Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

ancapailldorcha

robinph wrote: »

Article 50 needs a complete rewriting as soon as this is over so that it can deal with the reality of how it is actually done, until then though the EU could do with just making the exit date to be the end of the month that the UK gets themselves in order, add a fee onto the UK to pay to keep Tusk in his job until it's all over, and then the EU otherwise ignores the UK.

If it takes the UK another 5 years to figure out what they want then so be it, the EU could do without putting deadlines on things though for now as that just means the Tories will faff about wasting time until the month before the deadline and then complain about not having enough time. Remove that end date and make the UK figure it out.

This would effectively require another treaty though and the ratification of Lisbon was far from smooth. I shouldn't think it would be necessary in any case. Brexit is the best piece of pro-EU propaganda we'll see for several years.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

Remove the end date, as is shown by the extensions, simply removes the need for a decision whilst allowing them to continue to threaten to leave.

Yes, but we don't care if they threaten to leave for the next 100 years, in fact it does us some good. What we care about is if they actually ever do leave, especially if they manage to trip themselves up and leave with no deal.

I think it would be better if we could just remove the dates altogether and wait for them to sort out what it is they actually want, because 1) it costs very little to wait and 2) it lowers the risk that they will leave with no deal, the most expensive Brexit of all.

This constant drumbeat of cliff-edge leave dates (the latest one only 1 week away now) was thought would focus minds and get them to get their act together, but it hasn't done that so far, and it is very, very risky.

Enzokk

The EU should grant the UK the extension that they requested that will cause the least fuss. So up to 31st January 2020. Anything else will need a further vote and more drama so approve what Johnson asked for. If they were able to get one extension through you suspect a new one can be asked for as well if they come up to the deadline in January. There will be drama, let it be when the deadline is coming up instead of having further council meetings if their extension suggestion is rejected by parliament before an extension is agreed.

Strazdas

robinph wrote: »

Article 50 needs a complete rewriting as soon as this is over so that it can deal with the reality of how it is actually done, until then though the EU could do with just making the exit date to be the end of the month that the UK gets themselves in order, add a fee onto the UK to pay to keep Tusk in his job until it's all over, and then the EU otherwise ignores the UK.

If it takes the UK another 5 years to figure out what they want then so be it, the EU could do without putting deadlines on things though for now as that just means the Tories will faff about wasting time until the month before the deadline and then complain about not having enough time. Remove that end date and make the UK figure it out.

Lord Kerr says he assumed A50 would never be triggered and he was just writing a theoretical piece of legislation. The idea of even the UK leaving would have seemed preposterous to most people in 2009 (Labour were still in power and UKIP were seen as a bunch of cranks / nutcases) - it shows just how far the UK has lurched to the right in the last decade.

gooch2k9

Is there any indication of when the EU will return a decision on the extension? Business motion from JRM doesn't mention Brexit, are they trying to run down the clock to the 31st now in the hopes of no deal?

Strazdas

gooch2k9 wrote: »

Is there any indication of when the EU will return a decision on the extension? Business motion from JRM doesn't mention Brexit, are they trying to run down the clock to the 31st now in the hopes of no deal?

I think Tusk said he is awaiting further details from Johnson and what he intends to do - even though the extension letter has been sent.

FrancieBrady

gooch2k9 wrote: »

Is there any indication of when the EU will return a decision on the extension? Business motion from JRM doesn't mention Brexit, are they trying to run down the clock to the 31st now in the hopes of no deal?

Was it not said yesterday that it would be next week before they give a decision?

Zubeneschamali

Strazdas wrote: »

I think Tusk said he is awaiting further details from Johnson and what he intends to do - even though the extension letter has been sent.

On twitter, he said that following the pause in the WA, he is recommending the EU27 approve the extension, and that he explained why to Johnson on a call.

