Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Kermit.de.frog · 23-11-2018 01:26AM

Looks like the UK is headed for political chaos at the very least if the vote is rejected.

The market won't like it either.

Either way this damaging to UK politics and the economy.

10000maniacs · 23-11-2018 01:30AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There is no popcorn left. I'm biting hard on kernels. It really is extraordinary that when all the dust settles this is what they are left with.

Remember the bad old days when you ordered a sandwich with your beer in a bar or hotel and the only options available were cheese and/or ham.
Remember when the most popular soup was the Royco powdered variety? Remember years when there was a bad harvest of potatoes, and the only 'out of season' option was Smash mash? Remember those chicken curry mixes that you added water to?
That will be the UK circa 2019 if there is a hard Brexit unless they come up with some way of mass producing out of season vegetables like tomatoes, onions and lettuce. Potatoes and other root crops will become luxury items out of season too. Dutch lorry drivers are not going to queue for hours at the borders to bring this stuff into the UK. And even if they do, UK 3rd country tariffs enforced by the farming community will ensure they will become much more expensive. When stuff like this happens, whatever unrest there is now will seem like a tea party.

Capt'n Midnight · 23-11-2018 01:34AM

Larbre34 wrote: »

Just out of long day away from the news, so to catch up am I right in saying that as of now Britain has...

Negotiated itself to either economic armageddon OR loss of sovereignty over two of its territories / protectorates in order to avail of more limited access to its most convenient markets and to accept a whole range of regulations, which is currently has a say in, but won't after the fact?

They have a third option of changing their mind in light of new evidence and remaining in.

Jim2007 · 23-11-2018 01:38AM

Folkstonian wrote: »

The vote in parliament will be scarcely more than a formality. She’s a hopeless PM and her position is more insecure than ever.

I’m not so sure anymore, I suspect that she has far better intelligence on what the feeling on the ground in the constituencies is than we give her credit for. You’d think on the face of it cobbling together 48 letters to start a leadership challenge would have been easy and yet they failed to arrive - take that as a warning if I was a BREXITEER. If she does not call for a three line whip, she may well get the votes she needs.

Larbre34 · 23-11-2018 01:52AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

They have a third option of changing their mind in light of new evidence and remaining in.

They do indeed, and that would be preferable for Ireland of course, but as regards 'evidence', you could point at the sky and say its blue and still a large proportion of would either put the head in the sand or rail against it.

The p1ss poor level of their political discourse and print media has a lot of answer for.

Folkstonian · 23-11-2018 02:07AM

Jim2007 wrote: »

I’m not so sure anymore, I suspect that she has far better intelligence on what the feeling on the ground in the constituencies is than we give her credit for. You’d think on the face of it cobbling together 48 letters to start a leadership challenge would have been easy and yet they failed to arrive - take that as a warning if I was a BREXITEER. If she does not call for a three line whip, she may well get the votes she needs.

Possibly and we won’t really know until December 10th. Although the evidence that it is doomed to complete failure does appear to be mounting rapidly. We know that the DUP can’t vote for it. We know that labour can’t vote for it.

But most tellingly something like 80 Tory MPs have put their name to voting against her deal. Now I know you can never fully trust a politician, but it would be pretty bold to do an about turn at this late stage having given their word publicly to the electorate

I fully expect her to lose the deal and face a vote of no confidence the very next day

mickoneill31 · 23-11-2018 06:06AM

This is a funny thread

https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1065648448362434560?s=19

cml387 · 23-11-2018 09:04AM

Apparently the Pizza Club (Leadsome,Fox and other cabinet Brexiteers) have a wheeze up their sleeves.
Assuming defeat for the Withdrawal agreement, they will ask for a year's extension and then go straight to hard Brexit, presumably having by that time got their sh!t together .

This was reported by Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph this morning.

On the face of it, the EU would need to approve an extension but, it's a possibility.
It would leave us in the ordure in March 2020 though.

prawnsambo · 23-11-2018 09:23AM

cml387 wrote: »

Apparently the Pizza Club (Leadsome,Fox and other cabinet Brexiteers) have a wheeze up their sleeves.
Assuming defeat for the Withdrawal agreement, they will ask for a year's extension and then go straight to hard Brexit, presumably having by that time got their sh!t together .

