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.
Leroy42 wrote: » I thought JRM performance yesterday summed up Brexit for me. Despite repeated claims of the power and influence of ERG, when the time came to make the move JRM was left to plead with people to send in letters otherwise TM would remain in charge for the next election. Gone was the talk about Brexit, the need for national unity, respecting the will of the people. HE was reduced to pleading for someone to please help him out of the massive hole he has dug. Out muscled by Brussels (they always held all the cards) and now seemingly out outmanoeuvred by TM, he was reduced to a, IMO, pathectic sight of almost crying for someone to make it all better.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » The BBC story is here. Raab was just an errand boy taking messages between Robbins and May.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Why do you think that a second referendum carries a risk of a stronger vote to leave?
kowtow wrote: » From memory, and I'm not going to go hunting down quotes - but this is what the bbc said at the time:
FreudianSlippers wrote: » If it did (and it doesn't) at the very least it would give the Government a stronger mandate to go for a no-deal Brexit; as it stands, it seems a significant portion of the electorate who voted Leave were not informed that a no-deal Brexit was even a possibility.
listermint wrote: » Huh ? What is this nonsense! and where did you get it from
Infini wrote: » There could be far less disorder from a cancellation of Brexit than from No Deal crash since the former doesnt involve people losing anything tangeble. The Bullshíteers have been shown to be exactly what they are: Incompetent, Ideological, Braindead Stupid idiots with no plan, no common sense and nothing to show except tired worn out lies and empty soundbytes. If anything should Brexit be cancelled to the relief of many the best way of containing any fallout would be to go after all the lies, corrupt money and any party that was being used as a tool for Russian interference. Brexit is one of the greatest scams in recent history perpetuated by lies, cheats and Bullshít. The only way this can be contained is by holding those to account who spew misinformation and lies counter the rot that allowed this to happen in the first place.
briany wrote: » If the British parliament opts to revoke A50, I wonder what the likelihood of proper civil disorder and violence would be from the remaining Brexiteers on the ground? And would UKIP go from being a boogeyman for the Conservatives to sweeping however many dozens of their seats in the next British GE?
kowtow wrote: » If I remember correctly the day he was appointed it was stressed that his role would be primarily to stay at home and prepare for no deal... perhaps that was lost on him with the excitement of the appointment. The reality is that Theresa May and Robbins have been micro-managing this process all along and undercutting the various ministers appointed. If David Davis had been awake in the first place it might have been better for him to go earlier and make a fuss when something could be done - but he didn't and for better and for worse that is where they all find themselves. We'll have to wait for the autobiographies to get a better view. What matters now, to my mind, is whether they can get this deal through Parliament. I'm not sure that I would vote for it - but I'm more pig headed than the average politician! For what it's worth I think a second referendum would carry (a) a risk of an even stronger vote to leave and (b) a more significant risk of a close remain result with an even more serious breakdown in trust in democracy. The same goes for any unilateral withdrawal of A50.
Asked whether Mr Raab would be in charge of the talks, No 10 said Mrs May had "always been, from the outset, the lead negotiator". But a spokesman said there was a "huge body of work to be done, in terms of preparations for the UK leaving the EU and that obviously includes no-deal preparations as well".
Sam Russell wrote: » Bombardier losing 500 jobs in NI. Is it Brexit related? Or Trump related?
Peregrinus wrote: » Yes. If only somebody with Raab's understanding and insight has been appointed as Brexit secretary while the negotiations were under way, think how different things might have been.
Peregrinus wrote: » Nitpick: Indefinite extension of the transition is not on offer. From the EU perspective it would be both politically and legally objectionable so, even if the UK wanted it, I doubt they could have it.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » Or they withdraw A50 and Remain. Or they take this as a Withdrawal Agreement, and then negotiate Norway+backstop as the Future Arrangement. Or they take this and extend the Transition indefinitely. This is only one step, there is a long way to go yet.
Leroy42 wrote: » They either go with this deal or crash out.
kowtow wrote: » Raab's problem - and I say this as someone who doesn't totally disagree with him - is that even if he is correct it is too late to do anything practical about it.
Tell me how wrote: » From the outset the EU said the future relationship would not be negotiated until the WA is signed off. Rightly so. This is currently a mess because of UK shenanigans at cabinet, parliament, party, confidence and supply agreement and opposition levels.
kowtow wrote: » I think the most striking thing about the draft deal as published is the relative lack of detail on the future relationship - together with a commitment to fill in some more of that detail in the coming days. I think that was deliberate and sensible. To my mind, May (and her EU interlocutors) are playing this difficult hand just about as well as it can be played given the state of negotiations we have reached. Last week's cabinet resignations and drama served to let the steam off the situation in London and since then May has more or less had the better of the press grid. If I had to bet I would say: 1. Brussels will add plenty of generous wording to the unfinished future text (including, perhaps, more commitment to consider alternatives [technology etc.] to the backstop and a re-affirmation that nobody wants the backstop implemented)... that built in leeway was what Gove et. al. sniffed out when they made the decision to remain in the cabinet. 2. May will return from Brussels with a spring in her step, continue to rally businesses to support the cause, and begin to push very heavily against Labour MP's whose vacillation runs the risk of either a "no deal" or a "no Brexit". I also think she might characterize the vote as a free vote - she has nothing to gain by whipping it and doing so will increase the pressure on Labour if it can be painted as a matter which is above mere party politics. In the end, the ERG / DUP rebellion will be contained (although most will vote against on principle) and it's just possible that enough of Labour will simply vote to get the deal done rather than (as they will remind us) running the risk of a no deal crash out. Honour will be satisfied on all sides. The ERG leadership thing is a sideshow, to the extent that it is anything at all.
lawred2 wrote: » Raab is being reckless with such commentary. This is straight up nationalistic fire stoking.
