SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
UK Prime Minister Theresa May Will Resign, Pass the Brexit
Theresa May has announced that she will resign as UK's Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party:
Mrs. May announced on Friday that she would be stepping down as leader of her Conservative Party and then as Britain's prime minister, after repeatedly failing to win Parliament's approval for a deal to withdraw the country from the European Union.
A successor to Theresa May will be chosen before Parliament's summer break, the Conservative Party chairman said. She will continue as prime minister until the leadership contest is finished.
[...] Standing in front of 10 Downing Street, Mrs. May said it was in the "best interests of the country for a new prime minister" to lead Britain through the Brexit process. She announced plans to step down as the leader of the Conservative Party on June 7, with the process to replace her beginning the following week.
Previously: Theresa May: UK's Next Prime Minister?
UK PM Theresa May announces resignation amid fury over Brexit handling
foxnews.com/world/uk-pm-theresa-may-announces-resignation-amid-fury-over-brexit-handling
May spoke outside 10 Downing Street after a meeting with Graham Brady, the head of the 1922 Committee of Conservative Party backbenchers. She said she will step down on June 7. Her resignation will trigger a party leadership contest, and whoever wins that contest will take over as prime minister.
[...] Her announcement could complicate the upcoming June 3 state visit by President Trump to London to mark the 75th anniversary of D-Day, where he will also meet with Queen Elizabeth II.
May will still be in office during that visit, meaning it will nix the chance for a new prime minister to forge ties with the American president at a time where such relations are vital. A U.S.-U.K. trade deal is a top priority for the U.K. as it looks to depart from the European Union and begin making its own trade agreements -- and Trump has said "the potential is unlimited" for such a deal.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Kilo110 on Friday May 24 2019, @02:54PM (9 children)
Shouldn't have started the brexit process until their legislature figured out wtf they actually wanted to do.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @04:07PM (8 children)
How exactly?
Brexiters were braying for immediate departure from the EU.
There *is* no plan to leave the EU now even after 3 years of continuous effort.
May decided to trigger the departure clause anyway (and incidentally this was supported by huge majority in Parliament).
When we look back in 10 years, we will see clearly that the UK decided to do hari-kiri all by itself.
Scotland? Gone. Wales? Gone. Irish border? Hard. Relations with neighors? None. Trade deals? Ha ha, bottom feeder.
The reason is not yet clear.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @04:25PM
I love that blue style Made in England china. Hope we will see it again carefully crafted by hands of under-aged British girls, but with Chinese artifacts painted instead of American ones.
(Score: 5, Informative) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Friday May 24 2019, @04:35PM (5 children)
As ever, follow the money. Rhees-Mogg, Davis et al have all accepted some very generous
bribeslobbying from various unscrupulous business interests who want to:(a) scrap all the EU worker protections that prevent them wringing every last drop of blood from the workforce
(b) scrap all the EU environmental laws that prevent them from profitably shitting all over the rivers, seas and skies
(c) scrap all the EU consumer protections that prevent them from producing chlorine-washed, hormone-pumped pseudopork and labelling it as "organic chocolate".
(d) break up the NHS and sell off the bits to private insurance firms.
(e) sell off any other public assets they can get their slimy hands on.
There are also some rather dodgy looking financial leads that seem to point to the Kremlin, but nothing is proved yet.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by shortscreen on Friday May 24 2019, @07:09PM (4 children)
Your narrative that brexit would be a gift to business interests seems to contradict the parent AC's narrative that brexit would be economic doom and gloom. Which is right? Or is it just a win for one faction and loss for another?
And how do business interests or lobbying explain the referendum result? Everybody knows that voters are noble and wise when they happen to agree with us, whereas they are just easily manipulated fools when they have a different opinion. It seems to me that the remain camp should have been able to convince voters of something if it was truly in their own interest. But maybe they were sufficiently out of touch that they didn't see the necessity. Either that, or as in US politics, since both sides had constructed their fortresses out of lies, the truth could no longer be invoked without threatening everything.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @10:30PM
Economic doom and gloom for the people put out of a job by no-deal cratering significant sections of the economy, the disabled, people reliant on the NHS (or indeed other national services) who can't afford private healthcare, doom and gloom for those lucky enough to keep in a job but finding themselves being worked to the bone with 60+ hr weeks and fuck-all time off with the "do you really want to be taking a holiday in this economic climate Simpkins" of the bosses.
A gift to business interests that have been positioning themselves to profit from this exact set of circumstances which, oddly enough, includes many of the arch-Brexiters.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @12:22AM
Vultures do well during a sufficiently violent disaster.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by quietus on Saturday May 25 2019, @12:38PM (1 child)
If you'd been travelling across the UK, trying to spend euros, you'd been seriously surprised by the referendum result: 48 percent voted remain. I'd expected that number to be at most in the mid-30s.
Calling a referendum was enough to get the UK out of the EU, and all players on the EU side knew that, too.
As for business interests: this has nothing to do with a couple of hedge funds wanting to make a killing, or other conspiracy theories. This had everything to do with the UK being the first and foremost financial superpower in the world since they took that crown from the Dutch in the 1700s until they were eclipsed by the US after two world wars. London though managed to become top dog again after the New York stock exchange became increasingly regulated in the 60s and 70s, to which London (the UK) reacted with increasing deregulation.
Come 2 things: 2008 (survivable) and the EU. This last factor is the more serious threat: a currency union requires synchronization between the different economies which are part of it, which means regulation. This regulation wouldn't be so bad as long as it remained restricted to the ECB, but unfortunately the EU decides upon something called the EBA, or European Banking Authority. Long story short, the EBA assumes authority over any financial entity that wants to do business with EU customers aka the bulk of London banking.
That was a bridge too far, especially given the shift in profit towards SE Asia. Hence, the referendum.
(Score: 2) by kazzie on Sunday May 26 2019, @06:48AM
That's an interesting viewpoint, given that the main proponent of leaving the EU for the past two decades, Nigel Farage, was a London stockbroker before entering politics.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Friday May 24 2019, @06:09PM
Brexiters were braying for immediate departure from the EU.
No, they weren't.
Vote Leave made it quite clear
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/a_framework_for_taking_back_control_and_establishing_a_new_uk_eu_deal_after_23_june.html [voteleavetakecontrol.org]
Many on the leave side (Rees mogg, Patterson etc) argued for arranging a deal, then having a referendum on whether to accept that deal or stay in the EU.
May didn't form a concensus. She didn't even try. She jsut declared what her vision of brexit was, and that was it.
May decided to trigger the departure clause anyway (and incidentally this was supported by huge majority in Parliament).
When we look back in 10 years, we will see clearly that the UK decided to do hari-kiri all by itself.
Indeed, Corbyn and May share joint blame for this mess. They should both have resigned months ago.