Doubts over Brexit as vote backfires on May

[rooster59]

Doubts over Brexit as vote backfires on May

By THE NATION

 

 

UK prime minister forced to form a coalition; Thailand sees no short-term impact from uncertainty in Britain.

 

UK Prime Minister Theresa May is set to form a coalition government after her Conservative Party’s failure to win a majority in Parliament which will have a serious impact on Brexit.

 

According to the Thai Commerce Ministry, which closely monitored the UK election results, the poll setback for the ruling party meant negotiations to exit the European Union could be negatively affected. There is also a short-term impact on the value of the pound as well as increased worries in international financial markets due to uncertainties now hovering over Brexit.

 

UK premier May is due to visit Queen Elizabeth II shortly to seek permission to form a coalition government.

 

Pimchanok Vonkorpon, director-general of the Commerce Ministry’s Trade Policy and Strategy Office, said preliminary election results show that the Conservative Party had won 313 seats of the 650-seat UK Parliament, a drop of 331 seats from the previous 2015 poll. This means the UK will be ruled by a coalition government whose mandate would be less clear as crucial talks in the country’s departure from the EU near.

 

Pimchanok said that immediately there would not be any significant impact on UK trade with Thailand since the British government would continue to follow the EU’s rules and regulations until it leaves the group. However, the UK is expected to speed up negotiations with other trading partners, including Thailand, for bilateral and multilateral agreements on trade and investment. 

 

Brexit is expected to create new opportunities to increase trade and investment between the two countries, especially for Thai exports of sugar, chicken and rice to the UK market which are expected to increase due to the absence of quotas which are imposed on EU member countries.

 

On the investment side, Thailand expects to see more business partnerships with the UK in various sectors, especially information technology and aviation, as the UK is currently ranked Thailand’s 18 largest trading partner. 

 

In the first four months of this year, bilateral trade amounted to US$2.16 billion, with key Thai export products being processed chicken, automotive parts and components, aviation parts and components, electronics and jewellery.

 

The UK premier’s snap election was intended to boost her mandate for the Brexit negotiations, but the move backfired despite the party’s earlier lead.

 

According to an analysis by Kasikorn Bank’s financial markets, the Conservative Party, which still won the most seats but was short of a majority, would have to govern with the backing of other smaller parties. 

 

The last time the Conservative Party had to form a coalition was in 2010, when the Tories and Liberal Democrats joined forces, but that government only lasted for eight months before there was a new election.

 

Given the election results, Brexit negotiations are likely to be delayed as negotiations were expected to start on June 19. Overall, the new UK government will likely face many obstacles in Parliament as the UK needs a strong negotiator backed by the majority of MPs.

 

On the other hand, if May failed to form a coalition government and the Labour Party’s leader, Jeremy Corbyn is picked as the new prime minister, financial markets would expect to see a case for a “softer” Brexit.

 

Based on the election results, it seems UK voters had changed their minds to “Bremain” in the EU as a significant number had turned their back on May and ended up choosing the Labour Party instead, especially in London.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/business/30317683

 

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-06-10

[impulse]

Looks like the people have spoken.

 

Again.

 

Now we'll see how all the Brexiters tuned in here feel about "Democracy".  And we'll see if the remainers are as good at gloating...

 

[sungod]

Certainly did, Lib Dems who were offering a second referendum won 12 seats.

 

Nice to see democracy in action.

[impulse]

2 minutes ago, sungod said:

Certainly did, Lib Dems who were offering a second referendum won 12 seats.

 

Nice to see democracy in action.

 

Just to be clear, I don't have an opinion on the Brexit itself.

 

But I do have strong reservations about the process they used to sneak it through.  It took a 2/3 majority to join the EU, but a 52/48% vote can force an exit?

 

Had the weather been different that day, the vote could have gone the other way.

 

Had they voted on a different day of the week, it could have gone the other way.

 

Had a bunch of British football fans not been set upon by Eastern European thugs in the weeks before the vote, it could have gone the other way.

 

Had everyone realized it would be binding (representative democracy and all that), and voting could have gone toward an exit, the voting could have gone the other way.

 

It was hardly a resounding mandate, and not really a gauge of the constituency.  As I've been saying all along- this could get good.  At least it takes some of the focus off the debacle across the pond.

 

[roderick17]

Britain is in terminal decline , and now nothing can stop  its descent !

