Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Duane Dibbley

dancingwith wrote: »

This is what Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European commission, said about ruling out a Brexit extension. He was speaking to reporters on the “red carpet” where leaders speak to journalists as they arrive for the summit.

Asked if he thought the deal would pass parliament, he said: “It has to.”

Then he added:

Anyway, there will be no prolongation.

He went on:

We have concluded a deal. So there is not an argument for delay. It has to be done now.

Asked by another journalist if he would rule out an extension if Boris Johnson asked for that, Juncker replied:

I gave a brief doorstop with Boris Johnson ... half an hour ago and I was ruling out that there will be any kind of prolongation. If we have a deal, we have a deal, and there is no need for prolongation. That is not only the British view; that is my view too.

Asked again if he would officially rule out an extension, he replied:

Yes. We have a deal. So why should we have a prolongation.

And I agree with him. Move on and work on the trade agreement now.

devnull

Frosty Perception wrote: »

could that be BJ/Cummings' cunning plan to circumvent the Benn Act.
quite simply the HoC could now have a very straightforward binary choice, ie take it or leave it (with NO DEAL).
if that is the case, then it's no wonder BJ is grinnig from ear to ear.

And if this is there way around the act and the remainers still vote against the deal then they could end up being the ones that trigger their country into a chaos of No Deal by their intransigence.

Their intransigence about going all for broke on revoke already cost them a soft Brexit in the indicative votes where the Lib Dems and the TIGs voted against everything apart from this and a referendum, where if they voted for a soft Brexit we wouldn't be having this discussion now.

Boris would then be laughing all the way to the polls with all the remain parties turning on each other no doubt that they failed to agree a deal so it was no deal.

FrancieBrady

prawnsambo wrote: »

They've also said that they would be open to anything else that could replace the backstop as a substitute. And as pointed out, that could have been anything that came out of the future relationship. Or some alternative arrangement that emerged during the transition period.

I agree with this. It also completely neutralises the DUP blame game/conspiracy theory that we were in a landgrab or trying to trap them.

And it is more or less a backstop in reality anyhow.

Hurrache

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And it is more or less a backstop in reality anyhow.

It's being called a frontstop by some, basically the same thing but upfront.

beggars_bush

so three years of messing about and a deal could have been done within a week

Water John

Of course Juncker gave Johnson as much umph as possible to sell the Deal. If UK want an Ext for a Ref they would get it. It's not this Deal or No Deal next Sat.
Johnson will try and spin it that way, but that's not his decision, that belongs to Parliament.

devnull

Water John wrote: »

Johnson will try and spin it that way, but that's not his decision, that belongs to Parliament.

No, it's a decision for Parliament and the EU.

dancingwith

It was all fairly predictable, the Tories are saying today that Boris got rid of the Backstop.
As far as I can see whats there in the new deal is effectively a new Backstop

murphaph

Yep I would like to see them take the deal and leave in an orderly manner with transition, but they will be non-members and far weaker in any negotiations. Couple of years for businesses to relocate to Ireland too.

I can't see it getting through parliament though.

Kermit.de.frog

murphaph wrote: »

Yep I would like to see them take the deal and leave in an orderly manner with transition, but they will be non-members and far weaker in any negotiations. Couple of years for businesses to relocate to Ireland too.

I can't see it getting through parliament though.

Hopefully EU council comes out tonight and say no further extensions.

Then it's deal or no deal.

A lot of Labour MPs won't stomach no deal.

Varta

With no extension available the only option for remainers now is to immediately take control of the government and revoke article 50. If they do this, however, all Hell will break loose in the UK. Having been unable to get off the fence for so long, the opposition will then be turfed off it because the yobs will want it for weapons in the rioting.

Varta

Water John wrote: »

Of course Juncker gave Johnson as much umph as possible to sell the Deal. If UK want an Ext for a Ref they would get it. It's not this Deal or No Deal next Sat.
Johnson will try and spin it that way, but that's not his decision, that belongs to Parliament.

