UK Government to confirm exit from EU single market in speech on Tuesday

Motorhate

I think a lot of it is about compromise, as is any negotiation. It would be madness to lay your bottom dollar out in black and white as that's what the other party would go for straight away. Its basic common sense in normal business negotiations and probably in other scenario's of arbitration too. I think in this instance however, its a difficult one for the government, who obviously want what's best for Britain. Now however, I think they’ve been put in an impossible situation of having to lay all their cards on the table before any opening gambits are placed. The words “foot” and “shooting one’s self in” spring to mind. They could of course just bullshit the brains out of all the other parties and go for their own agenda but that'd probably have ramifications.

Rocker

I refer my honourable friends to the post I wrote a page or two ago. The prospect of the negotiators getting the Good Friday Agreement all messed up is too terrible to think about.

Motorhate

Rocker said:

I refer my honourable friends to the post I wrote a page or two ago. The prospect of the negotiators getting the Good Friday Agreement all messed up is too terrible to think about.

I think the anti-terror laws that have come in since the IRA's last campaign of terror would see them nipped in the bud more or less straight away.

ToneControl

Rocker said:

I refer my honourable friends to the post I wrote a page or two ago. The prospect of the negotiators getting the Good Friday Agreement all messed up is too terrible to think about.

if people in NI want to kill each other,  they have done so in the past, and when everyone agreed it should stop, they mostly did.
I can't see Brexit changing that.

In any case, it would be ridiculous to have 1.8m people in NI dictate what 62m+ people in the RUK  can  and can't do. 
That would be like Leeds decided to veto Brexit

Rocker

You are right @ToneControl about the numbers but this is one of those problems that simply must be got right.  First time.  

Motorhate

Notification of withdrawal has been drafted...

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2016-2017/0132/cbill_2016-20170132_en_1.htm

Heartfeltdawn

ToneControl said:

https://order-order.com/2017/01/25/labour-leave-select-brexiteer-win-stoke/
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/labourleave/pages/270/attachments/original/1485302931/Labour-can-win-in-Stoke-on-Trent_v4.pdf?1485302931

a small  sample poll, but...
it says:

If the Labour party can secure a candidate that has a proven track record of supporting Brexit
and can demonstrate a keen understanding of the issues surrounding the NHS, the Labour
party is more likely to secure victory.
● In the upcoming by-election our poll indicates that Labour will receive 25% (-14),
Conservatives 10% (-12) and UKIP 35% (+13) of the vote share with 24% still
undecided. This is without a Labour candidate selected.
● 30% of voters who indicated ‘Don’t Know’ for the upcoming by-election previously (GE
2015) voted Labour, 10% voted UKIP and 46% for the Lib Dems.
● The Labour party risks potentially losing more votes to UKIP than they possibly could
gain from the Conservatives and Lib Dems put together, therefore must pick a Brexiteer
candidate to nullify this threat.
● 81% of voters who indicated they are going to vote for UKIP in the upcoming
by-election have previously voted for Labour.
● 59% of voters who identified as voting UKIP and 51% of those who are undecided,
would likely vote for Labour ‘if the candidate was a staunch Brexiteer’.
● The Labour party should fight the by-election on two central issues, the NHS (27%) and
pro-Brexit (24%).
● 98% of voters who have voted for the Labour party at some point feel the most important
issue to them in the upcoming election is the NHS.
● Interestingly, Leave voters’ most important issue is a pro-Brexit candidate (34%) and the
NHS is only 17%, however, in contrast the Remainers’ key issue is the NHS (51%) and
anti-Brexit sentiment second, with 15% identifying it as their key voting motivator

and Labour have chosen a remainer candidate

A small poll of less than 200 people, conducted on Facebook, and one that Labour Leave admit is hardly a shining example of running a good poll. And they said that the GE polling was shite... 

Apparently Labour Leave donated £18,500 to UKIP just prior to the EU referendum. Politics first, beliefs second? And it is interesting to see where some of Labour Leave's funds come from... 

https://politicalscrapbook.net/2017/01/labour-leave-try-and-boost-ukips-chances-in-stoke-with-a-voodoo-poll/




 

Heartfeltdawn

ToneControl said:

Heartfeltdawn said:

And you're not comparing like for like stats as I pointed out earlier. Stoke on Trent at the referendum did indeed vote that way. The turnout at the last GE in Stoke was NOT 49.9%. That was the turnout for Stoke on Trent Central, one of three constituencies in the Stoke on Trent area. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoke-on-Trent_Central_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoke-on-Trent_North_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoke-on-Trent_South_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

what is your point?   
the by election is for   Stoke on Trent Central, which is why I  quoted its turnout of 49%

All three constituencies have been Labour since creation. 



