Comment by SilverBirch | Hacker News Reader

Comment by SilverBirch | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I think the idea that this matters is pretty fanciful. The unveiling of this bill is actually quite funny - Boris Johnson has announced he's stepping down as PM and there's a leadership election to find his successor going on right now. But the reason he stepped down is that he won a confidence vote amongst his MPs, but then it turned out he knowingly appointed a sex pest as his deputy chief whip - and so everyone who worked for him quit. The reason I'm giving you this detail, is that since he's waiting for his successor to be chosen he still needs people doing all those jobs. So the guy responsible for presenting this bill to parliament has been in place for 2 weeks, because the previous minister quit (hilariously, so many people were quiting the previous minister didn't even write her own resignation letter, she co-signed a letter with 4 other people).

The reason all that detail is important is that the new Prime Minister will select an entirely new set of ministers. So basically, someone new will be responsible for coming up with this legislation and getting it through parliament by the 5th of September.

But surely we could make a lot of progress on this bill in parliament before September?

Well, you would think that's the case, but Parliament goes on their Summer holiday today. Guess when they come back to parliament - that's right! The 5th of September.

I mean, the temptation is to say "this is just posturing by someone who's getting their few weeks as a minister, it'll never come in, no need to worry about it". But it's worth noting that another thing that started off as posturing was Brexit (at the time Cameron promised a vote, a Tory majority would have seemed rather implausible, so really it was just electioneering). The Tories have a track record of accidentally backing themselves into a corner and having to do the silly thing they talked about.

Whilst thats true, Brexit was monumentally bigger and had a lot more public support. If there were a GE now and the tories silently dropped this from their manifesto, I doubt many people would notice or care.

I've heard a few people saying things like "something should be done", but nobody outside of tech circles (and even many people within it) I've spoken to supports this bill, in fact none of them have even heard of it.

Oh I'm quite certain that the new UK data laws are going to be a total shit show and there's absolutely no possibility that they'll be compatible with EU regulations causing a massive spike in red tape. But I'm certain of that because that's the entire direction of the tory party since they expelled everyone to the left of Mussolini in the 2019 election. I'm just saying the details of this particular draft are moot.

> I mean, the temptation is to say "this is just posturing by someone who's getting their few weeks as a minister, it'll never come in, no need to worry about it"

I'd say: if they're saying that they don't understand how the political system in the UK works

Honestly, you could remove the resignation, the chaos, the summer holidays (over a month off is a bit rich, but thats another matter), all of these details, and I'd still doubt they'd ever happen.

Remember when the plan was simply to add ID checks to adult websites, and how 2 years later that still didn't happen? If they couldnt get something that unambitious through, in years that were, relative to now, fairly stable, theres no chance they'd get this monster of a bill through. And thats before you add in all those bonus factors you mentioned.

There are some benefits to an incompetent government.

The rabid intensity with which the tories are trying to remove any link to EU makes me nervous the government will push through with this, simply for ideological reasons rather than any link with reality. To be fair, that would apply for lots of things the government has done recently.

Have to demonstrate the benefits of liberating ourselves from the stifling EU rules!

Now we can have two different sets of rules to comply with if we do business with the EU.

It is entirely ideological.

It's quite scary that the House of lords (unelected peers), previously seen as undemocratic may be the only thing stopping the commons from rushing through legislation as they don't have to pander to public option. Which I guess was always their purpose

Most democracies place buffers between the will of the masses and the levers of power. For very good reasons too.

In UK there is the house of lords and the indirect election of the prime minister.

There's a good chance that Liz Truss will be our next PM. Which, coupled with the opinion polls on the Conservatives makes me believe that there's a good chance that Labour will win the next election. This I think could lead to a referendum to rejoin the EU, which I think would probably win. This is likely to lead to the UK reforming those EU links.

I think the idea of the UK rejoining the EU, ever, in its current state is fanciful thinking - and continues this division of remainer/rejoiner vs brexiteer identity politics.

For a start, rejoining would mean (committing to) adopting the Euro and joining Schengen, which as a Brit living in the Schengen/Euro Zone I don't really see any advantage of and even less public support from within the UK.

Hopefully when the Conservative party, or at least its own current state, burns itself out, the cooler heads (from whatever party is in power) will move to something like the famed Norway/EEA model. It won't be framed as rejoin/remain, more just economic and trade policy, and it'll take the best part of a decade - but I consider that the most sensible 'optimistic' view on the future.

> fanciful thinking

Yep, I agree, it's all very unlikely but I'm hopeful.

> rejoining would mean (committing to) adopting the Euro and joining Schengen for a start

I know I'm in the minority here but I'd absolutely love this. It just makes so much sense. We have such an island mentality.

I'm not sure that the EU would allow the UK to rejoin. If they did the terms would probably be a lot harder than what the UK used to enjoy, including switching currency to the Euro, for example. So I don't think that rejoining will happen soon. But one could move towards closer cooperation with the EU.

You're probably right the terms would be harder. Personally I don't care. Even if it means I have to pay more in taxes.

At least we'd be part of a progressive union, even if its run by bureaucrats.

It may seem small minded but having to change currency, go through passport control, pay more import duty for shipments from mainland EU, reform the progressive data protection and human rights laws and renegotiate trade deals with the whold world is just all such a personal pain. A pain that I feel isn't alleviated by any benefits. Naming a single definit benefit of brexit is difficult - the Leave campaign was built on lies and the current "Brexit Opportunities Minister" Moggins isn't achieving anything noteworthy.

> There's a good chance that Liz Truss will be our next PM

Such a horrific plausibility it doesn't bare thinking about, but I suspect the rank and file Conservative members might have a problem putting a brown man in charge, even if the alternative is as incompetent as the incumbent without the "charm".

> This I think could lead to a referendum to rejoin the EU

Unlikely.

> which I think would probably win

Even more unlikely.

Brexshitters would insist upon some sensible rules, such as 70% (or more) in favour for it to pass. I'd guess a vote today would likely be similarly split as last time, only just slightly in favour to rejoin.

> Such a horrific plausibility it doesn't bare thinking about

Just wait until she gives Boris the Foreign Secretary job...

> Unlikely

Agreed - it's all very unlikely but I'm hopeful!

Labour hasn't even ever had a woman leader, whereas the Tories have had two. They are far more diverse than the Labour party.

Of course, back in the real world – "diversity" is not a value which is calculated based on "how many women leaders has the party had". I'm sure you appreciate that to say so would be a silly partisan talking point without any value.

It's not absolute, but it's a "smell". And I was responding to a silly partisan talking point without any value.

fingers crossed... hopefully they actually let us back in!

British politics never cease to amaze.

That said, isn’t there a significant probability that this gets voted in September anyway with nobody having bothered to read it?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com