My read from these tweets (and Varadkars comment) is that Tusk has already gone to the EU27 leaders to recommend they approve the extension, and that the next we will hear is that the extension has been unanimously granted (written format) or that a meeting of the EU27 leaders is scheduled to discuss it, if they don't agree via other means.

https://twitter.com/eucopresident/status/1186737952313004032
https://twitter.com/eucopresident/status/1186977252011106304

Strazdas

^^ There's also this just in from the BBC's Adam Fleming:

https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1187344033779277824

Tea Shock

gooch2k9 wrote: »

Is there any indication of when the EU will return a decision on the extension? Business motion from JRM doesn't mention Brexit, are they trying to run down the clock to the 31st now in the hopes of no deal?

RTE are saying the EU are deciding tomorrow.

Also that some in Number 10, specifically Dominic Cummings, wants to abandon the WAB altogether and go for an election now. Perhaps via the Tory party bringing a motion of no confidence in their own government. The irony!

prawnsambo

Tea Shock wrote: »

RTE are saying the EU are deciding tomorrow.

Also that some in Number 10, specifically Dominic Cummings, wants to abandon the WAB altogether and go for an election now. Perhaps via the Tory party bringing a motion of no confidence in their own government. The irony!

They can do that, but that would give the opposition the opportunity to form a GNU. Or they could move a bill for an election, but that would allow the opposition the opportunity to tack something on to that bill like expanding the vote to 16 or 17 year olds.

Oh what a tangled web we weave...

Field east

Strazdas wrote: »

I think Tusk said he is awaiting further details from Johnson and what he intends to do - even though the extension letter has been sent.

When you have a professional job the minimum requirement by everybody including the public at large is that you behave in a professional way , be courteous , have basic manners, do the right thing, have the right decorum for the situation presented, etc , etc, etc. given this , I was clearly taken aback when BJ sent an unsigned letter requesting the extension. Further insult was added to injury when he sent two further letters and which he SIGNED.

But apparently, BJ thought of a further idea to try and show the ‘two fingers’ or something along those lines ie. THE UNSIGNED LETTER SENT WAS A PHOTOCOPY. There is no end to the guy. So that’s how he plans to treat his ‘European friends’ who he keeps referring to. God help him when it comes to negotiating trade deals with anybody but especially Europe

jimmycrackcorm

farmchoice wrote: »

its a valid point but i disagree. my fear is that if they they leave and subsequently find themselves up the creek as they inevitably will it will not lead to a period of self reflection. as opposed to seeing the error of their ways they will do exactly what they are doing now, blame everyone but themselves.
only next time it will be much worse because as opposed to just wishing for a return to an imaginary past they will actually be in some pretty dire straights.
it might be an exaggeration but the big difference between the UK today and Germany in the early 30's is that the Germans really did have something to complain about, for now the Brits dont, but following this madness they almost certainly will.

They might still point to the EU to blame for not getting a great FTA, but who are they going to blame when they get screwed over by a US FTA?

When the NHS is crumbling and then they can't blame immigration, what will they do?

They've lived under the illusion that EU laws had been stifling them and then discover that actually the imagined benefit never materialises. The fingers will point internally.

They might fingerpoint at the EU after but they're nothing they can do about it except wallow in recrimination until a generation change who will want to rejoin and accept the benefits.

Enzokk

Tea Shock wrote: »

RTE are saying the EU are deciding tomorrow.

Also that some in Number 10, specifically Dominic Cummings, wants to abandon the WAB altogether and go for an election now. Perhaps via the Tory party bringing a motion of no confidence in their own government. The irony!

The optics of the Tories calling a no-confidence vote in themselves would be tough to live down. In any interview between any other candidate and a Tory candidate the immediate question would be, if you and your party doesn't have confidence in Johnson to lead the country, why should voters?

Inquitus

prawnsambo wrote: »

They can do that, but that would give the opposition the opportunity to form a GNU. Or they could move a bill for an election, but that would allow the opposition the opportunity to tack something on to that bill like expanding the vote to 16 or 17 year olds.

