Europeans' opinions on UK's EU Referendum...

No there isn't.

I keep reading how more and more "leavers" have been backtracking, if not outright 180ing, and now pro Brexit papers are suddenly discussing the dangers ahead. http://infacts.org/brexit-press-changed-tune-straight-vote/

Edited by JJLehto - June 28 2016 at 00:40

^Very good analysis of the current situation - spot on!  We (as in the wife and I) love Jeremy Corbyn but yes, he will probably get ousted today. 

Dean wrote: JJLehto wrote: I keep reading how more and more "leavers" have been backtracking, if not outright 180ing, and now pro Brexit papers are suddenly discussing the dangers ahead. http://infacts.org/brexit-press-changed-tune-straight-vote/ I am becoming convinced it truly was all pandering, and that probably no one actually thought it was gunna happen.  Now causing a massive "oh sh*t" moment.  I have no idea how this process or UK snap elections work...but I gather this vote is just the beginning of the process. Is it possible to hold a snap election? One based on upholding (or really negating) the results? Seems more than a few people are having second thoughts... Also whichever party calls it, if it succeeds, could profit. I hear the Liberal Democrats have pledged to ignore the referendum result. They are not in a very good place, so could see them benefiting from attempting to reverse the results. So yeah is it possible in theory and reality to have a snap election called for/who exactly can do such a thing? I understand in reality this may add even more chaos, and even though the UK hasn't left yet...the damage may  be done and may not be viewed well by the powers of the EU This amoral government passed the Fixed-term Parliaments Act in 2011 which essentially means they cannot call an early election (the rats cannot leave the sinking ship). There are only two ways in which a snap election can be called: A vote of no confidence in the government or if a two-thirds absolute majority votes for an early general election. The former is difficult to justify, the latter is a possibility but not a certainty. As I have said before, the referendum result is not legally binding because of sovereignty, (somewhat ironically, given that UK sovereignty was an issue for Brexit), so it can be ignored. If we had a formal constitution (which we don't) then this referendum would have needed to be a legally binding one as it would have meant changing the constitution but our EU membership is not written into a formal constitution. Our EU membership was provisioned by the European Communities Act 1972 so I presume that it will have to be revoked or superseded so we can start disentangling EU law from UK law (which in itself is a hugely costly job-creations scheme that will take years to resolve). To leave the EU the UK prime minister has to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. This triggers the negotiation process with the remaining EU members, the content of the exit agreement has to be approved by the European Council with a qualified majority (>72% of the remaining members and representing at least 65% of the EU population). Basically if they cannot come to an agreement within 2 years we're kicked out regardless so we really don't need any loudmouthed euro-sceptics around the table there (Baroness Sharon Bowles would be my choice). Another touch of irony there is we have no vote in the exit agreement and it will be the first but not the last time the EU makes a decision that affects us without our vote. Whoever the next Prime Minister is, they will either go down in history as the PM who took us out of Europe and broke up the United Kingdom or if they decide to ignore the referendum result they will be remembered as the PM who went against the will of the people. The next Tory party leader will be a sacrificial goat, the smart players are holding back and waiting to replace her (or him). Worth noting that prospective leader candidate Jeremy "rhyming slang" Hunt has said that Article 50 should not be triggered until the public has had a chance to vote on a new deal with the EU, by either calling a general election or having another referendum...  As to whether there will be a snap election, I don't think it matters much, the EU will not wait around while we piddle about choosing a government and debating what kind of d.i.v.o.r.c.e. settlement we'd ideally like to have so they will put even more pressure on the departing government to invoke Article 50 even if that means there could be a change in government during exit negotiations. The EU will be more concerned in protecting themselves than worrying about what happens to us. While the Labour Party continues to queue up to fall on their collectively bargained swords they are next door to bloody useless at the moment, despite the aforementioned Baroness the Lib Dems are still conspicuous by their absence and the SNP and Plaid Cymru are so busy looking after their own self-interests and political devolution agendas they're more of a hindrance than a help at present. A general election will shake them up a bit but I suspect we'll return another Tory government with a larger majority than before. When Corbyn was elected PLP leader I said he was the right man for opposition but the wrong man to win an election - I now revise that as he has proven to be the wrong man for opposition too, this may result in the Lib-Dems winning back some of the popular vote they lost in 2015 but they'll not recover the seats they lost. Since UKIP and Fartrage was a one trick pony hopefully their novelty value has diminished now the reality of their rhetoric and duplicity of their pledges has hit home but you shouldn't overestimate the intelligence of the anyone who voted UKIP.

Edited by JJLehto - June 28 2016 at 04:36

BaldFriede wrote: This elaborate post just confirms my remark about the katzenjammer, but I grant you may have misunderstood the phrase. I did not mean "a big wailing", which is one of the meanings of "katzenjammer", I meant "the disillusionment after a night of intoxication", which is the other meaning (and actually what the word "Katzenjammer" means in German). And this is exactly what your elaborate post describes. I might as swell have used the word "Katerstimmung", which means just the same in German, but it is not a term familiar to native English speakers.

