Psychoactive Substances: Rolling UK Politics in The Neo-Con Era

bet cameron wishes he hadn't won a majority last year

these behind the scenes anonymously sourced post mortem pieces are always more fun when they're about badly run republican presidential campaigns

http://www.politico.eu/article/how-david-cameron-lost-brexit-eu-referendum-prime-minister-campaign-remain-boris-craig-oliver-jim-messina-obama/

Looking at all the possible 'escape routes' being sought, a question for you remainers: would you really want gov to pass by the result of the referendum? Or to have a second referendum even? I'm all about remain too, but the petition for a second referendum, within 48h after the result, is rather rich.

If it was the other way around and the result was 52% remain, then I'd be saying "that's it" — but also totally expecting Farage and crew to continue agitating and probably petitioning, and would be OK with that.

Given the massive impact of this, plus the retraction of nearly every Exit campaign promise, plus the evident buyer's remorse, plus that I'm certain Boris didn't want remain, I think it's not a strong enough result to silence all opposition.

I think parliament would therefore be justified in finding some way out of what is manifestly not in our best interests. The Scottish veto is not that way out; the new election with a party campaigning for remain seems a better one.

Assuming Labour can reconnect with the North in 3 months. Shit.

Boris didn't want exit, I meant

Labour is shot, is the thing, and any future positive scenario depends on a strong, convincing Labour party. If Brexit, then we desperately need Labour to win an election held soon so that they can stop the Tories being the ones rewriting all the expiring EU laws. If some fantasy non-Brexit, Labour would have to be the ones making the arguments. But frankly it's NAGL for Labour to disregard the manifest wishes of massive parts of the non-London parts of the UK?

an explicit referendum mandate

52% to 48% is not a fucking mandate! Even bloody Farage said that (when he thought it was the margin he was going to lose by, not win by).

(xposts)

Scottish / NI veto is the most likely route

I assume NI won't veto when DUP are for leave. Scotland might veto but would they rather hope for IndyRef 2 while leaving the non-Indy option to look as bad as possible?

The petition's daft with arbitrary figures

Daft and arbritrary like the referendum amirite etc

(no, I don't know what I want either. would of course be delighted to discover it was all a dream but can't see a real way out of it and fear serious unrest or at least big UKIP surges if one is attempted. Also, if we are given another chance to vote on it, be it a second referendum or a general election, will it really go any better for Remain? There are a few Leave regrets, but a million? And who could possibly win a GE on a Remain ticket?)

Have been hoping Cameron feels really fucking bad rn as some tiny shred of not-quite-compensatory schadenfreude, but sense Cameron has had many years of practice at not feeling personally responsible for anything

hey peeps i hear that the republican party doesn't technically _have_ to nominate trump

the petition is a load of shit and not relevant to anything

This, pretty much.

Feeling you Stet, but parliament or gov finding a 'way out' is betraying the 52%, no? Regardless of why or how they voted leave, I'll-informed or not etc. "Best interest" seems something people disagree on, to say the least. I can't conceibably see them do it. If you use a democratic tool like a referendum, to ignore or twist or obstruct the result seems very anti-democratic. Or elitist ("sorry ppl, you voted the wrong way"). I wouldn't want to be a pm and pull a rabbit out of the hat to ignore the result tbh.

only 24 hours ofc & a lot of politics still to go but some scottish unionists (activists & columnists mostly, no politicians understandably) making some interesting noises north of the border this morning
― cozen, Saturday, June 25, 2016 9:36 AM (9 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

how do you mean?
― Bein' Sean Bean (LocalGarda), Saturday, June 25, 2016 9:39 AM (9 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

sorry meant to come back to this. massive pinch of salt obv given context is prone to change day-by-day for next wee while, but certainly been expressions from some unionist commentators & activists that they will actually countenance scottish independence now, assuming it means continuing membership of the EU

e.g.https://medium.com/@AndrewWilsonAJW/not-in-our-name-25dfdef21d9b#.d5i8ztgm0, https://stephenorourke.org/2016/06/25/scotlands-future/

like the govt give a shit about "betraying" 40% of the country

the best way of ignoring the result is probably to delay it, tinker with it, bog it down in bureaucracy and talk about it being a win for decent people until people assume we've left the EU

the petition is a load of shit and not relevant to anything

― nakhchivan, Saturday, June 25, 2016 6:04 PM (40 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this cannot be repeated enough

the long way around must be taken

Cynical. But not inapt.