This was reported by Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph this morning.

On the face of it, the EU would need to approve an extension but, it's a possibility.
It would leave us in the ordure in March 2020 though.

Well that's the cunning plan out in the open then. Do these people think EU leaders can't read English newspapers?

cml387 · 23-11-2018 09:36AM

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well that's the cunning plan out in the open then. Do these people think EU leaders can't read English newspapers?

I suppose the thinking is that the EU will suffer as much as the UK next March from a crash out, this will give both sides time to prepare.

prawnsambo · 23-11-2018 09:38AM

cml387 wrote: »

I suppose the thinking is that the EU will suffer as much as the UK next March from a crash out, this will give both sides time to prepare.

But if the plan is to just use an extended transition period as a smokescreen for a hard brexit and the EU leaders know this, why would they grant it?

Rhineshark · 23-11-2018 09:41AM

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well that's the cunning plan out in the open then. Do these people think EU leaders can't read English newspapers?

Yes, yes they do. It's mad, but it appears to be that because most British don't or can't read foreign-language press that Europeans can't/don't read English. Despite all the heaped evidence to the contrary.

cml387 · 23-11-2018 09:44AM

prawnsambo wrote: »

But if the plan is to just use an extended transition period as a smokescreen for a hard brexit and the EU leaders know this, why would they grant it?

It's not a smokescreen. They'd be quite open about their intentions.

RobMc59 · 23-11-2018 09:46AM

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/sanchezcastejon/status/1065719004923342850

Looks like the Brits can start pointing the finger at the Spanish as well as the Irish now.

That's a very biased view if you don't mind me saying.Gibraltar has been British for a long time and Spain is trying to gain from the current situation-nothing wrong with that but hardly the UK pointing the finger.

Zubeneschamali · 23-11-2018 09:49AM

prawnsambo wrote: »

But if the plan is to just use an extended transition period as a smokescreen for a hard brexit and the EU leaders know this, why would they grant it?

Their cunning plan is that there won't be a smokescreen.

They are going to publicly aim for Hard brexit, they want to drive right off that cliff, they just need the EU to give them a one-year run-up.

Of course it would turn out that they actually want a free trade agreement, agreement on flights, visas, nuclear power, arrest warrants etc. etc. etc. In real life, that will take 10 years to negotiate, and this is just more nonsense from the Brexiteers.

FreudianSlippers · 23-11-2018 09:55AM

cml387 wrote: »

I suppose the thinking is that the EU will suffer as much as the UK next March from a crash out, this will give both sides time to prepare.

...but where's the factual support for this view? Other than hard-core Brexiteers, is any serious economist able to support this view?

First Up · 23-11-2018 10:02AM

cml387 wrote: »

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well that's the cunning plan out in the open then. Do these people think EU leaders can't read English newspapers?

I suppose the thinking is that the EU will suffer as much as the UK next March from a crash out, this will give both sides time to prepare.

The Brexiteers have been clinging to that delusion for quite some time. Of course they both need to prepare but they are preparing for very different things.

joe40 · 23-11-2018 10:10AM

cryptocurrency wrote: »

And the EU. Merkel called for the end of sovereignty.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1048913/brexit-news-angela-merkel-germany-eu-sovereignty-uk
She told the event, titled ‘Parliamentarianism Between Globalisation and National Sovereignty’: "In this day nation states must today - should today, I say - be ready to give up sovereignty.

Between this and the Army talk the EU is getting dangerous. I hope Washington and London are talking about to to nip this who thing in the bud.

The EU is getting dangerous and America and London should "nip it in the bud" Who carried out the invasion of Iraq looking for imaginary WMD.

Current America policy and a destabilised Britain are much greater cause for concern.

joe40 · 23-11-2018 10:16AM

In terms of the HoC vote. Is there any chance reminers from all parties will support the bill through gritted teeth to avoid a no deal exit.
Do they see other options if the vote fails?
Will it not be up to the Tory party, and no one else, whether to call for a new vote or an election.

Are remainers not taking a huge risk voting against this deal since no deal option is terrible. Maybe I'm missing something. I'm far from an expert on UK politics

prawnsambo · 23-11-2018 10:20AM

cml387 wrote: »

It's not a smokescreen. They'd be quite open about their intentions.

