Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

alchemist33

jester77 wrote: »

And then you see comments like this, not the UKs fault of course

Check out @EdConwaySky’;s Tweet: https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1106264926446936064?s=09

Some of the comments on that tweet would make you glad to see the back of the UK. But then I have to force myself to remember all the British people they're not representative of.

Shelga

How on earth can May’s deal ever be accepted now? Even if it passed extremely narrowly on a third attempt, it just looks like parliament is being blackmailed. The deal is poison and pleases neither Leavers nor Remainers.

sbs2010

The main problem is there is no majority in HoC for anything, right?

Simple solution only requires them to emabrace single transferable vote for one time only.

Procedures, history, rules might say it can't be done but its really the best way of getting the exit that best represents the weighted average of opinion. It's like delivering all the indicative votes in one go.

So you list all options from stay in to no deal exit. Alternatives between would be Canada+, Norway+, Switzerland, etc.

Then let them vote 1,2,3 etc in order of their choice.

They could have it wrapped up in 2hours.

Infini

alchemist33 wrote: »

Some of the comments on that tweet would make you glad to see the back of the UK. But then I have to force myself to remember all the British people they're not representative of.

In fairness we don't have to punish the British people for the failures and incompetence of the British Establishment to get its house in order we can still try and look after those living inside our borders as best we can but the UK at this stage is in such a dysfunction state that no amount of reasoning and talking is going to get through to such a thick level of pig ignorance and braindead stupidity here. They're living in a delusion and honestly only a hard reality check is going to force them to notice how utterly stupid they've truly been.

Truthfully if there's a Hard Brexit the EU should let it be clear they'd welcome them back pending serious refoirms over there. It also needs to be made clear that shítstirring bolloxes like Farage need to be utterly discredited and even investigated as I suspect there's more dubious levels of corruption with him and his cronies.

johnmcdnl

dresden8 wrote: »

That's my point.

Until the EU say yes and agree a new date it's still 29th March.
The EU don't have to agree to any extension.

Capt'n Midnight

tuxy wrote: »

Is there any projections on what a 2 year delay could do to the UK economy? I would think businesses would continue to relocation over that period of time.

So far it's cost £80Bn and running at £800m a week.

The hidden cost is the lack of investment in new technology. Car industry was spending £2.5Bn a year, now it's just £0.6Bn , soon the bean counters will have to decide if it's worth spending billions to catch up and upgrade the lines when new models come out. It's just Caterham and McLaren left of UK owned car companies that are producing any sort of volume.

Companies are investing in people as they are more flexible and capital isn't tied up in tech. So full employment of a sort, but no long term security as companies are waiting to see way Brexit bounces.

An Ciarraioch

If Labour had abstained on the extension vote, it would have been defeated!

http://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1106272594859302912

mcmoustache

Laois_Man wrote: »

Motion to request Art. 50 extension passed by a majority of 210

Now the little matter of agreeing on what to request it for!!

If I wrote what I'm thinking, I'd be infracted if not outright banned and deservedly so.



I really don't understand what they're playing at. I understand the DUP's and ERG's motivations but most of the rest don't seem to understand the reality of the position that they are in.


They have been told repeatedly and in plain English that an extension is only possible if the extension is for something deliverable. They have been told that it won't be given for some waffly aspiration that Parliament can't agree on.


And now they vote for something waffly that they can't agree on? With 2 weeks to go?


It's ridiculous, to put it mildly.

daheff

BLIZZARD7 wrote: »

A hard border, yes 100%. Reignition of paramilitary activity

explain why so?

plenty of places have borders betwen them without paramilitary activity. why would adding a customs checking border cause paramilitary activity?

i've yet to hear a convincing argument saying why it would happen.

the biggest problem is there is so much talk about it happening that its a self fulfilling prophecy.

charlie14

Shelga wrote: »

How on earth can May’s deal ever be accepted now? Even if it passed extremely narrowly on a third attempt, it just looks like parliament is being blackmailed. The deal is poison and pleases neither Leavers nor Remainers.