[whiteman]

10 minutes ago, roderick17 said:

Britain is in terminal decline , and now nothing can stop  its descent !

and so is the pound all the old poms here will have to drink less eat less and play with the ladies  a lot less

[sungod]

40 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Just to be clear, I don't have an opinion on the Brexit itself.

 

But I do have strong reservations about the process they used to sneak it through.  It took a 2/3 majority to join the EU, but a 52/48% vote can force an exit?

 

Had the weather been different that day, the vote could have gone the other way.

 

Had they voted on a different day of the week, it could have gone the other way.

 

Had a bunch of British football fans not been set upon by Eastern European thugs in the weeks before the vote, it could have gone the other way.

 

Had everyone realized it would be binding (representative democracy and all that), and voting could have gone toward an exit, the voting could have gone the other way.

 

It was hardly a resounding mandate, and not really a gauge of the constituency.  As I've been saying all along- this could get good.  At least it takes some of the focus off the debacle across the pond.

 

The same could be said for the election yesterday, had it been held a couple of weeks earlier the result could have been much different. We now have a government with 56 seats more than the next party, quite a difference but still not enough for a majority.  No one said its perfect, but thats UK democracy.

[terryw]

Brexit will continue. Both major political parties mainly support it. The latest opinion polls show 69 percent in favour of getting Brexit completed asap.

[impulse]

1 hour ago, sungod said:

The same could be said for the election yesterday, had it been held a couple of weeks earlier the result could have been much different. We now have a government with 56 seats more than the next party, quite a difference but still not enough for a majority.  No one said its perfect, but thats UK democracy.

  

True, but if you required the same 2/3 majority to untangle the mess of $$ trillions of dollars and millions or tens of millions of people who will be affected, there wouldn't be any question at all.  There's going to be millions of big and small winners and losers upon exit, just like there were millions of big and small losers on entry into the common market.  Seems a little arbitrary to allow a tiny majority percentage of the population redistribute that wealth in either direction.  

 

Next week, they may hold a referendum on dividing up all estates bigger than 5 acres...

[gamini]

May is a complete opportunist. She is determined to stay in power whatever the cost to the country. Her coalition with the DUP is a deplorable move. It's a Northern Irish party when Northern Ireland voted heavily to remain in the EU.

[Orac]

May is a complete opportunist. She is determined to stay in power whatever the cost to the country. Her coalition with the DUP is a deplorable move. It's a Northern Irish party when Northern Ireland voted heavily to remain in the EU.

To be fair, the DUP supported Brexit to the point where large sums of money were put towards campaigning but oddly not in Northern Ireland.

[Stupooey]

5 hours ago, impulse said:

 

 It took a 2/3 majority to join the EU, but a 52/48% vote can force an exit?

 

Not quite true. There was no vote for joining the EEC (as was), the 1975 referendum was held to decide whether the UK should remain members a couple of years after joining.

As you say, the result was 67-33 in favour, the sort of majority you could start applying emotive phrases like 'the will of the people' to. That should have settled the matter, but unfortunately the 33% were not prepared to accept the result. They became known as 'Eurosceptics', although 'Euroseptics' would be more accurate, as successive governments (particularly Conservative) had to pander to their Eurosceptic wing. As a result, instead of being one of the leaders of the Union, the UK allowed Germany and France to set the agenda. It is ironic that these are the same people who later complained that the UK was being ruled from Brussels, but were too arrogant to admit, or too stupid to realise, that their indifference had exacerbated the situation.

Referenda in the UK have only ever been held to appease party political in-fighting for a very good reason: they are a very unsatisfactory method of carrying out government and undermine sovereignty, which rests with Parliament. Certainly any vote on a cataclysmic change such as Brexit should require a 2:1majority, otherwise you end up with the sort of mess we are now witnessing. The only way to save the Country would be for Parliament to override the referendum result, which they are perfectly entitled to do, but of course politicians are not brave enough to do this. Perhaps the answer is a military coup and Article 44!

[impulse]

1 minute ago, Stupooey said:

Not quite true. There was no vote for joining the EEC (as was), the 1975 referendum was held to decide whether the UK should remain members a couple of years after joining.

As you say, the result was 67-33 in favour, the sort of majority you could start applying emotive phrases like 'the will of the people' to. That should have settled the matter, but unfortunately the 33% were not prepared to accept the result.