Which is my point really. There's no incentive for the EU leaders to extend a transition period when it's only purpose is to give them time to prepare for something they are pretending won't happen. There's a lot more preparedness on the EU side for a hard brexit. Staying execution will only increase uncertainty.

UsedToWait · 23-11-2018 10:22AM

joe40 wrote: »

Maybe I'm missing something. I'm far from an expert on UK politics

I think you'd need to be a SociologistHistorianPsychiatrist to understand UK politics at present.

joe40 wrote: »

Are remainers not taking a huge risk voting against this deal since no deal option is terrible.

It seems like the danger of an accidental Brexit looms larger every day.

LeinsterDub · 23-11-2018 10:23AM

joe40 wrote: »

In terms of the HoC vote. Is there any chance reminers from all parties will support the bill through gritted teeth to avoid a no deal exit.
Do they see other options if the vote fails?
Will it not be up to the Tory party, and no one else, whether to call for a new vote or an election.

Are remainers not taking a huge risk voting against this deal since no deal option is terrible. Maybe I'm missing something. I'm far from an expert on UK politics

Everything is on the table. There is currently a lot of talk of May puts the vote to the HoC it's rejected. Que currency collapse and general bad things. May gives this a couple of weeks. Meanwhile the option of a second vote is put to the HoC and this is also rejected (part of May's plan). May returns to the HoC mid December and says its my way or the highway in the hope opposition MPs don't follow their parties whip to avoid absolute madness

farmchoice · 23-11-2018 10:49AM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Everything is on the table. There is currently a lot of talk of May puts the vote to the HoC it's rejected. Que currency collapse and general bad things. May gives this a couple of weeks. Meanwhile the option of a second vote is put to the HoC and this is also rejected (part of May's plan). May returns to the HoC mid December and says its my way or the highway in the hoping opposition MPs don't follow their parties whip to avoid absolute madness

#

i think it will go something like this, i'm not sure about the offer of a second ref but she will lose the first vote but win the second or possibly third, she will keep going until she gets it.

after she loses the first vote there will prob be a vote of no confidence in her, those in the know seem to think she will win this and then have another crack at getting it through.
should she lose this, then rinse and repeat until the fear and loathing that will by then have descended across the uk gets her over the line to much national rejoicing just in time for Christmas.

MrMusician18 · 23-11-2018 10:58AM

cryptocurrency wrote: »

And the EU. Merkel called for the end of sovereignty.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1048913/brexit-news-angela-merkel-germany-eu-sovereignty-uk
She told the event, titled ‘Parliamentarianism Between Globalisation and National Sovereignty’: "In this day nation states must today - should today, I say - be ready to give up sovereignty.

Between this and the Army talk the EU is getting dangerous. I hope Washington and London are talking about to to nip this who thing in the bud.

I know you're a silly troll, but this is a point worth making.

The US and the UK decided that in the post war settlement that they would provide security to Europe and allow it to develop economically in order to prevent it becoming militarised (and a threat) again. By providing this blanket, it meant that European countries didn't need standing armies of great strength and could devote resources to civilian infrastructure. European countries accepted this effective loss of sovereignty (in that they didn't control their own foreign policy fully) to recover from the war and they trusted their Allies who were stable and dependable to defend them when needed.

The reason there is talk of a European Army is because the US and to a lesser extent, the UK, want to withdraw this defence blanket. If no one will come to the defence of Europe, it will be for Europeans to defend it.

Burden sharing notwithstanding (and it is a legitimate gripe) best way for the US and the UK to nip this in the bud, is a full throated commitment to NATO.

Water John · 23-11-2018 11:17AM

Raab saying that UK would be better staying in EU than this Deal has really fuelled the Remainers.

flatty · 23-11-2018 11:41AM

10000maniacs wrote: »

Remember the bad old days when you ordered a sandwich with your beer in a bar or hotel and the only options available were cheese and/or ham.
Remember when the most popular soup was the Royco powdered variety? Remember years when there was a bad harvest of potatoes, and the only 'out of season' option was Smash mash? Remember those chicken curry mixes that you added water to?
That will be the UK circa 2019 if there is a hard Brexit unless they come up with some way of mass producing out of season vegetables like tomatoes, onions and lettuce. Potatoes and other root crops will become luxury items out of season too. Dutch lorry drivers are not going to queue for hours at the borders to bring this stuff into the UK. And even if they do, UK 3rd country tariffs enforced by the farming community will ensure they will become much more expensive. When stuff like this happens, whatever unrest there is now will seem like a tea party.

