Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Water John

January deadline allows Johnson the option of a GE. A few weeks to get the Bill through Parliament doesn't.

Seth Brundle

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

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.

Despite your own agenda, the remainers are pointing out the obvious that no matter what way an agreement (never mind a no-deal) is completed, the UK will in absolutely no measurable way be better off!
It is a bit of a no-brainer really!

Kermit.de.frog

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Despite your own agenda, the remainers are pointing out the obvious that no matter what way an agreement (never mind a no-deal) is completed, the UK will in absolutely no measurable way be better off!
It is a bit of a no-brainer really!

They are not - they are using faux concern for the people on this island to suit their agendas.

The sooner they are out the better for everyone.

We have a deal.

Time to move on. Leave the psychodrama to them.

Jim2007

Tea Shock wrote: »

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.

They don't need a comeback, it would be a WTO issue, members would lodge objections they are not receiving the same treatment under MFN, so they would be WTO scansions, penalties etc...

Joe_ Public

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

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.

Given they are remainers whats the big issue with them being against any type of border? Isnt that the whole point of remaining?

Tea Shock

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.

They'll never say it out loud, but I think the EU would be more than willing to lean towards anything that would be more likely to take the Tory's out of power. Leaving them to have run an election campaign while the UK are still in the EU, after all Johnson's bluster over the last 5 months of "We will be leaving on October 31st come what may", with an election campaign then occurring with them talking about a new exit date several months away, wouldn't play well and would be sure to split the eurosceptic vote!

Tea Shock

Jim2007 wrote: »

They don't need a comeback, it would be a WTO issue, members would lodge objections they are not receiving the same treatment under MFN, so they would be WTO scansions, penalties etc...

Not checking goods being moved within your own nation would not contravene most-favored-nation rules

MrMusician18

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Despite your own agenda, the remainers are pointing out the obvious that no matter what way an agreement (never mind a no-deal) is completed, the UK will in absolutely no measurable way be better off!
It is a bit of a no-brainer really!

In fairness he has a point. Remainers (hint is in the name) have been using every crack in the plan that they can find in order to try to lever a way to overturn the result.

Do I really believe that remainers give two hoots about NI? Some do of course, and those people are easy to spot (since they cared before Brexit) but the majority are using it to further their own agenda.

Zubeneschamali

Danzy wrote: »

No Deal is even less likely than a revocation of article 50. If no deal received a dozen votes in the Commons, it would be a shock to all.

How about if it received 308 votes, as at 7 pm on the 13th March, or 278, as at 7.33 pm on that date?

woohoo!!!

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Given they are remainers whats the big issue with them being against any type of border? Isnt that the whole point of remaining?

It's the implication that the DUP should have a veto. Yet again British politicians demonstrating lack of knowledge or care on Ireland, just something to be used and discarded.

Joe_ Public

woohoo!!! wrote: »

It's the implication that the DUP should have a veto. Yet again British politicians demonstrating lack of knowledge or care on Ireland, just something to be used and discarded.

I would have thought its very simple. Remainers dont want any dup veto because by staying in the EU it doesnt arise. Isnt that agenda fairly crystal clear? Labour have brexiteers who want a CU and close sm alignment so again the issue doesnt arise. And thats a compromisise position available to the gov if it is serious about getting its deal through.

Akrasia

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Given they are remainers whats the big issue with them being against any type of border? Isnt that the whole point of remaining?

Yep

When the leavers have no good ideas, there's nothing wrong with remainers going
We don't like this idea because it shafts the good friday agreement
and We don't like this other idea because it shafts the United Kingdom

The brexiters need to defend their brexit, let the remainers defend remaining in the EU

LeinsterDub

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

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.

In the way the leavers said no Prime Minister could vote for a border in the sea, that they'd say by the DUP, no deal wasn't an option....

Tea Shock

Breaking: Johnson calling for a General Election to be held on December 12th

Can he get it though?

hometruths

Woohoo!
General Election, this will be very exciting!!

Kermit.de.frog

I wonder will the DUP regret their stance on pretty much everything in this election? Some of their seats must be at risk.

Zubeneschamali

schmittel wrote: »

General Election, this will be very exciting!!

Johnson can't call an election, he needs Labour to vote for it. Assuming Johnson is telling the truth and really plans to call for an election, that suggests that the EU have told him the extension is on for at least January 31st.

LeinsterDub

schmittel wrote: »

Woohoo!
General Election, this will be very exciting!!

