nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Rhineshark

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.

1. The EU
2. Remainers
3. Ireland
4. Corbyn

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

briany

Is the addition to the deal regarding technological solutions on the Irish border not a bit of a win for the UK? I thought the EU had been ruling this out as pie in the sky stuff ( subtext: they don't trust the UK to implement this effectively).

And why was there also language added regarding the UK pursuing an independent trade policy? I thought being in the customs union makes this effectively impossible, at least as far as goods are concerned.

Seth Brundle

Being widely reported now that Trump is sticking his small hands in saying how the deal favours the EU and not the UK and that the deal could make it more difficult to strike a deal between US & UK...
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/trump-says-brexit-deal-sounds-great-for-eu-but-not-for-uk-1.3711369

Mr.Nice Guy

Is there a chance Corbyn whips his party to abstain? That might get it through.

I noticed SDLP leader Colum Eastwood, of their sister party, has asked for the May deal to be supported. That could be an 'out' for Corbyn and Labour, that they won't vote against and threaten a No Deal Brexit because of the danger to the peace process, nor will they be able to bring themselves to support it.

Tell me how

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Renegotiation, extention to A50 or GE are some possible options.

Renegotiation - Think EU are adamant and united that this will not happen
Extension - Hard to see the point of it unless renegotiation is going to take place
General Election - Seems most realistic option but expect a demand for both renegotiation and extension should this happen for obvious reasons.
No Deal - Good luck UK. We wish you well.
An Other - Theresa May throws curve ball and announces peoples vote and agrees extension to A50 until this is held. (Queue all hell breaking loose)

igCorcaigh

Gintonious wrote: »

Of what though? Haven't the EU already said its this or nothing?

Yeah, I know. Some MPs are still demanding it though! I think it's pointless. Any delay increases the chances of a no deal scenario.

Frank Bullitt

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Renegotiation, extention to A50 or GE are some possible options.

Of what though? Haven't the EU already said its this or nothing?

Professor Moriarty

Gintonious wrote: »

So what will happen then if this doesn't get past parliament? Or am I not supposed to ask a question like that?

May could resign. Could be another vote. Another referendum. General election. Or all the above. Just make sure you have the popcorn in.

igCorcaigh

Gintonious wrote: »

So what will happen then if this doesn't get past parliament? Or am I not supposed to ask a question like that?

Renegotiation, extention to A50 or GE are some possible options.

Frank Bullitt

So what will happen then if this doesn't get past parliament? Or am I not supposed to ask a question like that?

Professor Moriarty

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

95 Tory MPs have so far declared they can't accept this deal. Even with centrist Labour MPs support it'll not even get close, dead in the water already.

I wonder how many have sent or will send letters to Brady.

Tom Mann Centuria

95 Tory MPs have so far declared they can't accept this deal. Even with centrist Labour MPs support it'll not even get close, dead in the water already.

An Ciarraioch

McGiver wrote: »

Imreoir2 wrote:

The suggestion is that the EU would allow an extension for a referendum in the hopes that Brexit would be cancelled. I don't see this as being a very likely outcome though.

But then the GE would have to campaigned on a People's Vote manifesto by Labour and they would have to win it. Is this the Labour strategy? I know there is a rather large fraction in the party who support people's vote but I'm not sure Labour as a whole would go for this as an election manifesto.

Another option is not notifying the EEA that the UK is leaving and I understand that that is sufficient for the UK to stay in it. Joining EFTA is a different business though.

AFAIK, the EEA Agreement currently states that members must belong to the EU or EFTA, so an exception would have to be made for the UK.

Capt'n Midnight

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Trump has weighed in on May's deal which won't help her cause.

Long story short, you can predict any future deals with the US in two words.

"America First"

McGiver

Imreoir2 wrote:

The suggestion is that the EU would allow an extension for a referendum in the hopes that Brexit would be cancelled. I don't see this as being a very likely outcome though.

But then the GE would have to campaigned on a People's Vote manifesto by Labour and they would have to win it. Is this the Labour strategy? I know there is a rather large fraction in the party who support people's vote but I'm not sure Labour as a whole would go for this as an election manifesto.

Another option is not notifying the EEA that the UK is leaving and I understand that that is sufficient for the UK to stay in it. Joining EFTA is a different business though.