Undoubtedly many Labour supporters in 2015 voted Leave, far more than the analysts ever thought possible. I've said god knows how many times on this forum how it was clear from the Bristol results that I clerked and counted that many Labour supporters saw nothing wrong with supporting Labour when it came to domestic elections (check out the Bristol mayoral election last year) and supporting Leave/UKIP elsewhere. If that can happen in a fairly affluent city like Bristol, then somewhere with higher unemployment is even more likely to support Labour and Leave at the same time. The big question is whether they are really going to change their political beliefs. 

That's your theory:  when has it been tested in a GE?
Bristol is a strong Remainer area, how can you confidently extrapolate theories about labour voters there to Stoke?

The SNP kicked the Labour door down through the weight of nationalist populism, Us against the English. The Libs lost because nobody trusted them one iota. Now somewhere like Stoke Central, a safe Labour seat, one that still manages to keep a Blairite in power... are they really going to change tack and support a more free market driven UKIP? What the by-election will do is force Nuttall to put his policies firmly on display, and the one that will get the most interest will inevitably be the NHS after the way it was used in the referendum. If Labour select Dr Stephen Hitchin as their candidate, and a former Army Reservist and GP and A&E doctor, then the medical policies will be right at the forefront. 

http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/contest-to-be-labour-s-stoke-central-candidate-heats-up/story-30069099-detail/story.html

I'm certainly not saying that something seismic won't happen. I am saying that it goes against by-election turnout history and against the longstanding Labour history within Stoke. You also have to look at 2010 versus 2015. 

2010 Stoke Central turnout: 32,470. UKIP vote: 1402 Labour: 12605
2015: Stoke Central turnout: 31,084. UKIP vote: 7041 Labour 12200

So Labour didn't lose a tremendous number of votes (Hunt's vote percentage was actually up on 2010). The BNP actually gained over 2,000 votes in 2010 and didn't stand in 2015. I think it's reasonable to suggest that some of those BNP voters went UKIP in 2015. Realistically for UKIP to win the seat, Nuttall's got to take 25% of the Labour vote and turn it into UKIP numbers. That's a pretty tough task. 

The biggest problem for Labour in 2015 was voter apathy. Miliband did not enthuse. The party did not enthuse. The same was true for Hillary Clinton. I suspect a strong Corbyn presence in Stoke will do a lot more to get Labour voters out there than Miliband ever did. 

Of course  it would go against history. I'm saying that anyone being complacent about labour voting areas is  unwise
Stoke has the highest leaver vote
But you're confident the labour voters will carry on voting labour,  with a  winning vote of labour=12200 vs UKIP 7041, a  labour majority of about 5200

So UKIP need 5200 votes, or simply take 2600 from Labour

Now, what about the extra  15.8% who voted  in the  referendum turn out? who will they vote for?
How many 2015 GE labour voters  who voted leave will decide to go for UKIP this time? We don't know
I don't think Corbyn will help labour in Stoke

@ToneControl ;;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38762034

"Bristol voted strongly Remain on the whole (62%), but there were some striking exceptions, particularly the large, deprived, mainly white estates to the south of the city. Hartcliffe and Withywood backed Leave at 67%. Similar neighbouring wards (Hengrove and Whitchurch Park, Filwood, Bishopsworth and Stockwood) also voted Leave, as did the more industrial area of Avonmouth and Lawrence Weston to the north west of the city."

This is why I thought it relevant to bring up Bristol because the data released for this BBC investigation is exactly what I was seeing last year. Now politically Bristol has 4 MPs. The North West is Toryland but the other three are East, South, and West Labour areas. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Bristol#Westminster_representation

It's those Southern areas that voted Leave who were also voting firmly in favour of a Labour mayor the month beforehand. It's also some of those Southern areas who voted for a UKIP mayor, put Labour as their second choice, and then voted Leave. That's why I say that future elections will be interesting as the referendum was very much one based on one's personal beliefs and not one based on party loyalty. Finding out which is stronger in future elections, party loyalty or personal beliefs, is going to be key for successful candidates. 

ToneControl

Heartfeltdawn said:

@ToneControl ;;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38762034

"Bristol voted strongly Remain on the whole (62%), but there were some striking exceptions, particularly the large, deprived, mainly white estates to the south of the city. Hartcliffe and Withywood backed Leave at 67%. Similar neighbouring wards (Hengrove and Whitchurch Park, Filwood, Bishopsworth and Stockwood) also voted Leave, as did the more industrial area of Avonmouth and Lawrence Weston to the north west of the city."