Edited by Dean - June 28 2016 at 05:52

Joke petition asks for a rerun of England v Iceland match

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/...iceland-match/

 

Edited by Sean Trane - June 28 2016 at 10:34

Normally I don't care about sports but Iceland's chant is pretty cool.

I've just heard that the vote of no confidence passed for Corby

Hopefully, amid the post referendum farce, the lessons this bolt from the blue holds for the fraying neo liberal consensus aren't forgotten.  I read an article today about the exodus of jobs from a town called Redcar and it reminded me of the complete collapse of the manufacturing economy in Mumbai after a textile mill workers strike (a long and stubborn strike similar to the coal miners strike of 1984 in Britain with sadly similar consequences).  All the land vacated by defunct factories helped free up real estate for the new 'information economy' enterprises and created many well paying jobs. In essence, the city reinvented itself.  I too work in a plush office block that stands on land that once housed a huge, huge textile mill.  But the people who used to work in these mills as well as their families were never taken care of and have struggled to eke out a living.   And the real estate that stands in the place of their erstwhile workplaces is simply out of their reach. Today, barring the odd sympathetic news item about their plight, nobody cares anymore. It may be markets at work, it may be creative destruction, whatever but it's still cruel and unjust.  When Britain will leave the EU is not known at this point but the problems that the Brexit brought to the fore will not go away and are only likely to get worse absent a breakdown of the neo liberal consensus and the birth of a new world order in its wake.

Dean wrote: dr wu23 wrote:   Frankly I don't care about 'Brexit'  except that the Brits screwed up the Market and affected my investments which pissed me off since I'm retiring very soon.     If that is what happens when an insignificant island off the coast of Europe does something ill-advised just imagine what'll happen when Trump gets elected.

Dean wrote: JJLehto wrote: I keep reading how more and more "leavers" have been backtracking, if not outright 180ing, and now pro Brexit papers are suddenly discussing the dangers ahead. http://infacts.org/brexit-press-changed-tune-straight-vote/ I am becoming convinced it truly was all pandering, and that probably no one actually thought it was gunna happen.  Now causing a massive "oh sh*t" moment.  I have no idea how this process or UK snap elections work...but I gather this vote is just the beginning of the process. Is it possible to hold a snap election? One based on upholding (or really negating) the results? Seems more than a few people are having second thoughts... Also whichever party calls it, if it succeeds, could profit. I hear the Liberal Democrats have pledged to ignore the referendum result. They are not in a very good place, so could see them benefiting from attempting to reverse the results. So yeah is it possible in theory and reality to have a snap election called for/who exactly can do such a thing? I understand in reality this may add even more chaos, and even though the UK hasn't left yet...the damage may  be done and may not be viewed well by the powers of the EU This amoral government passed the Fixed-term Parliaments Act in 2011 which essentially means they cannot call an early election (the rats cannot leave the sinking ship). There are only two ways in which a snap election can be called: A vote of no confidence in the government or if a two-thirds absolute majority votes for an early general election. The former is difficult to justify, the latter is a possibility but not a certainty. As I have said before, the referendum result is not legally binding because of sovereignty, (somewhat ironically, given that UK sovereignty was an issue for Brexit), so it can be ignored. If we had a formal constitution (which we don't) then this referendum would have needed to be a legally binding one as it would have meant changing the constitution but our EU membership is not written into a formal constitution. Our EU membership was provisioned by the European Communities Act 1972 so I presume that it will have to be revoked or superseded so we can start disentangling EU law from UK law (which in itself is a hugely costly job-creations scheme that will take years to resolve). To leave the EU the UK prime minister has to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. This triggers the negotiation process with the remaining EU members, the content of the exit agreement has to be approved by the European Council with a qualified majority (>72% of the remaining members and representing at least 65% of the EU population). Basically if they cannot come to an agreement within 2 years we're kicked out regardless so we really don't need any loudmouthed euro-sceptics around the table there (Baroness Sharon Bowles would be my choice). Another touch of irony there is we have no vote in the exit agreement and it will be the first but not the last time the EU makes a decision that affects us without our vote. Whoever the next Prime Minister is, they will either go down in history as the PM who took us out of Europe and broke up the United Kingdom or if they decide to ignore the referendum result they will be remembered as the PM who went against the will of the people. The next Tory party leader will be a sacrificial goat, the smart players are holding back and waiting to replace her (or him). Worth noting that prospective leader candidate Jeremy "rhyming slang" Hunt has said that Article 50 should not be triggered until the public has had a chance to vote on a new deal with the EU, by either calling a general election or having another referendum...  As to whether there will be a snap election, I don't think it matters much, the EU will not wait around while we piddle about choosing a government and debating what kind of d.i.v.o.r.c.e. settlement we'd ideally like to have so they will put even more pressure on the departing government to invoke Article 50 even if that means there could be a change in government during exit negotiations. The EU will be more concerned in protecting themselves than worrying about what happens to us. While the Labour Party continues to queue up to fall on their collectively bargained swords they are next door to bloody useless at the moment, despite the aforementioned Baroness the Lib Dems are still conspicuous by their absence and the SNP and Plaid Cymru are so busy looking after their own self-interests and political devolution agendas they're more of a hindrance than a help at present. A general election will shake them up a bit but I suspect we'll return another Tory government with a larger majority than before. When Corbyn was elected PLP leader I said he was the right man for opposition but the wrong man to win an election - I now revise that as he has proven to be the wrong man for opposition too, this may result in the Lib-Dems winning back some of the popular vote they lost in 2015 but they'll not recover the seats they lost. Since UKIP and Fartrage was a one trick pony hopefully their novelty value has diminished now the reality of their rhetoric and duplicity of their pledges has hit home but you shouldn't overestimate the intelligence of the anyone who voted UKIP.

