Brexit View

[EDOldie]

Well in Dulwich you have no choice at all because of the ridiculous boundary changes which lumped in part of West Norwood. It used to be a marginal and now it is one of Labour's safest seats. The proposed boundary changes look much more sensible taking in parts of Forest Hill and Sydenham but a worried Helen Hayes opposes them vigorously.

[JohnL]

EDOldie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well in Dulwich you have no choice at all because

> of the ridiculous boundary changes which lumped in

> part of West Norwood. It used to be a marginal and

> now it is one of Labour's safest seats. The

> proposed boundary changes look much more sensible

> taking in parts of Forest Hill and Sydenham but a

> worried Helen Hayes opposes them vigorously.

Seems to be accepted that these probably won't get through now. But you never know.

[Loz]

EDOldie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We all should have voted for PR when we had the chance.

... because that is really working out well in Austria and Germany right now.

[EDOldie]

It's a fair point, but pr is clearly a much more representative and I'd say democratic form of voting. I mean look at the States which has the most bizarre first past the post system imaginable. I'll remind you that Hilary got 48% of the vote compared to the man how name I cannot speak who got 46%.

We are the only country in Europe (or not in Europe depending on your view) that doesn't have PR.

[Loz]

Anyway, we never had the chance to vote for PR. But we did throw away the chance for AV, which is a much better system anyway - more stable than PR, more democratic than FPTP.

[EDOldie]

AV is probably worse than first past the post and I think the country realised that (I hope so anyway). Single transferable vote has always been my preferred system but the politicians don't like it at all. I wonder why?

[Loz]

EDOldie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> AV is probably worse than first past the post

Really? In what way?

[JohnL]

So the bill the EU will accept is 60B Euros according to this.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/24/eu-politicians-back-brussels-call-for-uk-to-pay-60bn-exit-bill-before-trade-talks

I think Theresa May will end up paying this.

[Blah Blah]

I agree John. 50B would be my guess at the settlement, in return for 2-4 years access to the single market. May had no choice but to cave in on that standoff - she does not want 'no deal' (I think that is very obvious now) whihc should give us some relief. Of course the hard brexit vultures are already piping up and that is the problem. Damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. She should just focus on doing what is best for the economy now, and stay at the helm long enough to make it impossible for a hard brexit sucessor to mess it up.

[Alan Medic]

Settlement can be agreed. EU citizens rights can be agreed. It beats me how they will solve the Irish border question which I hope is where the whole Brexit thing falls over. If their plan is a border in the Irish sea, just don't tell the DUP that. They won't like it.

[Alan Medic]

.

[JoeLeg]

They're already saying there won't be a hard border in Ireland; I reckon they'll find a way to make an exception. Like you, I'm not sure how, but seeing as the Tories (not just May) are dependent on the DUP I reckon they'll make it happen.

[Alan Medic]

Given the DUP don't want a hard border or a border in the Irish sea, I don't know how they can overcome that. If they go with a hard border it will just show how little they care for NI and they are already in breach of the GFA (Good Friday Agreement)by buying the DUP votes.

It's a conundrum which I think will massively affect the whole Brexit outcome. Unless a solution is found there will be no talk of trade deals post Brexit. Agreeing money and EU citizens rights will be easy compared to sorting out this problem.

[red devil]

Totally agree Meds, that's why it hardly merits a mention, no one has got a Scooby how to solve it. The money and citizen's rights should've been sorted by now. That 'open letter' she sent last week to EU citizens in the UK should've been issued as soon as she triggered A50.

I read an interesting article a couple of weeks ago about how the Brexiteers are using May to 'administer' Brexit. She's not an 'ideas' person, can't think outside the box, but has this blind sense of duty to follow a path once it's been set...

[Blah Blah]

Agreed RDevil. May a mouthpiece for whoever is pulling her strings - but she brought that on herself having lost the majority in the snap GE. The problem for us is that a Tory civil war is determining what kind of Brexit we get. The outcome won't be good and I agree that the NI border issue is most likely to be the biggest challenge. These are complexities that should have been considered before triggering Article 50. And all of this is matched by public division that could last for decades, especially if things don't go well.

[red devil]

You would've thought that the DUP would at least have some proposals for a solution as it's in their back yard. What was the point of them supporting Brexit otherwise? All along, Brexit has been shown to be no more than a concept, no one has thought it through properly, yet May expects the EU to be 'imaginative and creative'. It's not their problem or doing you imbecile...

[dc]

EDOldie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well in Dulwich you have no choice at all because

> of the ridiculous boundary changes which lumped in

> part of West Norwood. It used to be a marginal and

> now it is one of Labour's safest seats. The

> proposed boundary changes look much more sensible

> taking in parts of Forest Hill and Sydenham but a

> worried Helen Hayes opposes them vigorously.