 

 

Good info, and I think you get my point that something as fundamental as which set of laws you're going to live under should get the same scrutiny as a constitutional amendment, and not the same 50% criteria as you'd use in setting the price of a dog license. 

 

[dunroaming]

Yes after all the drama yesterday  May will struggle on with the DUP in tow.  Many people concerned about that but given the mess the country is in we just have to live with it. 

[HHTel]

The Nation has the 'forming a government' completely wrong.  She does not have to form a coalition and indeed she isn't going to do so.  As the largest party she is entitled to form a 'minority government'.  She has the support of the DUP but not a coalition.

 

8 hours ago, rooster59 said:

On the other hand, if May failed to form a coalition government and the Labour Party’s leader, Jeremy Corbyn is picked as the new prime minister, financial markets would expect to see a case for a “softer” Brexit.

And again, The Nation doesn't seem to have a clue!

[Thakkar]

The view from Switzerland:

 

[JHolmesJr]

6 hours ago, whiteman said:

and so is the pound all the old poms here will have to drink less eat less and play with the ladies  a lot less

a clean up of soi lk metro is long overdue.

[JHolmesJr]

1 hour ago, gamini said:

May is a complete opportunist. She is determined to stay in power whatever the cost to the country. Her coalition with the DUP is a deplorable move. It's a Northern Irish party when Northern Ireland voted heavily to remain in the EU.

what are these DUP guys thinking…..guess they might have to change their name to DUPE.

[Stupooey]

5 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Good info, and I think you get my point that something as fundamental as which set of laws you're going to live under should get the same scrutiny as a constitutional amendment, and not the same 50% criteria as you'd use in setting the price of a dog license. 

 

Agreed. Unlike a General Election, where abstentions just indicate no preference, in the Referendum it could be argued that those who didn't vote were happy with the status quo. There will always be a problem with simple majority referenda: what if the vote had been 50.01/49.99?

[attrayant]

5 hours ago, terryw said:

Brexit will continue. Both major political parties mainly support it. The latest opinion polls show 69 percent in favour of getting Brexit completed asap.

 

Can you link to the poll?  It's not that I don't believe you, it's just that (1) I'd like to keep an eye on it going forward, and (2) I don't believe you.

[sungod]

26 minutes ago, Stupooey said:

Not quite true. There was no vote for joining the EEC (as was), the 1975 referendum was held to decide whether the UK should remain members a couple of years after joining.

As you say, the result was 67-33 in favour, the sort of majority you could start applying emotive phrases like 'the will of the people' to. That should have settled the matter, but unfortunately the 33% were not prepared to accept the result. They became known as 'Eurosceptics', although 'Euroseptics' would be more accurate, as successive governments (particularly Conservative) had to pander to their Eurosceptic wing. As a result, instead of being one of the leaders of the Union, the UK allowed Germany and France to set the agenda. It is ironic that these are the same people who later complained that the UK was being ruled from Brussels, but were too arrogant to admit, or too stupid to realise, that their indifference had exacerbated the situation.

Referenda in the UK have only ever been held to appease party political in-fighting for a very good reason: they are a very unsatisfactory method of carrying out government and undermine sovereignty, which rests with Parliament. Certainly any vote on a cataclysmic change such as Brexit should require a 2:1majority, otherwise you end up with the sort of mess we are now witnessing. The only way to save the Country would be for Parliament to override the referendum result, which they are perfectly entitled to do, but of course politicians are not brave enough to do this. Perhaps the answer is a military coup and Article 44!

I would class a change of government as cataclysmic, using the same rationale maybe the opposition in an election need a 2 thirds majority so we dont witness the mess you think we are in?

[dunroaming]

30 minutes ago, HHTel said:

The Nation has the 'forming a government' completely wrong.  She does not have to form a coalition and indeed she isn't going to do so.  As the largest party she is entitled to form a 'minority government'.  She has the support of the DUP but not a coalition.

 

And again, The Nation doesn't seem to have a clue!

It is true that it isn't a coalition and isn't going to be.  It is also true that May needs to have the backing of another party and the DUP is one of very few who would get into bed with the Tories under May.  Just what concessions May will make to the nutcases in the DUP remains to be seen.

 

Brexit will go ahead but probably softer which will be a good thing and the markets are already responding positively to that thought.

[jesimps]

8 hours ago, impulse said:

Looks like the people have spoken.

