Brexit & British Politics

[duke74]

I used to work for a company with offices in France and Germany. Their lingua franca was English, even well before the EU. So long as the US and UK remain relevant in Europe, I suspect it'll remain so.

-jk

Agree completely. Besides, if not English, then what? It may be the only non native language taught in all member states. (Euros here please correct me if I am wrong.).

And it's clever to use the term "lingua franca" in discussing what would be the "lingual franca" if no longer English. Not sure if that was your intent.

[-jk]

Agree completely. Besides, if not English, then what? It may be the only non native language taught in all member states. (Euros here please correct me if I am wrong.).

And it's clever to use the term "lingua franca" in discussing what would be the "lingual franca" if no longer English. Not sure if that was your intent.

Sorry - no idea what "lingual" franca is. I've always read it as "lingua". So I'm definitely not "clever".

-jk

[OldPhiKap]

I used to work for a company with offices in France and Germany. Their lingua franca was English, even well before the EU. So long as the US and UK remain relevant in Europe, I suspect it'll remain so.

-jk

English content rules the Internet. That, as much as anything, keeps the kids wanting to learn it as well.

[duke74]

Sorry - no idea what "lingual" franca is. I've always read it as "lingua". So I'm definitely not "clever".

-jk

My fault...typo. Of course lingua franca.

I meant a reversion back to French as the "lingua franca" if English no longer the "lingua franca." Just struck me as funny...sorry

[OldPhiKap]

Curve ball from UK high court:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/03/news...urt/index.html

Note that the Supreme Court is above the High Court, so appeal likely heard in next few months.

[budwom]

a genuine turd in the Brexit punch bowl...

[sagegrouse]

Curve ball from UK high court:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/03/news...urt/index.html

Note that the Supreme Court is above the High Court, so appeal likely heard in next few months.

Here's some more background:

LONDON — Uncertainty over "Brexit" deepened Thursday when a court ruled that Britain's government can't trigger the process of withdrawal from the European Union without approval from parliament — a decision that could scupper the entire process.

In a major blow for Prime Minister Theresa May, the High Court in London said her government needs the consent of lawmakers before launching Britain's withdrawal from the bloc.

It opens the possibility that members of the House of Commons could vote against Brexit, defying British voters who chose to quit the EU by 52 percent to 48 percent in a June 23 referendum.

The article above has more detail. I believe the author, Alastair Jamieson, in an NBC correspondent. The Gouvernment will appeal, and the Prime Minister may have the ability to exercise a "royal option" and proceed with Brexit anyway. Sounds like a constitutional crisis, but at least the UK government is working on something momentous, whereas our Congress can't seem to even pass a continuing resolution, much less substantive legislation.

[OldPhiKap]

Here's some more background:



The article above has more detail. I believe the author, Alastair Jamieson, in an NBC correspondent. The Gouvernment will appeal, and the Prime Minister may have the ability to exercise a "royal option" and proceed with Brexit anyway. Sounds like a constitutional crisis, but at least the UK government is working on something momentous, whereas our Congress can't seem to even pass a continuing resolution, much less substantive legislation.

If the Sureme Court upholds the ruling, I wonder how many Torres would break rank and vote against Brexit. Labor, Scottish Nationals, And Northern Irish would likely be a large Anti-Brexit bloc. With the Scots making noise of leaving the U.K. For the EU, would T.May reallly fight hard on the floor of Parliament to leave?

Really interesting.

[OldPhiKap]

Oops. . . .

[budwom]

The perils of long term, or even intermediate term planning in politics. May calls the election two months ago, everyone expects a big majority to ensue, especially with Corbyn being less than highly popular. D'oh!
Lessons for our expectations in 2018 and 2020 here. Too much stuff can happen.

[PackMan97]

The perils of long term, or even intermediate term planning in politics. May calls the election two months ago, everyone expects a big majority to ensue, especially with Corbyn being less than highly popular. D'oh!
Lessons for our expectations in 2018 and 2020 here. Too much stuff can happen.

I don't understand the British/Parlimentary system...the idea of unscheduled elections whenever someone wants is "odd" to me. Clearly it was the wrong call.

[Jeffrey]

The perils of long term, or even intermediate term planning in politics. May calls the election two months ago, everyone expects a big majority to ensue, especially with Corbyn being less than highly popular. D'oh!
Lessons for our expectations in 2018 and 2020 here. Too much stuff can happen.