Sorry, I can?t let that go, not least because it?s one of the few things I actually know something about.

The ?analysis? above is simply untrue. In 1997, when it was created, the new ?Dulwich and West Norwood? seat actually had a smaller notional (ie a calculation of what the result would have been in the new seat in the previous 1992 election) Labour majority than that of the old ?Dulwich? seat.

The real change has been in the demographics and the voting patterns of electors in London. When I first came here to live in the mid-80s the Tories had 8 seats on Southwark Council. They held 3 wards outright in the old Dulwich seat and the then two member Alleyn ward - loosely East Dulwich - had one Labour and one Tory Councillor. Now they have just two out of the three members in Village ward.

How EDOldie thinks retaining the old boundaries - effectively keeping the parts of Peckham and Camberwell south of Peckham High Street and Peckham Road would have made the seat more marginal is beyond me. Camberwell and Peckham currently has a Labour majority of 37,316 (65%). At the 2017 General Election, Labour had majorities of 23,162 (16.6%) and 21,123 (44.8%) respectively, in the Lewisham West & Penge, and Lewisham East constituencies to the south of ours. Good luck with carving a marginal out of that.

It is clear that the same social and political changes were what also drove the very high Remain votes in Southwark and Lambeth. Remember, Streatham had never had a Labour MP (not even in the great landslide of 1945) until Keith Hill won the seat in 1992. Chuka Umunna MP now has a majority there of 26,285 (47.1%).

The change in the marginality of our constituency really has nothing to do with the 1997 boundary changes and everything to do with the changing nature and political outlook of the people who live here.

[JohnL]

JoeLeg Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> They're already saying there won't be a hard

> border in Ireland; I reckon they'll find a way to

> make an exception. Like you, I'm not sure how, but

> seeing as the Tories (not just May) are dependent

> on the DUP I reckon they'll make it happen.

The republic would also veto any hard border on the EU27 side.

I think they can veto at phase 1 too.

[JohnL]

Juncker can't resist another little dig. Edit: actually people saying it's his aide - who denies it

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-jean-claude-juncker-private-dinner-brussels-a8014741.html

[EDOldie]

dc Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> The change in the marginality of our constituency

> really has nothing to do with the 1997 boundary

> changes and everything to do with the changing

> nature and political outlook of the people who

> live here.

Ok dc it's a fair cop but society's to blame. It's just a fit of pique (on my part) at the complete unfairness of the current voting system. And, this is the Brexit related part, if we had had a representative voting system we probably wouldn't have had the referendum. We may still have done I accept but I think it is a great deal less likely.

On the AV/STV side of things Loz, the AV system tends to work against smaller parties and favour the larger parties. That is precisely what I think we should be getting away from for people to have their voice heard. Even if I don't agree with what some of the smaller party's say.

Anyway back to Brexit. I actually am beginning to wonder if there is going to be an EU to leave shortly. Are the Catalans the catalyst (ho, ho) to the fall of the Treaty of Rome?

[Alan Medic]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Juncker can't resist another little dig. Edit:

> actually people saying it's his aide - who denies

> it

>

> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brex

> it-theresa-may-jean-claude-juncker-private-dinner-

> brussels-a8014741.html

Maybe fake news?

[JohnL]

Looks like it was fake - and one or the other sides - or the press playing games.

The Times (can only see first paragraph or so) still blames Martin Selmayr and others are blaming Nick Timothy for trying to set-up Selmayr. Oh the dark arts are back (if they ever went away after Campbell and Mandelson)

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/leak-will-only-stir-up-suspicions-between-britain-and-brussels-r9h8jw3mw

[red devil]

Michel Barnier knows what he's talking about...https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/23/uk-likely-to-end-up-with-canadian-style-deal-warns-michel-barnier

Theresa May doesn't...https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/23/brexit-transition-period-final-eu-trade-deal-theresa-may

[Jenny1]

Still can't work out how we got to the point where the country is run by people who'd be out of their depth managing a medium-sizd M and S.

[JohnL]

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Michel Barnier knows what he's talking

> about...https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/

> oct/23/uk-likely-to-end-up-with-canadian-style-dea

> l-warns-michel-barnier

> Theresa May

> doesn't...https://www.theguardian.com/politics/201

> 7/oct/23/brexit-transition-period-final-eu-trade-d

> eal-theresa-may

Maybe she wants to extent the A50 period and add a transition period after that. She can't just conjure a trade agreement out of thin air in 2019.

It's difficult to read her mind :)