But it does look like it's this deal, no deal or revoke. The EU has moved on.

davedanon

Frosty Perception wrote: »

having followed this drama for over 3 years now, it was always obvious to me that Leo would have to compromise on his backstop, if a deal was to be done.
backstop needed to be softened. It was the only way to square this circle.
judging from the optics Leo does not look as chipper as one might expect. he looked and sounded a tad deflated in his press briefing earlier.

then i think like other on the EU side, he's probably exhausted by the whole fiasco and realising Brexit is actually happening.
this is it imo.

over to Westminster now ...

Sorry, whose backstop? This would be the solution proposed by Britain, yes? The backstop was a British proposal. You do know this, don't you?

robinph

Frosty Perception wrote: »

having followed this drama for over 3 years now, it was always obvious to me that Leo would have to compromise on his backstop, if a deal was to be done.

Whose backstop was it again?

Whose backstop is it now it's called a stopback/ frontstop?

FrancieBrady

Frosty Perception wrote: »

having followed this drama for over 3 years now, it was always obvious to me that Leo would have to compromise on his backstop, if a deal was to be done.
backstop needed to be softened. It was the only way to square this circle.
judging from the optics Leo does not look as chipper as one might expect. he looked and sounded a tad deflated in his press briefing earlier.

then i think like other on the EU side, he's probably exhausted by the whole fiasco and realising Brexit is actually happening.
this is it imo.

over to Westminster now ...

The DUP are against this deal...because the backstop is effectively still there, only it's name has changed.
What cannot happen now is the DUP pointing at Dublin and blaming them...they are effectively sidelined and isolated.

AdamD

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

And everyone has run out of patience with the DUP. They are holding the whole of Europe up with their inability to say Yes to anything.

No matter what deal is brought back from the EU, the DUP will say No.

Ah come on, I know we don't like the DUP but there will be plenty of others in the HoC who will vote it down. Disengeous to say they're holding up Europe alone

ToBeFrank123

Its time to wrap up a deal. They could extend it to January 31st but if Labour play hardball there is no guarantee of an election before then. So the same arithmetic would apply. If there is an election and Johnson wins comfortably, the threat of No Deal will still be on the table and the Tories might be even more tempted to go for No Deal.

Now is a good time for everyone to get a deal done and save face.

Zubeneschamali

Varta wrote: »

With no extension available

Hold your horses - Juncker saying he personally does not think an extension is needed does not for a second mean the EU will not give an extension if asked. The EU Parliament has already voted in principle to grant an extension, and they have not even seen this deal yet, never mind approved it.

The EU parliament doesn't even sit until Monday, by which time the UK HoC may well have rejected this deal, forcing Johnson to request an extension until January.

dancingwith

Therin lies a certain gullability with the DUP in assuming the Brits will always be on their side !

threeball

The UK got their victory in these talks. Despite dealing with some very unscrupulous people the EU/Ireland caved. The very idea of the form of consent being a vote by two of the most hard line and unreliable parties in politics somehow not conspiring to use this process as petty points scoring is remote to say the least. Any invester would be mental to put money in to NI with such an arrangement.

We in the south now have to watch the unending soap opera of a mini brexit in the north forever more whilst the threat of a hard border returning will ensure the republican and unionist terrorist types have a reason to stick around forever. They were so desperate for a deal they came up with one of the sh1ttiest imaginable.

Joe_ Public

Even if they wanted, and I still doubt it, I don't see how the EU would come out and say officially they won't grant any more extensions. To do so before any vote is a very imprudent course to take, almost interference in internal UK matters. And the question of time been against them too, allowing Johnson the privilege of holding up the legislation to sneak no deal in. Just can't swallow it for one minute.

It's not a backstop. It's just a regular shltshow up north. But I can't see many voting to kill the dairy trade etc. overnight when all this Brexit fervour has died down.