I agree with virtually every single word of this analysis, which summarises well the constitutional mess we are in, and the political situation as it stands.

The only qualification I would add to it is that I feel, if there is a general election, and it is very much an if (although my personal feeling is that Parliament will vote for one to exercise the "will of the people"), then UKIP might do rather better than the last time out, even with the first past the post system stacked against them.

Labour are in dire trouble. Corbyn, as Dean rightly points out, is next to useless, and a lame duck leader. The party has passed today a vote of no confidence, and there will be a ballot for a new leader. Corbyn is, I believe, stating that he will stand again. If that happens, and he wins again, I reckon that the party will finally have the massive split that they have been heading for for some time now. It is inconceivable that the numbers of MPs who loathe him will continue to sit in the same party after all that has happened.

A possibility, a very real one, is John McDonnell coming through as the new darling of the left, if Corbyn realises the game is up. I have known John for some time, as he headed up the parliamentary group for my Union for a number of years until May this year. He is even more left wing than Corbyn, but is far more forceful in terms of being a "leader". He would, though, be entirely unpalatable to his parliamentary colleagues, and the same split would, I think, still be likely.

The real danger, though, is the nonsense being propagated by Labour MPs. Getting rid of Corbyn for being a useless sod would, I believe, play well with the country at large. However, getting rid of him for being reticent to promote the pro EU agenda would be a severe misunderstanding of the anti establishment and economic settlement feeling which is rampant in their natural supporter base (here I will decline to comment on the intelligence of voters point Dean made. I do not agree with it. I understand their feelings, and sympathise with them). Going into an election with a metropolitan pro EU liberal would also be, I think, a disaster for them, and the only parties which would benefit would be UKIP and Conservatives under a Brexit leader, if that transpires.

There is a hope for Labour if they can tap into that anti establishment and rampant globalisation feeling which is out there with a leader who is not regarded as either being useless, pro establishment, or a left wing nutter. Quite how they manage that is anyone's guess.

Dean is spot on regarding SNP and my party, Plaid Cymru. Plaid are, I feel, facing an existential crisis in Wales. They simply cannot afford to posture as they are, and continue to rely on the good old fashioned, loyal, Welsh language, hate the English, vote. As much as I like Leanne Wood (I worked quite closely with her a few years back as a PCS union rep), I am not convinced that she can galvanise the party in the direction required. Adam Price possibly can. A new narrative to capitalise on the raw deal Wales has had is desperately required, with an alternative narrative which does not include independence from the UK, which will not happen here in my lifetime.

Lib Dems. Who they? Forget them, they are utter toast.

Hunt's (careful with the pronunciation ) position to seek a second referendum "on the terms of leaving" should he become Tory leader and PM is interesting. If I were a betting man, I would put money on us having such a second referendum. I would also put money on Dean and others being a sight happier than they are now, as Britain votes narrowly to avoid a divorce in a couple of years time following all sorts of economic turbulence, political turmoil, and etc.

The caveat to that. Populist parties such as UKIP in Britain, and others in Europe, making inroads and huge waves. A distinct possibility, and that should not be seen as an endorsement by me. Quite the opposite.

As I said in a previous post, politics is becoming extremely interesting.

The old order, I think, is retreating into its eventual oblivion. That happens. Politics and society move on. What replaces it will determine our collective destinies for decades to come.

My final thought. Rampant globalisation and the liberal establishment have failed working, and middle, class utterly across the Western world. I sincerely hope that what replaces it is not the politics of hate, racism, and conflict, but a truly progressive alternative. On that, I hope, most of us can agree.