Oh what a tangled web we weave...

A GNU with Bercow at the helm has been mooted, if the opposition can get their **** together!

Joe_ Public

Inquitus wrote: »

A GNU with Bercow at the helm has been mooted, if the opposition can get their **** together!

You never know but cant see it. When you see the squabbling going on between opposition over last nights nhs amendment, it does rather make talk of any sort of gnu look a bit fanciful. Think Cummings made that calculation some time back.

Leroy42

Enzokk wrote: »

The optics of the Tories calling a no-confidence vote in themselves would be tough to live down. In any interview between any other candidate and a Tory candidate the immediate question would be, if you and your party doesn't have confidence in Johnson to lead the country, why should voters?

Oh that's easy to get around, same way they ditched TM but carried on with the same policies. The line will be that parliament was stopping Johnson from leading and delivering Brexit, with an extra but about them all being paid EU shills and anti democratic, and that they wanted to give the country the same opportunity as the Tory party to give Johnson full support.

And then simply pivot to attacking Corbyn

SeaBreezes

Tea Shock wrote: »

RTE are saying the EU are deciding tomorrow.

Also that some in Number 10, specifically Dominic Cummings, wants to abandon the WAB altogether and go for an election now. Perhaps via the Tory party bringing a motion of no confidence in their own government. The irony!

I wonder if that's because the ONLY reason for Brexit is to avoid the tax laws coming in Jan2020 and that's the real deadline? A referendum with agreement would take them past that deadline and force financial transparency? And you may be sure the EU would be looking at the Cayman Isles first for transparency..

prawnsambo

Field east wrote: »

But apparently, BJ thought of a further idea to try and show the ‘two fingers’ or something along those lines ie. THE UNSIGNED LETTER SENT WAS A PHOTOCOPY. There is no end to the guy. So that’s how he plans to treat his ‘European friends’ who he keeps referring to. God help him when it comes to negotiating trade deals with anybody but especially Europe

This was probably said by the usual 'source' in Downing street. But it's not true. I think perhaps Jolyon Maugham tweeted (or retweeted) images of both the Benn Act letter and the actual one. Fonts and type-spacing were different. So no, it wasn't a photocopy.

Leroy42

The other major concern is just how duplicitous they are being in terms of the actual requirements for the NI/GB border. The cabinet are giving out completely different versions, with Johnson stating in the HoC yesterday that there would be no controls.

Others are saying there will be, but in any event they will be minimal, very little actually checked.

Whilst I don't personally care for however they lie to their own MP's, the big danger, in fact I would say it is a given, is that the UK will continue to reduce any controls they do put in so that in effect Ireland is forced to implement its own controls to avoid the rest of the EU placing controls on anything coming form Ireland.

Zubeneschamali

Field east wrote: »

THE UNSIGNED LETTER SENT WAS A PHOTOCOPY.

It turns out that that was baloney. Cummings A #10 source told journalists that they had sent a photocopy of the letter from the Benn Act as part of Johnson's defiance, along with a letter contradicting it.

But neither of those was true - the accompanying letter had been carefully drafted so as not to contradict the request, and the Benn letter was not a photocopy. Faisal Islam tweeted them out side by side - the letter was more neatly typed and formatted than the one in the legal text of the Act:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1185895759633420288

Joe_ Public

Simple trick but clever enough. Get everybody talking about the apparently photocopied letter while the reality of johnsons humiliation in requesting an extension is relatively overlooked. Got to say it did its job reasonably effectively.

Danzy

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Allow it? What exactly is he going to do about it if the EU say No to his extension request?

The only way to avoid it at this stage is to revoke A50.

Which shows how dangerous the whole "Keep No Deal on the table as a bluff" policy has been.

Why would the EU deny the extension, they want this deal passed as much as he does.

