kuro68k wrote: » The British government is going to take it right to the cliff edge and hope that someone else compromises. Of course they have their excuses already lined up if no-one does, only real question is who they will blame.
Strazdas wrote: Ireland and the EU need to be very careful here. The Brexiteers are slippery customers and deceitful and would think nothing of reneging on any agreement they had previously signed.
RobMc59 wrote: » I'm against brexit but think some of the posters on this forum seem to think the UK has committed a terrible sin to want to leave the EU-if it's a no deal brexit it will hurt the UK but all this talk of "watch them come crawling back " and they'll soon realise their mistake-40 years of gutter press..blah blah blah-where is all that bile and bitterness coming from?
Peregrinus wrote: » Tell me how wrote: » There are those in Labour who either want Brexit themselves, or are afraid of facing their constituents if they don't support the democratic vote to leave (leaving Aaron Banks and such aside). Less and less. Latest studies suggest that every single Labour MP sits for a constituency where a majority backs a second referendum. Tell me how wrote: » There are certainly as many pro-Brexit labour MP's as there are DUP MP's. Question is, are there enough to counter Tory rebels. The issue is not how may pro-Brexit Labour MPs there are; it's how many Labour MPs would vote for May's Brexit. This is quite a different question. Extreme pro-Brexit Labour MPs - e.g. Kate Hoey - might vote against May's Brexit because they don't think it's brexity enough. Conversely, anti-Brexit Labour MPs might vote for May's Brexit if they were persuaded that the likely alternative was a no-deal Brexit. The key question here is whether Labour will whip its members to vote against May's brexit. You'd expect so, given that May's brexit will not meet Labour's six tests. (No Brexit will.) But is it possible that Labour leadership will not want to risk (a) being blamed for no-deal Brexit and/or (b) triggering chaos which may lead to no Brexit at all, and will seek to avoid this by allowing members a free vote?
Tell me how wrote: » There are those in Labour who either want Brexit themselves, or are afraid of facing their constituents if they don't support the democratic vote to leave (leaving Aaron Banks and such aside).
Tell me how wrote: » There are certainly as many pro-Brexit labour MP's as there are DUP MP's. Question is, are there enough to counter Tory rebels.
flatty wrote: » Id be very surprised if the corbynistas allowed a free vote. Its not really in their nature.
Tell me how wrote: » Think that looking at tweets from Simon, Leo and Sabine this morning, they're well aware of it. Each of them all but said "We know what ye are trying to do".
Zubeneschamali wrote: » flatty wrote: » Id be very surprised if the corbynistas allowed a free vote. Its not really in their nature. Corbyn defied the Labour whip more than 400 times when Labour were in power.
flatty wrote: » As an aside, what would people expect sterling to settle at vs the euro if a deal of some sorts is done?
Zubeneschamali wrote: » flatty wrote: » As an aside, what would people expect sterling to settle at vs the euro if a deal of some sorts is done? I think Sterling is already settled expecting a deal to be done, it's already priced in. The scary question is what would happen to Sterling if the City decide a no deal crashout is coming.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » I think Sterling is already settled expecting a deal to be done, it's already priced in. The scary question is what would happen to Sterling if the City decide a no deal crashout is coming.
flatty wrote: » Whats good for the goose isn't necessarily good for the gander. The corbynistas with their momentum paramilitary wing have not shown great tolerance to internal dissent thus far.
Rhineshark wrote: » flatty wrote: » Whats good for the goose isn't necessarily good for the gander. The corbynistas with their momentum paramilitary wing have not shown great tolerance to internal dissent thus far. I've seen this sort of talk from normally reasonable posters but none of them have explained what they meant. Far as I know it's a pack of students that flooded into the party primarily out of dislike of Tory Brexit (plus students tend to be a bit more liberal) and were highly enthused for Corbyn (that seems to be waning). How are they a "paramilitary wing" and, given my understanding of the term is along the lines of the IRA, what exactly do you mean by the phrase? Strikes me as rather "Continuity Remain" or terrorist antifa.
Bambi wrote: » Leo must be loving this, getting to tell the Brits to cop themselves on every few weeks. Great PR
RobMc59 wrote: » What happens if some EU members want to push through a brexit deal?-I ask as it appears Germany and Poland are apparently very keen for a deal to go through..
Nody wrote: » Nothing without managing to swing at least two thirds of the countries to join 'em and 100% for the post brexit trade deal.
charlie14 wrote: » If it comes down solely to the backstop being the cause of a no deal I wonder would that hold true though if Germany were determined to get a deal.
ArmaniJeanss wrote: » This is where Corbyn will have to defer to/agree with Keir Starmer - e.g., Starmer decides the 6 tests haven't been met, JC agrees and the plp whips to vote No. It's much more difficult for anyone to defy the whip in this case as not only are you defying the current leader you are also defying his possible successor. This would keep the numbers voting with the government down to single digits (Hoey, Field etc)
ilovesmybrick wrote: » Well the Irish version left out the Whitehall official saying that Ireland were f**ked, so there's a degree of pandering to national audiences and not providing the full account in case it upsets the apple cart
swampgas wrote: » The EU caving on the backstop would do the EU lots of reputational damage, internally and externally. Internally, it would be a message that smaller countries will be thrown under the bus at the last minute if it suits the majority or the larger countries. It's not a message that would encourage EU cohesiveness. Externally it would indicate that the EU's consistent position up to now has been a bluff and that the EU will cave at the last minute if brinkmanship is used. Not a good precedent when there are future trading arrangements and political crises to be negotiatied. I really can't see the EU making blunders on such a scale for the sake of a deal with the UK that might very well collapse anyway. The EU have to think long term here. The UK should be thinking long term but don't seem to be able to see beyond the next 24 hours.
