Brexit, aka, the UK Becomes a Clown Car of the Highest Order

The pairing debacle continues to run. Nobody is exactly denying the Times story, and then…

On the Daily Politics the Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen was asked a moment ago about the pair breaking scandal and what he thought actually happened (ie, whether he believed it was an honest mistake). Bridgen said the fact that Brandon Lewis did not vote in most of the divisions on Tuesday night, but did vote in the two crucial ones, “tells you all you need to know”.

Is he pro or anti brexit?

Smith or Lewis or Coates?

Julian Smith

I think the most accurate thing to say is that he’s pro-government policy. Right now that’s Brexit (unless you’re a die-hard eurosceptic, in which case it’s some sort of pro secret remain).

Excellent summary of the current UK political situation:

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/07/20/a-week-is-a-long-time-in-politics/

The idea of a ‘simple but painful’ hard Brexit strikes me as an act of self-delusion. The day the UK leaves the EU, I think no UK airline will have the right to operate anywhere in the EU or the US, and vice versa. This may be true of the entire world, since airline operations deals with the rest of the world are probably all with the EU. If anyone is working on that problem, I’ve read nothing about it at all. And it is only one of hundreds or thousands of such problems.

Not to mention rights of UK nationals in Europe, especially regarding travelling.

Brexit wets are going to lament it if ever a visa is needed for a booze cruise in malaga.

Unfortunately Malaga bar owners are going to lament it too. Too bad Brexit is a choice between bad and worse from the POV of the EU…

Raab’s first act as Brexit secretary appears to be renege on previous agreements. Part of the withdrawal agreement - entirely independent of trade - was agreed to be the divorce bill.

We’re going backwards in these negotiations.

The agreement was always contingent on a suitable framework for negotiations on an eu U.K. trade deal being in place. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.

That’s a very low bar - and not what Raab is saying.

But besides, the point is that this was already settled and agreed. We’re now opening up previously settled parts of the agreement.

I’ll probably get pilloried for this, but I still like Tony Blair (despite the UK’s role in the Iraq war and Blair’s pro-business stances.) This recent interview with the BBC shows why:

That was a good interview, Blair has always come across as intelligent and well spoken.

I haven’t followed Brexit much since it passed. One thing I did notice is it seems most of the leaders who pushed for it are gone from the spotlight. Did they choose to leave or what?

Maybe he wants her title and role? (In addition to the job he currently has.)

Blair is charming but really very very bad. In the end, he seems to be capable of rationalizing almost any horror.

It was a bit like Wumpus turning up, getting rid of Ignore, then trotting off.

Ok, so, is Blair guilty of anything but trusting his ally? I ask, because I really don’t know. He went to war against the wishes of his population, a “fireable” offense once it become clear that the population had good reason and was right for not wanting the war. But did he also know the reasons for the war were bullshit or was he taken in by his “special relationship” partner?

Farage jumped off the train the moment the results of the referendum were in. He knew the actual execution of Brexit was going to be a shit-storm.

I mean how could it be otherwise? What something like Brexit needs is leaders. Instead the UK has politicians and not particular competent ones at that.

Yes. There’s plenty of evidence that his government knew the Bush admin was at the very least overstating the case, and more likely cooking up a case. The whole ‘the intelligence is being fixed around the policy’ point in the Downing Street memos. So he knowingly cast his lot with Bush even though he knew there wasn’t a good case for the war, and he presumably did that for political reasons, e.g. he wanted to ride the popularity wave of a war leader, wanted the appreciation of those in power in Washington, etc.

Beyond that, he seems incapable of understanding, or at least of articulating, the magnitude of that blunder in real human terms. He helped kill a million people or more, and all he can manage is some kind of mild regret that he didn’t know then what he says he knows now. He did know then.