 

Again.

 

Now we'll see how all the Brexiters tuned in here feel about "Democracy".  And we'll see if the remainers are as good at gloating...

 

It has nothing to do with the Brexit referendum, that's done and dusted and article 50 had been submitted. The govt is the vehicle to negotiate our leaving of the EU. 

 

The govt,  whoever it may be, has a duty to carry out the wishes of the people by taking the UK out of the EU.

 

This was a democratic vote, the Tories and DUP will take us out of the EU, I will neither grieve or gloat.

 

Edited June 10, 2017 by jesimps

[jesimps]

1 hour ago, attrayant said:

 

Can you link to the poll?  It's not that I don't believe you, it's just that (1) I'd like to keep an eye on it going forward, and (2) I don't believe you.

I read the 69% bit somewhere but can't remember where, so can"t prove it, so you can disbelieve me too.

[Stupooey]

1 hour ago, sungod said:

I would class a change of government as cataclysmic, using the same rationale maybe the opposition in an election need a 2 thirds majority so we dont witness the mess you think we are in?

Elections are different animals to referenda. A party receiving 48% of the votes in an election will invariably win, one receiving 33% will invariably lose. Changes of government are regular occurrences, unravelling the previous 44 years are not, thankfully. Glad that you don't seem to think the UK's in a mess, though.

[sungod]

35 minutes ago, Stupooey said:

Elections are different animals to referenda. A party receiving 48% of the votes in an election will invariably win, one receiving 33% will invariably lose. Changes of government are regular occurrences, unravelling the previous 44 years are not, thankfully. Glad that you don't seem to think the UK's in a mess, though.

I find it amusing that those who claim to be democratic dont respect the views of the majority. 

 

Had the Brexit vote been the other way around with the same margins would you be bleating so much? 

 

 

 

[dunroaming]

20 minutes ago, sungod said:

I find it amusing that those who claim to be democratic dont respect the views of the majority. 

 

Had the Brexit vote been the other way around with the same margins would you be bleating so much? 

 

 

 

Well the vote didn't go the other way so we will never know.  Brexit will go ahead but with the DUP being all for a soft Brexit don't expect the May vehicle getting pushed through anymore.  I suspect that once the negotiations are agreed we will end up with something like the Norwegian deal.  We will see who is bleating then shall we.

[Basil B]

2 hours ago, jesimps said:

It has nothing to do with the Brexit referendum, that's done and dusted and article 50 had been submitted. The govt is the vehicle to negotiate our leaving of the EU. 

 

The govt,  whoever it may be, has a duty to carry out the wishes of the people by taking the UK out of the EU.

 

This was a democratic vote, the Tories and DUP will take us out of the EU, I will neither grieve or gloat.

 

There is no turning back on article 50...

 

But May wants Hard Brexit... that is why many voters turned away from the Tories not that Corbyn would make a better PM.

 

I bet there are a few Tory MP's who see the way forward as a soft brexit (single market, common customs union, etc), now thinking of resigning the whip, even defecting or starting their own party.

 

 

Quote

The atmosphere in Downing Street under Theresa May is "pretty toxic" and its operation "dysfunctional", a former aide of the prime minister has said.

Katie Perrior, who served as director of communications for 10 months, said she and others were not able to "speak freely" and her advice was not heeded.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/40232154

 

And that was before the election... She is getting a right little Thatcher.

Edited June 10, 2017 by Basil B

[JAG]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/40232154
 
And that was before the election... She is getting a right little Thatcher.

Well, except for the fact that Margaret Thatcher won elections - consistently...

[ddavidovsky]

The public voted for Brexit ages ago, and it still, for almost unintelligible reasons, hasn't happened. It could and should have happened overnight and the process of reconstructing trade channels would have started immediately and be largely over by now.

 

What is happening? The media now has almost absolute strait-jacket control over politics and politicians, having learnt it can spread seeds of doubt that the media-impressionable rabble swallows without question. This usually involves faux-hysteria and concocted outrage, such as the OP.

 

There's really no news here. All we are seeing in articles like this is the same screams of the losers we had after the Brexit vote. The Tories can and will still govern. They held the election just in time. Later on, they could have lost it completely as power can oscillate simply for the sake of change and it will soon be Labour's turn again. Arguably, a very astute move by May and her advisors to get this out of the way now.