IMO, it was merely more of the same. People are tired of the status quo. If your name is Clinton or Bush, do not bother running.

[budwom]

I don't understand the British/Parlimentary system...the idea of unscheduled elections whenever someone wants is "odd" to me. Clearly it was the wrong call.

There is SOME logic to it. The more of a majority (or plurality at least) of seats a party has, the more stuff they can push through. So it makes sense that if you have a modest majority (as the Cs did in April)
and you think you're doing well with the populace, and the opposition is run by someone not particularly popular himself, you call an election to go for a bigger, more robust majority which can push your agenda more easily.
But stuff changed, Labor took advantage of some of May's decisions which cut back somewhat on policing, the attacks in Manchester and London did her no good at all, and so here we are. Seemed like a good call
at the time, definitely the wrong call in retrospect.

[tbyers11]

I don't understand the British/Parlimentary system...the idea of unscheduled elections whenever someone wants is "odd" to me. Clearly it was the wrong call.

There is SOME logic to it. The more of a majority (or plurality at least) of seats a party has, the more stuff they can push through. So it makes sense that if you have a modest majority (as the Cs did in April)
and you think you're doing well with the populace, and the opposition is run by someone not particularly popular himself, you call an election to go for a bigger, more robust majority which can push your agenda more easily.
But stuff changed, Labor took advantage of some of May's decisions which cut back somewhat on policing, the attacks in Manchester and London did her no good at all, and so here we are. Seemed like a good call
at the time, definitely the wrong call in retrospect.

I get the logic as you explain budwom, but I also share PackMan97's feeling that being able to call a new election outside of a structured time frame seems odd to me. I profess my ignorance of British politics here. How often can one call a new election? Does it have to be a set period from the previous one? I will probably Google these answers this weekend, but as this a rather learned message board was hoping that someone could enlighten me and save me the trouble

[OldPhiKap]

I get the logic as you explain budwom, but I also share PackMan97's feeling that being able to call a new election outside of a structured time frame seems odd to me. I profess my ignorance of British politics here. How often can one call a new election? Does it have to be a set period from the previous one? I will probably Google these answers this weekend, but as this a rather learned message board was hoping that someone could enlighten me and save me the trouble

Per BBC overview, it sounds like Parliament can vote to hold an early election without restriction:

http://www.parliament.uk/education/a...ral-elections/

At least, none are spelled out. Which makes sense; if a workable coalition cannot be put together, hold another vote. Italy does this all the time, or at least historically has done so. Greece too I think.

[budwom]

I get the logic as you explain budwom, but I also share PackMan97's feeling that being able to call a new election outside of a structured time frame seems odd to me. I profess my ignorance of British politics here. How often can one call a new election? Does it have to be a set period from the previous one? I will probably Google these answers this weekend, but as this a rather learned message board was hoping that someone could enlighten me and save me the trouble

I think the thinking is that if a party actually wants to get something done, calling an election when at a peak point of popularity (Which May miscalculated) gets you the seats to push stuff through, and I do think that's better than gridlock in many cases. Not my rules, but that's the thinking. You have to have an election at least every five years, but can pick an earlier date if you think it's a good idea. May thought it was, and it wasn't. Oops.

[Deslok]

The basic gist is that elections must be held within 5 years, and the soonest they can be held is two weeks from when the new parliament first sits in session.

[budwom]

A stronger hand in negotiating Brexit (what a mess this is going to be) was May's primary motivation, and you can still hear the backfiring noises...

[YmoBeThere]

and you can still hear the backfiring noises...

I heard those occasionally on one of my '68 Firebirds. Turned out the carb needed to be rebuilt.

[budwom]

I heard those occasionally on one of my '68 Firebirds. Turned out the carb needed to be rebuilt.

how I miss carburetors...temperature twenty below zero, car won't start, just take off the air filter, spray some ether into the carb, and (step back), boom she starts.
Now I look under the hood and everything is hidden by a big, menacing black panel.

on the Brexit deal, the vote is being interpreted as perhaps being led by more younger voters who 1) are not keen on Brexit, and 2) evidently felt they've taken the
brunt of Conservative austerity measures (not getting political, just reporting what's been stated)