Xp

Tracer: very much depends on what they campaign on. This referendum morally binds only this present government, and legally binds nothing. If a new government is elected on the manifesto of staying in/re-running referendum that's a totally legitimate thing. But depends on strong Labour, totally.

This was a high turnout ref wth a close result. The impact is still quite hard to guess, I think. The remain side's anger could lead to a surge in, fuck knows, the Libs as equally as it could lead soft Leavers to UKIP. And if Leavers feel lied to enough, that won't help Nigel "NHS thing was a mistake" Farage at all.

But for the present time delay while promising to get around to it is the order of the day. Only Farage wants an A50 now. Oh, and Corbyn, sometimes.

And hell, it's not like this would be the first referendum ever that was been re-run until it got the right result. Hell, it wouldn't even be the first Euro referendum,.

https://next.ft.com/content/45244ac8-3afc-11e6-8716-a4a71e8140b0

Jeremy Haywood tells civil servants “the will of the British people is an instruction that must be delivered”

A coworker's cousin made this to express his feelings about having just earned his British passport, after months of studying and paperwork, right before the vote.

http://m.imgur.com/yOaOv0V?r

Labour can't campaign explicitly on the promise that they will reverse/defy the will of the non-London parts of the country. There are too many Ketterings, remember?

http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7632

But Kettering was lied to. I mean this only half as posture: if we leave the EU and they still have immigration and the NHS is still fucked they'll be just as angry and we'll be in an even worse fix.

There's something interesting in this Greenland idea. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-scottish-referendum-scotland-eu-remain-nicola-sturgeon-snp-a7100736.html

Referendum to see if just England wants to leave; saving the union in the process? Some pretty weird stuff being dreamt up here, right enough. Everyone still at Bargaining, I guess.

the best way of ignoring the result is probably to delay it, tinker with it, bog it down in bureaucracy and talk about it being a win for decent people until people assume we've left the EU

otm, I suspect the soft brexiters like Johnson are eyeing this scheme up. Alternatively, second ref after it's been bogged down in protracted negotiations & the economy is in a terrifying state - the new tory gov can make confusing claims about ratifying a special status, exit plus or some shit and sell it to the people

which will leave a very very angry rump

gov will probably placate them with repatriations, & british jobs laws

good times

Man x-posts again: kinder, this was the question: "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?" "Should" is not a word that contains any strong legal sense of direction -- the question as posed is prima facia an advisory question. "TWU should not post on ILX political threads" -- that question would probably get an unanimous "yes" vote, but it wouldn't legally compel an instaban.

I know that accusing people of thinking like lawyers or looking at situations as if they were conspiracies is general a foolproof shut down on the interwebz, but we are talking about legislations and dudes in suits who meet in smoky rooms to plot against nations, so the dog won't hunt here.

I was probably reading too much into the 'should'. Perhaps they could've had 'how would you feel about leaving the EU' and then you have to circle an emoji

tipsy, that gif is incredible

follow up question to my scotland question - are tories/ukip generally more opposed to Scottish independence than your average joe cause they want big/powerful UK or are any of them a little bit interested by the prospect of a more consistently right-wing electorate?

ukip the party doesn't really want to be in power, so they don't really care about the long term left/right balance of the country. ukip voters don't want an independent scotland. they (or at least the former tory ones) tend to be "great" britain/spitfires/warm beer types, and therefore opposed to any changes that make britain today more different to britain of ~1958.

aren't spain and belgium pretty implacably opposed to scotland joining the EU (via their own separatist movements)? would scotland trying to join under these circumstances make them less opposed?

