PMs change and lol we're all gonna die (but brexit will never end)

There is no 'hagiographical bent', but you seem to need to believe there is, so carry on, it's of a piece with your habit of misrepresenting what people are saying.

For the absolute!last!time!on this!

- you are not the only foreigner itt
- the government is literally deporting black and brown citizens, so don’t act like anyone is cavalier towards this country’s utterly fucked up immigration policies
- there is no actual existing Labour deal so there is no point in getting mad about anything at this point in time
- did I mention how even the “least foreign” of us have to live under the government defending their soldiers using the hollowed out skulls of Irish citizens as ashtrays or stripping Irish citizens from NI of their rights?
- the last labour leader was the son of two holocaust refugees and yet he still found himself putting out the infamous “controls on immigration” mug.
- I’m not sure exactly what I or anyone would need to do to be sufficiently remain enough? Stop slagging off the EU?

I am unequivocally pro-FOM fwiw and think the leadership should be full throated in its support. while I think there are issues around the posted workers directive, JC and co have been a little cute in the purely factual statement quoted above. I also have issues w some of the dogwhistling they have done in this area

there are some indications yesterday in some of what DA was saying that the leadership may take a more forthright/positive position on this

Dialogue de sourds.

tl;dr but while you are largely right that discourse on immigration is totally fucked, that’s not the case itt and it’s not the case in terms of Corbyn’s personal beliefs either. The repeated focus on his “support for the IRA” is explicitly meant to imply that he likes the foreigners a bit TOO much, ffs

er, I meant that Corbyn said he doesn't presume remain would be better than a deal.

he hasn’t negotiated a deal yet. why second guess things. hypothetically, what would happen if he negotiated a deal where we get 10 vetoes and a hundredty billion added to the rebate? now, that is unlikely so I think you can work out where labour will probably end up /enilythornberrywelltherewego.png

That's odd, I thought the weekly discussion about the people itt was scheduled for tomorrow?

xxxps great contribution, thanks

I'm not interested in a discussion *about* the people in this thread, I'm interested in hearing what people in this thread think about a difficult issue. this is to prod a discussion. I'll meta if people want to meta me, but otherwise that's not my interest.

"Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union": this is a simple consequence of leaving the EU, a description of a fact.

what wasn't and isn't clear is what comes next: "FOM is now over bye bye" vs "FOM will be BACK BACK BACK when we establish the customs union we have in mind"

this unclarity was the heart of the tactic of constructive ambiguity, basically sending different signals in different drections to different wings of the party (for unity's sake) and to different types of voter (for votes' sake), while the overall strategy was very much to lean on all the non-brexit elements in the manifesto (with enough success to squeeze the tories into being a minority government but not enough to get lab over the line). But FOM was never actively a labour red line -- if it had been,labour wouldn't have voted may's WA down (it *was* a tory red line).

given that constructive ambiguity is by nature ambiguous, it's unsurprising (and an occupational hazard) that many have chosen to read into it the elements they don't want to hear: corbs is a divisive politician and insofar as he has influence, this influence is often negative! plus i think those who choose to interpret lab's position as guardedly pro-FOM* are also SOMEWHAT reading tea-leaves and making oblique inference (for example from keir starmer's six principles) than much that's been directly said (tho I think Diane Abbott -- a non-negligeable figure on corbs's counsel -- in has been consistently pro-FOM?)

*roughly speaking this includes me, in the sense that i've chosen to be persuaded by commentary that's interpreted the stance as making pro-FOM signals without saying so out loud

Everyone itt is in favour of freedom of movement. There you go. Job done.

FOM D

I think there should be quotas on how many supercilious French speaking nincompoops with a predilection for projecting ignorance onto other people enjoy FOM tbf. joeks obv

was listening to a hostile environment story earlier of a Nigerian woman who was deported by the HO and unceremoniously shunted onto a plane and not even dropped off at the main airport, just dumped onto some remote country lane in some remote part of Lagos without a penneth to her name.

Getting rid of FOM is nbd because of that anecdote. Flawless logic.

flawless reading

joeks obv

and that is what I was saying yes? That's the problem with you pom, your a total dickhead of much wilful misapprehension at times

I just mentioned it because I heard it on the radio earlier ftr.

supercilious French speaking nincompoops with a predilection for projecting ignorance onto other people

your a total dickhead of much wilful misapprehension at times

🤔

yeah really not sure where this kind of passive aggressive sarcasm is coming from, we're all friends here surely!

I don't care that much about leave or remain and if the UK is to have x amounts of immigrants I'm just as happy for them to be from Ghana or Costa Rica as from Iceland or lithuania.