Zubeneschamali

Danzy wrote: »

Why would the EU deny the extension, they want this deal passed as much as he does.

My point is that if Johnson does not want No Deal under any circumstances, handing control of No Deal over to the EU, the people he has been poking with a stick since he took office, is risky.

I think that in fact he would be quite happy if they denied the request and forced a no deal since he would be the hero who delivered Brexit and the EU would be the baddies who forced No Deal.

Danzy

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

My point is that if Johnson does not want No Deal under any circumstances, handing control of No Deal over to the EU, the people he has been poking with a stick since he took office, is risky.

I think that in fact he would be quite happy if they denied the request and forced a no deal since he would be the hero who delivered Brexit and the EU would be the baddies who forced No Deal.

Johnson is as keen to avoid a No Deal, they EU are as well.


No Deal is even less likely than a revocation of article 50.


If no deal receiveda dozen votes in the Commons, it would be a shock to all.

Varadkar during the week commenting that an election win for Johnson and pass the deal would be welcome.

They can't interfere much but Juncker and Tusk etc will have a mass said for Johnson on election night.

woohoo!!!

Very noticeable and disturbing that the opposition are all playing the union card, sucking up to the DUP, and isn't it terrible that there'll be barriers that upsets unionists. Perhaps they should have a unionist veto after all.

Yet again, nationalists and non aligned being ignored. Swinson is a Tory lite, who may well lose her seat and is mostly interested in capturing Labour votes and get ex tories to join. Corbyn is just too indecisive, doesn't inspire confidence and as for Johnson...

British Brexit unicorns are strong in all of them. I'm with Macron, a short extension to sign or not, but either way, make a damm decision and quit the cunning tactics that just delay and delay

Tea Shock

Leroy42 wrote: »

The other major concern is just how duplicitous they are being in terms of the actual requirements for the NI/GB border. The cabinet are giving out completely different versions, with Johnson stating in the HoC yesterday that there would be no controls.

Others are saying there will be, but in any event they will be minimal, very little actually checked.

Whilst I don't personally care for however they lie to their own MP's, the big danger, in fact I would say it is a given, is that the UK will continue to reduce any controls they do put in so that in effect Ireland is forced to implement its own controls to avoid the rest of the EU placing controls on anything coming form Ireland.

Well I have only heard them talking about checks that are going from NI to GB which we don't have to care about

If they start acting the shyte with checks coming from GB to NI though, then there'll have to be something in the future relationship that we can use to punish them with. If they leave with no deal at the end of 2020, there wouldn't be any comeback available to the EU.

I keep saying it on this thread, these are cowboys and everything they do should be viewed upon with the greatest of suspicion

Water John

Macron may be correct. Only give them a sort period to get the Deal through Parliament, not enough time to mess around and call a GE.
After all, the EU doesn't want to get involved in a country's domestic affairs.

Kermit.de.frog

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Very noticeable and disturbing that the opposition are all playing the union card, sucking up to the DUP, and isn't it terrible that there'll be barriers that upsets unionists. Perhaps they should have a unionist veto after all.

The remainers are totally disingenuous.

Up until a week or two a go they were all saying you can't have a land border - the peace process etc etc...

...because it suited their agenda.

Now they are against an Irish sea "border".

...because it suits their agenda.

I'm pretty angry at how this island is being kicked around like a football to suit agendas.

They should just leave already. The whole lot of them can do more harm than they have already done.

The whole of Britain should be ashamed of it's self over it's behaviour these last few years from all sides.

Joe_ Public

Water John wrote: »

Macron may be correct. Only give them a sort period to get the Deal through Parliament, not enough time to mess around and call a GE.
After all, the EU doesn't want to get involved in a country's domestic affairs.

You could argue thats precisely what they'd be doing with the short extension though. At the very least, applying serious pressure. As stated by a previous poster, most pragmatic and least risky option is just to accept january request. And the EU is nothing if not pragmatic to its core.