British Politics


All these people who are coming out with the hot takes about how Toy Blair isn’t good but we should totally be backing him on Europe and Brexit are bad.



This is pretty amazing! Congrats


UKIP are calling on people to subscribe to Pewdiepie hmmm


Christ! Where’s this?


They tweeted that “real patriots subscribe to Pewdiepie” and linked to his stuff.


non-racist libertarian party


also fuckin lmao. like absolutely nobody’s surprised at this point. how many times has this happened


The government narrowly losing a motion it expected to lose so it then starts trying to whip its own members to vote against it’s own motion, fails badly and in the process of failing badly just starts letting some of those members piss off to the pub instead. Is there a better metaphor for Brexit? Starting to think us voting No in 2014 was a bit of an error.


Can someone explain how exactly Theresa May is still PM? The continued failure to pass something concrete on Brexit seems like one of the most catastrophic failures of governance I’ve ever seen and I don’t quite understand how the Tory ship is even still afloat at this point.


she’s safe from internal tory leadership challenges until december - winning the last one gave her a year’s grace period - and, 'cause of the coalition’s fixed term parliaments act - which formalised the definition of a ‘vote of confidence’ in the government - the tories themselves can fail to pass as much legislation as they like and still stay in power as long as enough mps are willing to declare they have some vague sense of ‘confidence’ in the government… even if they refuse to vote for their actual legislation. which is incredibly stupid.

as for why she’s held on this long/won the last leadership challenge, i think it’s just that no one else in the party particularly wants the job at the moment.


This isn’t that important but it keeps bugging me. I hate how the term we use now is “talks” when referring to the negotiations. I think it gives the impression that the UK can have an amicable conversation without compromising on anything.


More specifically, nobody wants to be blamed for the economy tanking after Brexit.


This isn’t too far off, but it is mostly just that nobody actually thinks they could do a better job than her at negotiating Brexit. Theresa May runs Brexit like a Conservative Party management task, very rarely involving other parties outside of the Democratic Unionist Party in negotiations in a meaningful way. Even in flirtations with Labour rebels to woo them over, it works out to being a few days of pork barrel politics rather than a sustained charm offensive.

This means that Conservatives like it, since all they need to do is win over their own eccentrics rather than actually cooperate with Corbyn’s Labour – which is more than likely what a ‘soft Brexiteer’ would have opted to do.

Theresa May runs Brexit this way because she is, in practice, a xenophobe. While the press has largely suffered from bizarre amnesia from her stint as Home Secretary, we shouldn’t forget that the ‘Go Home’ vans of Operation Vakan were her idea. This encourages a harder Brexit – the European Union requires the four freedoms to be held together, so a hardline on immigration ipso facto rules out customs union, Norway plus, &c. You’re out of the single market by definition.

As for the hard Brexiteers, their ideas are fantasy and they know it. The Brexit Minister position has been occupied by a number of their charlatans, so taking the Prime Minister spot would not be a huge gain in terms of giving them power of the Brexit process. These are also the only people who could win an internal Conservative Party election – because their base is increasingly pro-Brexit and is actively becoming hostile to Europhiles.

Nobody wants to be the Brexit Prime Minister. Everyone will want to be the post-Brexit Prime Minister.


good news everyone. absolutely nothing has changed, other than everyone’s still mad at corbyn for some reason and the government has completely ceased to function


Didn’t get the chance to share this on the discord but this really makes my blood boil


Has anybody got any insight into this newest Brexit twist?


Well, it’s one of those things which wasn’t totally unexpected… but seems to have been unexpected by the people most affected by it.

It was pretty obvious that the May / Government approach of “just keep putting up the same legislation until we get close enough to the deadline that people break” was already pushing the limits of “good behaviour” for a government, but the question was how much trouble the Speaker was willing to cause by actually objecting and stopping them. After several MPs publicly talked about the existence of standing orders which prevent this kind of thing, Bercow was always going to have had to make a statement about his position, and he was always going to have had to do so before MV3.

The fact that it was also obvious that MV3 was going to look precisely the same as MV2 just made it much more likely that Bercow’s position was going to upset the May / Government approach.

Now, though, without their main plan available to them, it’s not clear what they’ll do. They can’t make MV3 materially different to MV2, because the EU has noted, repeatedly, that they won’t change anything else - and May herself has also repeatedly said this. But there’s very little time left to do anything else: in order to get a reasonable extension from the EU, May needs to go to Brussels on Thursday with an actual plan from the UK. And we don’t have one now.

(There’s also the possibility that Bercow will also have to rule out other motions - like “giving Parliament control of the issue” - which have been voted against more than once, but I rather think that any push from their factions would now be relying on “hybrid” suggestions which aren’t precisely what they’ve pushed before - like how Labour is now suggesting supporting “the Withdrawal Agreement, with a confirmatory referendum”.)

In general, though: this is utterly terrifying… but only because the Government has been utterly awful at managing this process, and Parliament contains utter lunatics who were willing to rely on brinkspersonship at the risk of disaster.


I think this opinion piece in the Guardian gives some useful context to The Speaker’s decision:

The articles I’ve read seem to say that Bercow’s position is legitimate in that the same proposition cannot be voted on twice in quick succession, however, the point at which a proposal is different enough is up to interpretation.

John Bercow is disliked by many groups for many different reasons, one of the most common reasons being how hands-on he is with trying to control the chamber (annoyingly, the allegations of his bullying and antagonistic treatment of staff and aids has been used as the scapegoat for removing him rather than the actual reason some MPs push for it). He annoyed enough people before that they’ve tried to push him out of his position multiple times and threatened to refuse his lordship once he leaves the role of Speaker - the expected, though not required, treatment of any minister who has been the Speaker regardless of the government in control when they step down. It seems his response is to cling-on to the role of Speaker throughout the Brexit process and try to make his mark on proceedings.


This is the real problem, especially when the brinkmanship people are almost entirely within the group of people May has chosen to focus on.

I wrote about this above, but I do think that a robust analysis of May’s strategy, free from party or Remain/Leave partisanship, will focus on the internal Conservative aspect of this as the key motor of it. May has generally excluded Labour from this in favour of keeping her party afloat, even though there probably is a Brexit vision that can squeak through the Commons if the Labour front bench are on side with it.

May’s argument is that it is her vision, but the only way she can get it is by running the clock down enough that it will goad people in. The only issue is that most MPs are pro-Remain by inclination; keeping Labour out means they are also, effectively, also-rans to the discussion. May wants to run it in-house, even though the Conservatives are just not united enough to make it work and attract Labour support.