This is why I thought it relevant to bring up Bristol because the data released for this BBC investigation is exactly what I was seeing last year. Now politically Bristol has 4 MPs. The North West is Toryland but the other three are East, South, and West Labour areas. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Bristol#Westminster_representation

It's those Southern areas that voted Leave who were also voting firmly in favour of a Labour mayor the month beforehand. It's also some of those Southern areas who voted for a UKIP mayor, put Labour as their second choice, and then voted Leave. That's why I say that future elections will be interesting as the referendum was very much one based on one's personal beliefs and not one based on party loyalty. Finding out which is stronger in future elections, party loyalty or personal beliefs, is going to be key for successful candidates. 

yes,  & I suspect  it will be interesting
my gutfeel, with less evidence than you have, is that many labour voters  will vote UKIP in the  national Election,  labour in the local
the gutfeel is based on  the fact that I feel like doing it to  try to wake Labour up, but I know I won't

Clarky

vale said:

any remain town with a liberal candidate within a sniff of a swing will win. for me & most other remainers, the eu issue comes above all else, including party loyalty. & disillusion with anything of value ever coming out of the farce the tories are presiding over is growing, even among leavers.
the tories keep stressing the mythical & magical 'will of the people' is behind everything they say and do but that's pseudo-fascist nonsense. among those who voted to leave there were many reasons & expectations of what an appropriate solution might be; single market access is one split among leavers, limited immigration another, matters of sovereignty another.

the trouble with a simplistic 'for or against' plebiscite is that 'against' defines nothing. we know what 'for' is, but everyone can imagine their own version of 'against'.
so it is powerful initially as a uniting strategy for people who are unhappy with the current set up (often for reasons they don't fully grasp, which may be nothing to do with the eu, such as tory austerity). but this alliance of convenience falls apart at the next stage when consensus has to be reached on what anyone wants.

the leave margin is also a joke, which wil be its unravelling. eg, a 2% swing from leave to remain would make leave & remain equal. in political swing terms 2% is a sneeze, that can swing week to week, let alone year to year.
by way of perspective, the swing from tory to lib in the recent richmond by, with libs basing their entire appeal on being the only remain option, was 22%. that's where this is at.
a change of lab leader for a remain (eg, 2nd ref) candidate would really put the cat among the pigeons with swings like that on offer.
i've voted labour (or tactically anti-tory) all my life. but my vote goes to the remain party (or tactically anti-leave) next ge. and every ge thereafter. changing voter demographics takes care of the rest.

brexit is doomed. it's building sandcastles while the tide comes in. but the tories have to make a show of it because support for it is a predominantly tory vice. & ultimately it's not their money they are pissing away playing at it anyway.
they are all rich for life and already use private healthcare & private schools, so sacrificing those to stealth US privatisation & crippling pfi schemes to fund this fuck-up means nothing to them.

and if taxes are cut for the wealthy across the board 'to encourage investment' they stand to win big.

interesting you say all this..
because for the first time in my life I've actually considered voting Liberal, because the Tories can't be trusted, Labour is a joke, UKIP makes no sense to me at all, the Libs will remain in the EU and no matter how hard they try I cannot imagine them being more shit than the others..
ah yeah… and to stick it to the majority of the leavers for ramming how right they are down everyone's throats even though most arguments I hear from them generally spiral towards immigration [the bulk of which has been within the gov's ability to sort out all along, so it's a non-argument with respect to the EU]..
the killer thing that would put me off wanting to re-join the EU though is having anything to do with Juncker
he's by far a smug enough tosser without having the UK go back to him saying 'I've changed my mind'
if Art 50 was triggered and then there was a Lib victory resulting in a remain, he'd turn his dickhead setting to max and the UK would end up getting stuffed royally by him..

so here we are.. screwed if ya do… screwed if ya don't..
the real issue is that the govt:
- was stupid and careless enough to have such an ill thought through referendum in the first place
- seriously let down the people of this country by not taking their very real concerns seriously enough to do something meaningful about them
- was so deeply short sighted that their sights were set only on how to get their election victory at the cost of the people that granted them the last one
and the final part in this was that the EU themselves were so head-up-own-ass, that they completely failed to consider the UK leaving to be even a remote possibility, so they just took the piss out of Cameron's piss poor attempt at getting some reforms.. so the bag of meaningless shite they gave him to wave in front of the British people was nothing sort of an insult to all of us…

now the really funny thing is… I have all this hatred for the EU yet I voted to remain, and would again..

EDIT: in writing the post above I think I've just realised that I didn't want to leave or remain..
I just wanted to hate everyone… lmao

Heartfeltdawn

By-election time then.

Stoke on Trent Central: turnout was 11.7% down from the GE, Copeland was 12.4% down. This is consistent across by-election history, rarely does a by-election pull in more voters than a GE. 

The 69% Leave vote for Stoke Central didn't result in a UKIP win for Nuttall. It does suggest that the referendum was a true 'gut feeling' consultation of the general public.