the number of conservatives who would welcome the loss of scotland for that reason is quite small, mostly from the libertarian vanguard who will probably be determining policy if the uk leaves the eu and making it into something even less pleasing to lower middle class nostalgists

spain would likely be a strong opponent of scottish accession, belgium to a lesser degree

Any further referendum after Scottish independence would be Brexit with a higher margin, and a Scottish independence referendum is looking
fairly imminent (with the outcome obvious) - so I'm not convinced delaying tactics are good for the chances of remain. But I'm not convinced anything is good for remain at this point.

there is the whole currency thing

If the UK stalls long enough, could Scotland call indyref2 before Article 50 is triggered?

I think a lot of English brexiteers would quite happily "lose" Scotland. We're on par with immigrants as an unwelcome drain on the welfare system.

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/746734152632963073?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

think the argument goes tht spain's fishing industry depends on scottish fishing grounds for its viability. w/out scotland in the EU it has no fishing treaty to allow it to use scotland's pelagic waters. spain's official policy during the indyref (notwithstanding rajoy's huff & bluster which was basically just him trading favours with his right wing pal callmedave) was that as the referendum was happening within UK constitutional rules they "have no problem w/scottish independence". the spanish cnstitution rules it out for catalonia

they could probably 'call' an unauthorized referendum as catalonia did, they couldn't have a binding one without national legislation

I think a lot of English brexiteers would quite happily "lose" Scotland. We're on par with immigrants as an unwelcome drain on the welfare system.

― a goon shaped fule (onimo), Saturday, 25 June 2016 21:38 (1 minute ago)

there was a lot of commentbox fuck off sentiment around the referendum, given time to contemplate what it would mean for the uk's international power they would probably be unlikely to agree - these are mostly authoritarians and fans of 'the forces' etc

see evidence of graeme avery (who has personally mapped out the requirements & the route to accession for 26 different countries) http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Meeting%20Papers/Graham_Avery_Written_Evidence.pdf

It has been argued that since Article 48 requires unanimity (and the same is true of Article 49) its use would be blocked by Spain in order to discourage Spanish regions from seeking independence. For similar reasons Spain, Slovakia, Romania, Greece and Cyprus have not recognised Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence from Serbia in 2008. But Scotland’s referendum is not unilateral: it is a constitutional process approved by the British Parliament. In Spain, however, such referendums are not permitted by the national constitution.

watch his supplemental evidence here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL4l0q4AbG0mmhtEGFeAJxVQdpk3TAcwBm&feature=player_detailpage&v=UvOuyiw306I

Anyone seen a list of planned EU funded projects in the UK now likely to get cancelled?

he addresses the spanish question at 24:10
xp

just watching that, jesus we were fed so much bullshit during the independence referendum

hearing anecdotal reports (not through my job, I must add) that some students with EU-funded Erasmus degree offers have now been asked to self-fund. Sounds unlikely this would happen so quickly, anyone know more?

thought this was classy from aberdeen university

Similarly, I have today also written to current EU students and those joining us later this year to reassure them that there will be no change to their fee status. I have assured them that if there is any change during their course of study, the University will cover the cost of any tuition fees to allow students to complete their degree studies at Aberdeen.

http://www.abdn.ac.uk/news/9348/

7 hrs ·
From the guardians comments section:

If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.

Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.

How?

Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.

The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.

If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.

The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.

When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.

they fucked it up good and proper, didn't they?

was just about to post that. The result is so tight that the tories are just as split over Europe as they ever were — and Remain iirc still has a Tory MP majority, no doubt strengthened by the fact that like the comment says the consequences are now evident — break-up of the union, collapse of Sterling, beer chilled etc.

Johnson really is fucked, but so is any candidate agitating for immediate exit. Phew, I think?

there's a reasonable chance the final ballot could be johnson vs may, so there would be no doctrinaire committed pro-leave psycho for the membership to select

don't think there's enough knowledge about how_tory_mps_really_feel to say, even the stupid ones are mostly canny enough to keep shtum or dissimulate about their real priorities