileenWalsh

Registered User
Messages
14
He does not have a choice his majority is too small and sooner or later he will have to call an Election. My feeling is sooner.
 

Seagull

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,232
He'd have to win an outright majority. No major party would go anywhere near a tory coalition right now. The lib dems are making slow gains after being almost obliterated after their last coalition. Joining the conservatives would see them wiped out again. The issue right now is that there is no obvious party for the protest votes who dislike both conservative and labour. Lib dems was the option, but I don't think they've recovered enough yet.

Given that parliament have ruled out a no deal exit, trying to go that route will probably trigger a motion of no confidence in the government, and could well have enough tory revolt to pass.
 

EmmDee

Frequent Poster
Messages
420
He'd have to win an outright majority. No major party would go anywhere near a tory coalition right now. The lib dems are making slow gains after being almost obliterated after their last coalition. Joining the conservatives would see them wiped out again. The issue right now is that there is no obvious party for the protest votes who dislike both conservative and labour. Lib dems was the option, but I don't think they've recovered enough yet.
You haven't factored in the Brexit Party Ltd. - I can see a scenario where Conservatives and BP Ltd come to an agreement where BP go after Labour leave areas in the North (where the Labour vote would never switch to the Conservatives but there is a history of strong nationalist voting. LibDems, Green, Plaid and SNP will end up in a non aggression pact - but they will also target Labour seats where the MP is a leave voter. Labour will be targeted by both sides


Given that parliament have ruled out a no deal exit, trying to go that route will probably trigger a motion of no confidence in the government, and could well have enough tory revolt to pass.
Yes and no - Parliament hasn't ruled out anything. There have been motions but really they have no legal weight. The legal default is for Brexit on Oct 31st. Unless Parliament passes legislation (rather than motions) that remains the case. Legislation instructing the PM to request a further extension is possible but it requires the EU to agree (and Boris could request an extension in a way that was unacceptable to the EU). The other option is for legislation to withdraw the Article 50 notification - which doesn't require EU consent.

The danger with a VONC, and the reason why there is still concern about pulling that trigger, is that it doesn't force a general election immediately. So it could lead to a situation where a new government is elected after 31st October. And as stated above, that would be after the UK had exited.

Edit - the will need up to about 50 Tory MP's to rebel on a VONC to get over the number of Labour MP's who will support a Brexit at any cost. So it really does need to the "last option remaining" to have a chance
 

Seagull

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,232
There's actually nothing legally binding about the referendum. The UK can change their mind at any time until the deadline. There's no legislation required.
 

EmmDee

Frequent Poster
Messages
420
There's actually nothing legally binding about the referendum. The UK can change their mind at any time until the deadline. There's no legislation required.
True - it was an advisory referendum. But following that, Parliament passed legislation to enact the referendum and trigger the Article 50 process. So that is legally binding.

Under EU law, the UK can change its mind and withdraw the A50 notification. But under UK law, there would need to be amending or new legislation.
 

Early Riser

Frequent Poster
Messages
783
I think they believe that they can get an overall majority by attracting Brexit Party votes ( and neutralising it) and, also Labour votes in Brexit constituencies. Hence the hardline Brexit rhetoric and Labourite spending promises. With an overall majority they can ditch the DUP. They will then pass an agreement with a revised version of the original backstop ,ie, a NI only backstop.
 

PatrickSmithUS

Registered User
Messages
35
An axis between Labour and the SNP would finish them. if they can get the Ulster Unionists on board, providing an laternative for the anti-Brexit Unionist voters in Northern Ireland, then we could be looking at the end of the Tory party and a softer Brexit with a back stop.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
9,755
An axis between Labour and the SNP would finish them. if they can get the Ulster Unionists on board, providing an alternative for the anti-Brexit Unionist voters in Northern Ireland, then we could be looking at the end of the Tory party and a softer Brexit with a back stop.
As long as the Tories have their greatest asset in place they will be fine. I am of course referring to Jeremy Corbyn.
 

Seagull

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,232
Jeremy Corbyn is actually surprisingly popular with younger voters, but he alienates all slightly left of middle to right leaning voters who might otherwise vote labour. Persuade Jeremy Corbyn to resign, and Boris would start back pedalling very fast. I still think the Tories have made themselves unelectable for a generation at least. I wouldn't be hugely surprised to see something like a labour, lib dem, SNP coalition.
 

john luc

Frequent Poster
Messages
444
Not so sure about the demise of the conservatives. People often like a decisive leader and this decision by Boris will appeal to them. I think he is angling for a general election and if he can win an overall majority ha may ditch the DUP and agree a deal with the border down the Irish sea. This deal would be a good deal for the north as it's a win win even if the DUP will not like it.
 

joe sod

Frequent Poster
Messages
913
I think this proroguing of parliament for 4 weeks is a step too far by johnson, it is blatantly obvious what he is doing and it has enraged both the opposition and many in his own party. It might seem a very smart move at first glance but it is very high risk and could bring people onto the streets in their droves like what happened during the poll tax riots of 1990. Its also very unbritish something you would expect from putin.
It also exposes the ridiculous policy of the irish government of sticking to the backstop and not yielding a little bit to theresa may when she was desperate for a deal. There is always a time to do a deal and that was the time. Even Ken Clarke who might vote no confidence in boris johnson if it is tabled in the house of commons and a staunch remainer wants an extension to article 50 and a new deal not the current withdrawal agreement, therefore the backstop is already dead and the irish government are looking more and more ridiculous by not getting off it.
 

WolfeTone

Registered User
Messages
394
It also exposes the ridiculous policy of the irish government of sticking to the backstop and not yielding a little bit to theresa may when she was desperate for a deal.
I agreed with your post until this point.
The backstop applicable to the whole of the UK, is a UK term in the WA. If they want to change it, the UK need to offer a credible alternative. They have failed to do so thus far.
A NI only backstop is credible. It is in line with how the people of NI voted. It is in line with majority sentiment of people in NI. It protects the integrity of the GFA, and the UK governments obligations under that agreement.
It does not dilute NI status within the UK as it is merely a trade arrangement (a best of both worlds arrangement).
And it will only ever apply after the transition period and in the event of no UK/EU trade deal.
 

Andrew365

Registered User
Messages
279
Can somebody simply explain what the backstop would entail?

Now that it looks like they will leave either without a deal or with some form of a backstop. My concern is what is going to happen to the border on 1st November?

Selfishly I am trying to make plans for christmas involving crossing the border!
 
Top