Dyou know what, that weren't bad times in Ireland at all. I think it will lead to a violent crime wave and civil unrest in England though.

McGiver · 23-11-2018 11:43AM

joe40 wrote: »

The EU is getting dangerous and America and London should "nip it in the bud" Who carried out the invasion of Iraq looking for imaginary WMD.

Current America policy and a destabilised Britain are much greater cause for concern.

Exactly. And the EU need the "EU army". It's a necessity, the global situation has changed and is deteriorating. Of course some member states may opt out, I'm quite sure there will be a lot of flexibility in this matter as it's sensitive topic. Germans know that them engaging may cause outrage and are very cautious. It will need to be done collectively with a clear indication that there is no one who actually bosses this whole thing (France or Germany especially) and that it's a joint effort under a joint command.

As the EU consolidates and gets stronger soft power globally (EUR is second largest reserve currency and that was achieved without any military support), very soon it will have to protect that soft power with hard power, otherwise it will decompose. You can protect your soft power without proper defence only to a certain point. Russian meddling, destabilising, hybrid war, Chinese spying opertations and American trade "war" are clear indications that the EU has to act on this.

EU army or some sort of consolidated defense must and will happen. RoI can provide nurses, doctors and the likes if they wish to stay "neutral", no problem.

Also, Frontext needs to be seriously upgraded and staffed. Suggestions and proposals have been made but the Visegrad Group (Poland and Czech Rep.) are strongly against, which is insane and hypocritical, because they said "No to migrant quatas, no economic migrants welcome. We need to protect the EU borders and help to sort out the situation in the source countries instead" and when it comes to protecting borders and empoweing Frontex, they shout that protecting borders is a national competency and they don't want EU agency policing them.:(

EDIT: By the way - there has been a Civil War on the eastern border of the EU in Ukraine for several years, where Russia is engaged milarily and incites the Civil War directly (supplies, training, manpower, hardware) and indirectly (propaganda). It may seem distant and non-existent from Irish point of view, but it doesn't change the fact.

FreudianSlippers · 23-11-2018 11:49AM

McGiver wrote: »

Exactly. And the EU need the "EU army". It's a necessity, the global situation has changed and is deteriorating. Of course some member states may opt out, I'm quite sure there will be a lot of flexibility in this matter as it's sensitive topic. Germans know that them engaging may cause outrage and are very cautios. It will need to be done collectively with a clear indication that there is no one who actually bosses this whole thing (France or Germany especially) and that it's a joint effort under a joint command.

As the EU consolidates and gets stronger soft power globally (EUR is second largest reverse currency and that was achieved without any military support), very soon it will have to protect that soft power with hard power, otherwise it will decompose. You can protect your soft power without proper defence only to a certain point. Russian meddling, destabilising hybrid war, Chinese spying opertations and American trade "war" are clear indications that the EU has to act on this.

EU army or some sort of consolidated defense must and will happen. RoI can provide nurses, doctors and the likes if they wish to stay "neutral", no problem.

Also, Frontext needs to be seriously upgraded and staffed. Suggestions and proposals have been made but Visegrad (Poland and Czech Rep.) are strongly against, which is insane and hypocritical, because they said "No to migrant quatas, no economic migrants welcome. We need to protect the EU borders and help to sort out the situation in the source countries instead" and when it comes to protecting borders and empoweing Frontex, they shout that protecting borders is a national competency and they don't want EU agency policing them.:(

IMHO Ireland should still train with an EU Army for defensive and humanitarian operations. Either that or we should just give up this false notion of "neutrality".

MrMusician18 · 23-11-2018 11:52AM

funkey_monkey wrote: »

I didn't know this. Can you point me to your source for this information?

Thanks.

It's an observable reality.

cml387 · 23-11-2018 12:02PM

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

...but where's the factual support for this view? Other than hard-core Brexiteers, is any serious economist able to support this view?

Well here's what the new PM (because May will be gone by then) will say to the EU:
"We're going to crash out on WTO terms anyway,it can either be next March or March 2020...your call."

Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Comments