The referendum passed on narrowly and they plowed ahead on that without knowing what form of exit was voted for where they ended up with May drawing red lines for nothing other than an attempt to appease a rump in her own party.
The fact that they have now been shown by the EU how ridiculous those red lines were I would not see as blackmail. Just a very belated reality check.

Capt'n Midnight

daheff wrote: »

explain why so?

plenty of places have borders betwen them without paramilitary activity. why would adding a customs checking border cause paramilitary activity?

i've yet to hear a convincing argument saying why it would happen.

the biggest problem is there is so much talk about it happening that its a self fulfilling prophecy.

It's easier and cheaper to ignore a certain level of smuggling than try to stop it. That's why the plan is for self verification unless there's a lot of it.




27,000 troops didn't stop 40% of the fuel in NI being either smuggled or laundered. It was being done on an industrial scale. Coal up north doesn't have a carbon tax. Back of the envelope and you can get to a billion euro year without counting booze and fags or clothing or beef.

As someone put it , customs wouldn't go into South Armagh without the police. And the police wouldn't go there without the Army, and they wouldn't go there without helicopters. What would be an impromptu inspection elsewhere becomes a logistical exercise.


The big problem with the UK's tariff plans for NI is that it puts legit businesses in direct competition with smugglers. And requires an Irish Sea border. It would leave NI further behind us than they are now, and the grass is greener on the other side of the fence.

Capt'n Midnight

mcmoustache wrote: »

They have been told repeatedly and in plain English that an extension is only possible if the extension is for something deliverable. They have been told that it won't be given for some waffly aspiration that Parliament can't agree on.


And now they vote for something waffly that they can't agree on? With 2 weeks to go?


It's ridiculous, to put it mildly.

This is a nice summary.

https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2019/0314/1036311-brexit-analysis/

But it was social media that brought forth pithier analysis of the outcome - "like the titanic voting for the iceberg to move out of the way". Or on the over-weening narcissism of the House of Commons - "maybe next time they will vote for global warming to stop".

Will May continue to ignore the will of parliament like she ignored the public destroying her majority in the last election ?
So far it's kept here in No. 10


We still don't know what May really wants.

Does she really want her own deal that she has voted against ?
Is she angling for a Hard Brexit because that would at least get rid of the Human Rights courts ?
Or does she want remain by showing how bad Brexit would be ?


Or will she announce ,whatever the result, that it was what she had planned all along ?

tuxy

She wants the Tories to cling on to power and not split in the same way she has been clinging on to her position for months.
Anything else she may want is nebulous and not of great concern to her.

Remember why Cameron agreed to the referendum, it's the exact same situation as back then.

Capt'n Midnight

tuxy wrote: »

She wants the Tories to cling on to power and not split in the same way she has been clinging on to her position for months.
Anything else she may want is nebulous and not of great concern to her.

The only thing keeping the Tories in power is Corbyn.

And FPTP and safe seats. Some have been Tory for hundreds of years. A lot of this mess is because of who was selected to "contest" the seats. If only May could threaten to deselect certain MP's next time out.

Vince Cable has to take some blame too. A few seats more and May would not have been able to form a govt with the DUP.

Irishmale0399

So what are the odds that the EU will say no to an extension??

What are the chances the EU will stick to their word and only extend if the UK bring a realisitic/viable/workable solution to the table upon application to ensure the extension doesnt end in a farce like we have now??

Irishmale0399

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

So what are the odds that the EU will say no to an extension??

What are the chances the EU will stick to their word and only extend if the UK bring a realisitic/viable/workable solution to the table upon application to ensure the extension doesnt end in a farce like we have now??

Probably dependent on the outcome of next weeks vote (for the third time) on the deal. If it is accepted then it is likely a short extension would be granted to get the legal stuff through the house.
I suspect it will pass with a number of abstentions as those who refuse to back it realise the alternative is a crash out no deal.


If the vote fails then I guess the EU could force a no deal rash out .