The HoC still have to approve he's using the FTPA, the one nation Tories are in open revolt. I can't see it happening

Duane Dibbley

Tea Shock wrote: »

Breaking: Johnson calling for a General Election to be held on December 12th

Can he get it though?

No way labour will vote for a GE.

They are Charlatans.

Kermit.de.frog

Johnson's plan is to get the deal through and have an election early December.

Rjd2

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

No way labour will vote for a GE.

They are Charlatans.

Corbyn is gagging for one from all accounts. He likes campaigning and is fed up with been on the opposition benches.

Very brave to suggest we don't get an election in December.

Tea Shock

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

No way labour will vote for a GE.

They are Charlatans.

The exit date of October 31st has to be removed from UK law before Labour would vote for it, doesn't it

That can't happen before they vote on an election on Monday!

robinph

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

No way labour will vote for a GE.

They are Charlatans.

Well labour won't vote for the deal on the promise of a GE when they would take a GE followed by getting their own version of a deal through.

Whilst it's getting very close to the deadline, there is still time for labour to have a vonc and appoint an interim pm to take a different course that they want.

Strazdas

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Johnson can't call an election, he needs Labour to vote for it. Assuming Johnson is telling the truth and really plans to call for an election, that suggests that the EU have told him the extension is on for at least January 31st.

In theory, the UK could leave the EU in mid November and hold the GE after this.

The sequencing of events is down to the UK side....the EU won't be bothered when the GE is held, they're only concerned with the WA.

Tea Shock

This will be overshadowed by a possible election, proposed Labour amendment 44 to WAB wants to change the consent mechanism in Johnson's WA from a simple majority in Stormont to one requiring cross community support, consistent with the mechanism stipulated in the GFA!

In summary, they want to negotiate with themselves again, on things already rejected by the EU.

Zubeneschamali

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

No way labour will vote for a GE.

I think they should go for it. Last time I saw a poll asking voting intentions if Brexit does not happen on 31st, the Brexit party took a bite out of the Tories. I don't think things are going to be better for Labour later, might as well take a crack at it. If the deal gets passed and Brexit actually happens, Boris will be a hero to the Brexiteers, so have to go before that.

Duane Dibbley

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I think they should go for it. Last time I saw a poll asking voting intentions if Brexit does not happen on 31st, the Brexit party took a bite out of the Tories. I don't think things are going to be better for Labour later, might as well take a crack at it. If the deal gets passed and Brexit actually happens, Boris will be a hero to the Brexiteers, so have to go before that.

They should but they won’t vote for an election this side of Christmas. You can see in the interviews that the Labour MPs are scared of losing their seats.

Imreoir2

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

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.

The clif-edge has consistantly been to the EUs advantage in negiotiation. The risk of no-deal is no greater with the cliff edge than without becasue the UK political system has time and again proved sufficently able to avoid the cliff-edge when it comes to it. With or without the cliff edge, the UK only leaves with no-deal if it makes a conscious choice to do so.

I don't see what the EU has to gain be easing up on the pressure. There is a political crisis in the UK, allowing it to move in slow motion will not change the fundemental facts of that crisis. The UK needs to push through the crisis and come to a resolution one way or the other. Constantly going around in circles, as they tend to do whenever there is not a deadline looming a few weeks away, does no-one any good.

I don't think forcing the pace to a resolution will change the nature of the resolution when we get there. If it takes another 6 months or another six years, the resolution will be what it is, but taking another six years to get there is more damaging to us than if it only takes another six months.

Akrasia

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Johnson's plan is to get the deal through and have an election early December.

Thats his stated plan, his unstated plan is to get the opposition to vote for an election under the fixed term parliament act on Monday, before they can confirm the extension from the EU. If the act passes, he can then change the date of the election and disband parliament before they get a chance to confirm the extension resulting in a crash out on 31st of October

If Corbyn falls for this then he is as stupid as Johnson seems to think he is.

Kermit.de.frog

Tea Shock wrote: »

This will be overshadowed by a possible election, proposed Labour amendment 44 to WAB wants to change the consent mechanism in Johnson's WA from a simple majority in Stormont to one requiring cross community support, consistent with the mechanism stipulated in the GFA!

In summary, they want to negotiate with themselves again, on things already rejected by the EU.

This is why the EU should give a short extension just to get the deal through.

That will focus the minds of opposition MPs who can't stomach no deal.

The longer an extension the more messing around there is going to be.

Macron is right.