Where UKIP go now will be hard. Europe isn't enough for them. The need to develop into more than a one-issue party is vital. 

For Labour, Copeland doesn't weaken them in a new way. A nuclear-heavy area was never going to be saluting the anti-nuclear Corbyn. It only reinforces the idea that Corbyn Labour will alienate certain Northern areas but not all of them, As the Stoke result showed. 

Bidley

Heartfeltdawn said:

The 69% Leave vote for Stoke Central didn't result in a UKIP win for Nuttall. It does suggest that the referendum was a true 'gut feeling' consultation of the general public.

All it says is that not everyone who voted leave is a UKIP voter. Which is pretty obvious when you look at the whole issue in a non-polarising way.

Fretwired

Bidley said:

Heartfeltdawn said:

The 69% Leave vote for Stoke Central didn't result in a UKIP win for Nuttall. It does suggest that the referendum was a true 'gut feeling' consultation of the general public.

All it says is that not everyone who voted leave is a UKIP voter. Which is pretty obvious when you look at the whole issue in a non-polarising way.

^^

This. And who would want Nuttal as their MP.

The results at the top:

Gareth Snell, Labour 7,853

Paul Nuttall, UKIP 5,233

Jack Brereton, Conservative 5,154

The Tories did pretty well and probably pinched votes from UKIP.

Heartfeltdawn

Bidley said:

Heartfeltdawn said:

The 69% Leave vote for Stoke Central didn't result in a UKIP win for Nuttall. It does suggest that the referendum was a true 'gut feeling' consultation of the general public.

All it says is that not everyone who voted leave is a UKIP voter. Which is pretty obvious when you look at the whole issue in a non-polarising way.

I know that. It's what I've consistently said throughout this thread and through other Brexit threads when select individuals were claiming that the referendum result was going to lead to a tsunami of support for UKIP come by-election time. My feelings about how Labour voting people were happy to go Leave at EURef time but would likely to revert to type come GE/by-election time seem to be demonstrated by Stoke Central polling. 

Until UKIP can convince people that they have effective domestic policies, then they won't get anywhere. 

Heartfeltdawn

Fretwired said:

The Tories did pretty well and probably pinched votes from UKIP.

I'd say so. That coupled with the continued Corbyn collapse puts May and company in a very strong position.

ICBM

The only saving grace for UKIP is that they just pipped the Tories for second place - but by less than a hundred votes. I can't see them surviving as a serious political party now - their purpose has been served in the minds of most people. If so, that's probably Cameron's main legacy other than Brexit itself.

I think it also demonstrates that if Labour fully embraced what we all know is probably Corbyn's private view and supported Leave, they would have done a lot better - it's quite clear which way their core support in the North mostly voted. And I say that even as a Remain voter who has sometimes voted Labour.

quarky

Stoke doesn't convince me that there is credible opposition still, and that is a major concern. Opposition for the sake of opposition isn't good, but it is better than none at all. Labour are in a fantasy world of their own. LibDems  had Richmond which could have been a springboard, but they won that by-election with someone who seems completely unsuitable for the task, and have spectacularly failed to step-up to the plate.

16m people voted to remain in the EU, but no parties seem capable of using that as a platform.

ToneControl

If UKIP  had lots of  candidates of the same  expertise as Farage, it may have been different, quite possibly not.
UKIP are a bunch of amateurs really, and  they couldn't even put up a convincing show with their leader standing here

Anyway , these by-elections have been even worse for Labour than I was  imagining, I had wondered if UKIP might steal votes from them, but I wasn't expecting the tories to  achieve  these kind of results mid-term

I'm not sure if Labour needs to lose  this badly in 2020 before they wake up and ditch  the idealism

Heartfeltdawn

I imagine certain areas of the Conservative party are ecstatic today. To have seen off Cameron, gotten the bill through Parliament, and to have given UKIP a very bloody nose in Stoke along with the Copeland victory is like getting the Easter bunny round early. 

Labour have suffered through a lack of understanding as to what they stand for. That was true of Miliband and has continued with Corbyn, most notably with the EU referendum. 

@quarky absolutely. Labour are not credible in this form (and when they're this bad, you have to ask even more questions of UKIP for failing to win in Stoke). The LibDem victory in Richmond wasn't nearly big enough for a major revival (not nearly enough media coverage and Farron still comes over as a prefect looking after the lunchtime dinner queue than a serious leader). 

It shows the continual division of the left-leaning world. 16m people voted to remain in the EU but 16m voters still remain achingly divided across a variety of platforms. 

Bidley

The division of the left doesn't stop at remain voters; plenty voted leave too. It's not about right vs left any more, which is especially tough, given the polarising nature of politics these days.