Capt'n Midnight

Igotadose wrote: »

Lots of posts about this topic in this thread. But really, kind of just an mental exercise at this point.

As of today, the UK has 2 options:
1. The arrangement the EU27 agreed to.
2. Crash out in March 2019. That's a bit more than 4 months from now. *4* months. 120-odd days.

There's no extension in place to avoid crashing out, there's no alternative proposal and the EU, has been very up front: there's no other deal available - no Canada, Norway, what-ever-the-fcuk. It's the present deal, or the highway.

The UK has 3 options if you include Remain.

But neither party is looking to return to the runway they've just taken off from.

The choices are a controlled crash landing that most people will survive or nose diving into the ground.

Mr.Nice Guy

Trump has weighed in on May's deal which won't help her cause.

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1067149444884455424

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1067157475030429697

This will be a blow to Liam Fox who has been keen on pushing a US deal. Wonder what he's thinking because I believe he's been supporting May up to now.

devnull

I see Donald Trump is now weighing in on how the deal is bad for the UK and US-UK ties and that the deal is good for the European Union rather than the UK.

https://www.rte.ie/news/us/2018/1126/1013541-donald-trump-white-house/

I guess that Putin will be happy that he is towing the line.

Spanish Eyes

I think things are quieting down now.

The challenge (no confidence vote ) to May did not materialise. So Rees Mogg goes back to his Nanny and stamps his foot.

Strange thing is, the WA is worse than staying in the EU. But they need to get away from it all, so Norway ++ beckons. As if they ever thought of Norway before now. Far too expensive for a hollier has to be said.

I think, they think, they just don't know. I think!

Being a bit lighthearted here. Although it is a difficult subject.

Still, I console myself by realising we are living through a big time in history all the same.

Capt'n Midnight

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Am very sceptical about a WA or Norway++ etc.

Would love to know the benefits of such arrangements compared with staying in EU.

Does anyone really know now or is it just a UK post Colonial crisis again.

Norway is four freedoms (freedom of movement is UK RED LINE) AND a hard border (Our RED LINE). And nothing for financials and it's not any cheaper either. And no say in EU rules.

Norway would give the UK rights on fishing (less the Pre-EU deals with 6 countries which account for most of the foreign fishing anyway). Also deals on exports of Agriculture, energy, and raw materials but the UK is huge IMPORTER of these, especially from the EU so it's biting off your nose.

The Norway deal makes sense for Norway, they get burdened with EU social and health legislation, but that's the direction all the Nordic countries are going anyway so it's pushing an open door, and they get to keep all the Oil Money. ( Scotland exports Oil, but the UK imports as much as it exports )

The Tories want to roll back workers rights, and Labour want to roll back the common market. Norway means taking most of the EU rules without a say. Norway doesn't suit either party.

A Norway++ that would remove any those obstacles is not on offer.

Imreoir2

Tell me how wrote: »

I overheard a snippet from Ivan Yates show this evening where someone from the UK was on. The guest is a Brexiteer but I did not get his name.
During the bit I heard he said something along the lines of "What we are witnessing here is the (start of the )break up of the European Union".

They are adamant that the EU will give them what they want. If the EU were to act in any kind of favourable way should the deal be rejected in the House of Commons, Brexiteers would likely take that as a sign that they have the EU on the run and not take whatever olive branch might be extended.

If the EU expect this and refuse to bend, the same Brexiteers will scream that they are being bullied.

Let them scream, they will do so anyway.

Tell me how

Igotadose wrote: »

Lots of posts about this topic in this thread. But really, kind of just an mental exercise at this point.

As of today, the UK has 2 options:
1. The arrangement the EU27 agreed to.
2. Crash out in March 2019. That's a bit more than 4 months from now. *4* months. 120-odd days.

There's no extension in place to avoid crashing out, there's no alternative proposal and the EU, has been very up front: there's no other deal available - no Canada, Norway, what-ever-the-fcuk. It's the present deal, or the highway.

I overheard a snippet from Ivan Yates show this evening where someone from the UK was on. The guest is a Brexiteer but I did not get his name.
During the bit I heard he said something along the lines of "What we are witnessing here is the (start of the )break up of the European Union".

They are adamant that the EU will give them what they want. If the EU were to act in any kind of favourable way should the deal be rejected in the House of Commons, Brexiteers would likely take that as a sign that they have the EU on the run and not take whatever olive branch might be extended.

