Why so much surprise over Corbyn calling for Labour to Abstain?

dj which side is it on?

It's not. It's on this link, RT, I think.

skwawkbox.org/2017/07/01/live-link-to-notonedaymore-march/

My iPad won't let me open it. Bum

Corbyn is on his way.

To look at while we are waiting.

Evening Standard says more than 10,000.

Corbyn talking about the rights to trade union representation, decent housing, fate of modern Britain with Tory austerity.
Social care crisis is a crisis made by this government.
People began to realise that we didn't have to go down the way of neocon economics.
The only magic money tree is on a tax haven island which doesn't allow trickle down.
NHS publically owned, publically run and those who work in it are publically employed.

We will fight for a Britain that has full workers rights, human rights and justice.

The age of imagination, to build a better society for our children and all those that come after us.

Interesting video by Mike Galsworthy (Scientists for EU), who goes through Umunna's amendment logically:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0zx4guR5ik

That's quite brilliant.
Why did Umunna try to split the party again? To actually have Farage and Hannan saying Corbyn's okay must make him wonder.

I'm not sure he did - not according to Mike Galsworthy.

Labour's playing a long game, that's for sure, and it's all about jockeying for position.

The danger is that Labour leaves it too late - and some younger Labour supporters realise that.

Even if there's a vote in Parliament (or even a second referendum on the deal), the choice could be between no deal and whatever the Conservatives "negotiate". "No deal" is such a bad alternative that people would be forced into accepting the least worst option.

The trouble is (a Galsworthy points out) it's like Shrodingers Cat. None of it makes sense, especially as people are still introducing fantasy solutions. Labour (and some others) keep claiming that the UK can have something similar to the Single Market an Customs Union, but it isn't an option. The EU has said emhatically that we can't have that - and I can't say I blame them.

Incidentally, I still don't know officially why the LDs abstained on McDonnell's amendment, but I've looked at the exact wording and my guess is because it includes pushing for something like the SM, but not the SM. The LDs' position is that we stay in the Single Market and that something like it is nonsense - I agree.

Farage, Hannan (and Hopkins) were sh*t stirring - they're good at that!

Eloethan Sat 02.05

"POGS Are you the same POGS that used to post a couple of years ago - your style of writing seems to have changed?"

Yes I am the same POGS and I don't know what makes you think otherwise to be honest. More than a couple of years too!!!

Whitewave Sat 10.11
Durhamjen Sat 10.17

Re Starmer 6 points on Brexit negotiations.

2. Does it deliver the exact same benefits as we currently have as members of the single market and customs union.
-------

Labour has stated they would end 'The Free Movement of People' , as have the Conservative Party.

The EU have stipulated that the 'Free Movement of People' thus far is 'Non Negotiable' , there will be no 'Cherry Picking'.

The EU states the 4 Freedoms/Pillars of ' Free Movement of Goods, People, Services and Capital' is 'Non Negotiable'.

I have asked so many times but 'How can the UK Government TELL the EU that it must give us the 'same benefits as we have now'?

What would happen if after negotiations the EU told the UK that if it does not agree to the Free Movement of People no deal will be offered and in March 2019, ' THEIR ' offer not ours was “take it or leave it”. ?

These are questions never answered by the likes of Labours Starmer, Corbyn, McDonnell, Gardiner, Thornberry , they simply say something like "Well we mustn't leave the EU without getting the same rights as we have now".

Labour are being disingenuous by trying to say they want/we could have the same benefits AND end Free Movement of People.
If it were to happen it would be because the EU dropped their stance on the 4Freedoms/Pillars being the defining principal they insist on. If only!

It's not telling. It's asking.
It's called negotiation.
The Tory government TELLS the EU what it wants.
Labour negotiate, and try to come to an agreement.

That to me is the main difference between the two parties anyway.

Just for once I am entirely with POGS on this.

How can we possibly achieve the 'same benefits' as we have now without conceding Free Movement of workers?

The Labour party seem to be regarding this as a red line. So is the EU!

How can anyone honestly believe that a way can be negotiated round this?

There is often the mention of Norway on sooooo many Brexit Threads (DJ Sat 10.21).

Norway is in EFTA

www.efta.int/eea/policy-areas/persons

'Free Movement of Persons'

The free movement of persons is one of the core rights guaranteed in the European Economic Area (EEA), the extended Internal Market which unites all the EU Member States and three EEA EFTA States – Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. It is perhaps the most important right for individuals, as it gives citizens of the 31 EEA countries the opportunity to live, work, establish business and study in any of these countries.

So if Starmer has stated Labour will 'End the Free Movement of People' how can it keep expecting to keep the 'same benefits'.?

DJ

" It's not telling. It's asking.
It's called negotiation."
-----

BUT the EU has stated it's 'Non Negotiable'.!!

Yes, obviously negotiations are taking place but the only way this 'Mexican Stand Off' is for the EU to drop the 4 Freedoms/Pillars is none negotiable stance or the UK to drop the 'We will end the free movement of people' stance. The latter stated by both the Labour and Conservative Parties.

I think voters have been taken for fools by Labours rhetoric over the Single Market and now the penny is dropping for many.

Corbyn used the 'whip' over the Queens Speech Amendment tabled by the Labour MP Chuka Umunna which called for ' The UK should remain in the single market and in the customs union.'.

That said it all to some but obviously not to others.

Have you ever seen anything positive in anything Corbyn has said, POGS?

dj, both POGS and I are questioning how Labour can aspire to achieve 'exactly the same benefits' we have now when they are apparently refusing to accept Free Movement.

I see lots of positive things in what Corbyn says but I don't see anything positive, or at all feasible, in this particular aspiration.

I know that, Maizie. I also know that you see many positive things about Corbyn.
Whatever he does or says as far as Brexit is concerned will be wrong to some people.

I still would like to know if POGS has ever seen anything positive in anything Corbyn has said.

And I'd like to know how anyone, of any party can believe that insisting that it's possible to retain all 'current benefits' of the EU without allowing Freedom of Movement is a credible position.

But it's not insisting. It's asking.
And if it's not possible, that's the answer. What the EU said was in rssponse to May saying that she would leave without a deal if it wasn't the deal she wanted.

The EU have already said that it's not possible. Why does anyone believe they'll change their mind?

(WTF don't we just stay in the EU, really...)

Hate to say just wait and see, but we'll have to.