Ireland auto corrected to Iceland there for some reason

ILX sponsorship deal iirc

I have 5 A levels and degrees from Oxford and Harvard. Angela Rayner is a far better politician than I will ever be. And a far more admirable human being than the mean spirited snobs who sneer at her. https://t.co/mjcao8cUYc

— Nick Boles MP (@NickBoles) September 23, 2019

lol

"FOM will be BACK BACK BACK when we establish the customs union we have in mind" - this seems an odd reading though, I'm not aware of plans to leave the EU without a customs union other than No Deal.

- you are not the only foreigner itt

No, but you are AFAIK the only (European) foreigner itt willing to go to the mat for Labour on this issue?

lol @the Boles condescension "don't do it nick!"

the boles condescension is my favourite robert ludlum novel

i think Allison's forgetting that a lot of us have been treated to the depth of her intellect on Late Review and that's pretty shaky ground she's standing on right there

otm, what a dimwit she was on that programme.

it's a delicious idea tho that your GCSE results should disqualify you from being an education minister more so than say never having been to a state school in your entire worthless life

andrew, acc.mcdonnell some time back end of last year the lab dream of a WA would have in mind a future customs union suited to lab's wants and dreams*: this can't strictly speaking be pre-negotiated (bcz the WA doesn't allow for trade details to be pinned down) though it probably could (as of june 2017, which is when we're talking about) have been well signalled and agreed-on in back channels

lab aren't in a position to set out a plan, they're not in government. whether FOM actually ends and re-begins, or in effect carries on, depends on the nature of WA, but there's definitely a case for reading lab's manifesto claim as a lawyerly bit of sleight-of-hand (FOM as grounded by our current status in the EU will end with our current status). the question of the strained-ness of this reading really depends on how effective you think the sleight-of-hand is: the intent behind it is revealed more by lab's refusal to back the may version of WA (and refusal of no deal) than by anything said out loud.

*this was much mocked in the UK media as inveterate unicornism, by political opponents (as you;d expect) and by commentators confused by the fact that the WA was and is a precursor to the next stage of negotiations (even in the case of no deal) -- but among others donald tusk was happy to give it quiet approval

i shd add i'm making a bit of a distinction between the first half of 2017, which is when the manifesto in question was drawn up and when the strategy was evolving, and today -- when a lot of water has passed under the bridge. i don't necessarily think the stance and the strategy are exactly the same now (i fret when lab started calling for a second ref for example, but it was relatively recently and certainly not part-and-parcel with 2017 manifesto strategy)

not "i fret" but "i forget" lol

i fret a little

i mean me too but abt other stuff mostly

butts

who among us does not fret about butts

Make sure that you can say "I helped lay the foundations of a new society". #Lab19 pic.twitter.com/OQwZ15PHqQ

— John McDonnell MP (@johnmcdonnellMP) September 23, 2019

😍😍😍

reread the manifesto section on Brexit, on Labour's website, earlier and don't know if we covered it before but it states 'where immigration has put a strain on public services' which as a statement, even as conditional as it may be in this case (being too generous probably), just should never have been nor continue to be used

For areas where immigration has placed a strain on public services we will reinstate the Migrant Impact Fund and boost it with a contributory element from the investments required for High Net Worth Individual Visas.

?

_For areas where immigration has placed a strain on public services we will reinstate the Migrant Impact Fund and boost it with a contributory element from the investments required for High Net Worth Individual Visas._


?

grampasimpsonwalksindoor.gif

Probably the most singularly appropriate dn you’ve ever had

Looks like the NEC statement went through.

This is not the end of the fight - not even at this conference.

Tomorrow, #Lab19 will get to vote on the @labfreemvmt motion on freedom of movement and migrants' rights.

We are urging all our supporters at conference to now help campaign for this important motion 👇 pic.twitter.com/ngu7tljIdh

— Another Europe (@Another_Europe) September 23, 2019

some great bedwetting on ch4 news from labour conference

On PM they seemed sure the vote was going the other way so the editorial line was : this vote is seen as a confidence in the leadership test by many. I think it totally ruined the rest of the show for Evan Davies.

I heard David Lammy on the radio today, saying something along the lines of: "The Tories have/are leave, the LibDems have/are remain, what is/does Labour have? No hard brexit but maybe a better WA or perhaps a second referendum? That's no message. That doesn't wash."

Lammy otm. It's astonishing (for an ~outsider~) to see how Labour make themselves seem inadequate, even in the worst of times. BJ is PM ffs, Labour should be able to walk this, poll over +50 and take charge. But they can't close the ranks, and do not have a clear answer to the Brexit crisis. It's so frustrating. I think this was what Pom was getting at with Labour(istas) "not being remain enough".