RickBlaine

If we get to a situation where the UK requests an extension, I still cannot see the EU refusing it. If they do, they will be seen to have been a cause of a no-deal crash out.

Panrich

RickBlaine wrote: »

If we get to a situation where the UK requests an extension, I still cannot see the EU refusing it. If they do, they will be seen to have been a cause of a no-deal crash out.

But an extension for what purpose?

There are now two agreed deals with two different PMs and if we get to a scenario where an extension is being requested, then both of these will have failed to get past parliament.

We have seen that in the past parliament has held indicative votes on several different types of deal from soft to hard Brexit and no-deal and they rejected all options.

Zubeneschamali

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

If there is an election and Johnson wins comfortably, the threat of No Deal will still be on the table and the Tories might be even more tempted to go for No Deal.

If there is an election, Johnson will have broken his "out on the 31st" pledge and his "dead in a ditch" pledge, as well as adopting May's hated surrender deal as his own, with added backstabbing of the Unionist wing of the Conservative and Unionist Party by betraying the DUP.

The Brexit Party will run against the Surrender deal and eat into the Tory core vote, while Labour and the LibDems carve up the Remain vote. The SNP will sweep everything north of the border.

Anything could happen, including a Labour led coalition calling the whole Brexit thing off after a renegotiation and referendum.

joe40

Panrich wrote: »

But an extension for what purpose?

There are now two agreed deals with two different PMs and if we get to a scenario where an extension is being requested, then both of these will have failed to get past parliament.

We have seen that in the past parliament has held indicative votes on several different types of deal from soft to hard Brexit and no-deal and they rejected all options.

The difference now is that any extension period will almost certainly involve a general election which could change the make up of the HoC, and change the negotiating strategy.

An extension with the same government and the same HoC would be ridiculous

J Mysterio

Deleted User wrote: »

Just now on the Guardian:

EU will not grant any further extension, says Juncker, implying MPs must choose between this deal and no deal
Jean-Claude Juncker, the European commission president, has said the EU will grant another Brexit extension.

This is hugely significant, because, if the rest of the EU27 agree - and it is not clear yet whether he is speaking on their behalf - it means MPs will effectively be faced with a choice between this deal and no deal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zGucnyaVOU
8 minutes ago.

That's a great feed from the Guardian. little comments from various EU leaders there.

FrancieBrady

Frosty Perception wrote: »

the DUP have to be seen to be agin this. they have to be seen to protect their precious, sacrosanct UNION.

they are effectively riding 2 horses, 1 being the farmers/business people of NI who want and need a deal done, and the other being the fundamentalists in their own ranks.

they've gotten a large dollop of fudge and possibly cash to help the medicine go down.
i dont see them getting anything more, from ANYBODY.

How are they 'effectively riding two horses'?

They are taking flak from farmers and business and that will not change. They haven't delivered for their hardliners either if this deal goes down.

LuckyLloyd

beggars_bush wrote: »

so three years of messing about and a deal could have been done within a week

The deal is based on the parameters of the original backstop in 2017, and rolls back elsewhere to text agreed during earlier phases of negotiation. It seems like it’s all last minute, but it’s really just rearrangement of lots of things already worked through. Probably very few sections were written fully afresh over the last few days. They are leveraging all the work done the past two years.

Zubeneschamali

Panrich wrote: »

There are now two agreed deals with two different PMs and if we get to a scenario where an extension is being requested, then both of these will have failed to get past parliament.

And if Labour get in, they will negotiate a 3rd deal and then hold a referendum and Remain.

This all costs the EU very little compared to the cost of Brexit actually happening, which will cost people in the EU billions of euros. Especially us here in Ireland, it'll cost us a measurable percentage of our GDP.

Far better to play along and let the UK fight with themselves for as long as they like, they may eventually come to their senses. And if not, well, this deal is almost as expensive in trade terms as No Deal, so we are not risking much long term.