BluePlanet

daheff wrote: »

explain why so?

plenty of places have borders betwen them without paramilitary activity. why would adding a customs checking border cause paramilitary activity?

i've yet to hear a convincing argument saying why it would happen.

the biggest problem is there is so much talk about it happening that its a self fulfilling prophecy.

The reason it will happen is there are some bad people that will use it as an opportunity to cause mayhem.
Border infastructure will be a target that they know the general population despises so provides an opportunity for some 'spectaculars', thus increasing dissent's profile and gain support.

tuxy

If the WA somehow gets through then thy will get a short extension, no questions asked.

Without the WA the options are crash out on 30 March or a very long 2 year extension in the hope that enough changes over that time that they decide not to leave. I think very few countries would want to veto and prevent a long extension so it would depend on how strongly they feel about it. If it's not too big of a deal for them they may be convinced not to veto.

Loafing Oaf

funkey_monkey wrote: »

How can the DUP and ERG seriously consider voting for the WA at the third asking?

I heard one of the ERG guys saying earlier on he was fully intent on voting down the deal but if May promised to resign in the near future that might be a game changer. I'm not sure why this should be so but if this was a widely held position it might offer a direction out of the morass.

Leroy42

Why would the EU grant any extension? even if TM gets her deal passed what advantage to EU?

It's not really their problem the UK won't be ready.

tuxy

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I heard one of the ERG guys saying earlier on he was fully intent on voting down the deal but if May promised to resign in the near future that might be a game changer. I'm not sure why this should be so but if this was a widely held position it might offer a direction out of the morass.

Brexit on what the ERG consider a bad deal and the possibility of the ERG taking control of the Tories would be preferable to no brexit and continue with a PM/Cabinet that is currently in place.

Professor Moriarty

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I heard one of the ERG guys saying earlier on he was fully intent on voting down the deal but if May promised to resign in the near future that might be a game changer. I'm not sure why this should be so but if this was a widely held position it might offer a direction out of the morass.

It's probably because the next Tory leader will almost certainly be a Brexiteer. Remember, the WA is just chapter one of Brexit.

tuxy

Leroy42 wrote: »

Why would the EU grant any extension? even if TM gets her deal passed what advantage to EU?

It's not really their problem the UK won't be ready.

It's a deal that the EU have signed off on and are happy with. The extension ensures less disruption for both the UK and EU.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

Why would the EU grant any extension? even if TM gets her deal passed what advantage to EU?

It's not really their problem the UK won't be ready.

But it will be the EU's problem as laws would need to be changed in line of whatever outcome there is.

ancapailldorcha

Leroy42 wrote: »

Why would the EU grant any extension? even if TM gets her deal passed what advantage to EU?

It's not really their problem the UK won't be ready.

The UK crashing out harms both the UK and the EU.

It's in the EU's trade to maintain maximum trade possible. It's up to the British to work out their own position regarding free movement, ECJ, regulation, etc.

A significant extension would mean that the UK can work out its own position properly and might even kill off Brexit altogether.

The next steps as visualised by the BBC

Frank Bullitt

https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1106301673608220674

Injuryprone

Isn't it funny that having a second vote on the referendum is a betrayal of democracy, but there's no problem having as many votes as May wants on her deal.

Injuryprone

Injuryprone wrote: »

Isn't it funny that having a second vote on the referendum is a betrayal of democracy, but there's no problem having as many votes as May wants on her deal.

Well in this case, there is no alternative plan and no one wants the no deal default position.

Strazdas

tuxy wrote: »

If the WA somehow gets through then thy will get a short extension, no questions asked.

Without the WA the options are crash out on 30 March or a very long 2 year extension in the hope that enough changes over that time that they decide not to leave. I think very few countries would want to veto and prevent a long extension so it would depend on how strongly they feel about it. If it's not too big of a deal for them they may be convinced not to veto.

The very long extension will not be granted automatically. The UK will have to give a detailed explanation on what it intends doing when they submit their extension request.

If they say "Give us a couple of years and we'll see what happens", the extension will be flatly rejected. This would be a nightmare for the EU - the UK still in A50 mode as a half in / half out 'member' of the EU and nobody having a clue what is happening or what the plan is.