If the EU expect this and refuse to bend, the same Brexiteers will scream that they are being bullied.

Igotadose

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Am very sceptical about a WA or Norway++ etc.

Would love to know the benefits of such arrangements compared with staying in EU.

Does anyone really know now or is it just a UK post Colonial crisis again.

Lots of posts about this topic in this thread. But really, kind of just an mental exercise at this point.

As of today, the UK has 2 options:
1. The arrangement the EU27 agreed to.
2. Crash out in March 2019. That's a bit more than 4 months from now. *4* months. 120-odd days.

There's no extension in place to avoid crashing out, there's no alternative proposal and the EU, has been very up front: there's no other deal available - no Canada, Norway, what-ever-the-fcuk. It's the present deal, or the highway.

Capt'n Midnight

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

FPTP in UK has stifled anything other than Red or Blue. Totally undemocratic IMV. But there we are.

No new party has a fn chance at all under that system.

No wonder the voters don't give a sht. There is no point anymore.

It's a black and white system, like the US it's a flip flop system. Each side reverses what the other other did last time.

And nearly 60% of the seats are safe, baring a massive groundswell.

What's most telling is how little support the main English parties have outside of England/Wales. ALL of the elected MP's of Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem, Green and UKIP from Northern Ireland and Scotland constituted less than half a percent of the seats in Westminster.

And of course both parties are forcing their MP's to follow the current part lines in long drawn out leadership contests.

Capt'n Midnight

The irony is that if MP's were given the option of a secret ballot Remain would win by a landslide.

But secret ballots are reserved for infighting within the parties.

Meanwhile Her Majesty's "Most Loyal" Opposition are giving the Government a free ride instead of putting the country first.
Labour will not allow a representative of the People’s Vote campaign to take part in any televised Brexit debate

Spanish Eyes

Am very sceptical about a WA or Norway++ etc.

Would love to know the benefits of such arrangements compared with staying in EU.

Does anyone really know now or is it just a UK post Colonial crisis again.

Imreoir2

Akrasia wrote: »

If May loses her vote, the 'People's vote' campaign will ramp up into top gear.

I don't think there will be a majority in favour of a peoples vote in parliament regardless of how high a gear the campaign ramps up to.

In the UK, Parliament is Sovereign, so when the parliament rejects May's deal It would be extremely undemocratic for May to just ignore this and put the exact same deal before them again and again until it passes.

The first time around the bill will be amendable by the commons which could result in a number of unrealistic amendments, such as striping out the backstop, being passed by the commons. It could well end up being a bit of a pantomime the first time round. From the commentary I have seen, there is an expectation that the deal may well have to be put to Parliament for a second time.

If May loses the vote, then her deal is no longer viable and the choice should be between 'a different deal' (given time limits, this means most likely crashing out) or withdrawing Article 50 and calling off Brexit.

May is prime minister, the votes held in the commons is largely up to her, regardless of what some people think should happen.

Spanish Eyes

If Theresa May had observed the rules regarding EU immigrants in the first place as Foreign Sec this debacle may never have happened. But there they are now scrambling all over the place.

Talk about needing a hammer to crack a walnut.

lawred2

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1067126406050664448

This sounds amazing. For those who don't want to click, some in Downing Street want a TV debate with May v Jez.
I want to see May pretending that she believes leaving is a good idea and Jez pretending to oppose it with a zillion cliches floating about for good measure.

Over/Under "will of the people" shout outs.:p

May though will probably bottle it last minute and send Rudd again though.:(

Yeah let's debate Brexit, two years after we voted for it.

fly_agaric

Tell me how wrote: »

Not sure that was the case. He tried to put the Brexit thing to bed for at least another generation but it failed spectacularly.
He made plenty of errors but I suspect he always knew the importance of the EU to the UK but still couldn't silence the Brexiteers, due in part to the influence which the media still has on public opinion there.

Cameron was very Eurosceptic (but not to extent of leaving the EU, just damaging it whenever possible, strangling the budget, blocking any further integration etc.).
I suppose you could not be leader of the Conservative party without holding that view - you'll never get the job!
As an example, afair he took the Conservatives out of the big centre right group in European parliament (containing the "normal" right of centre parties in most EU states like FG here - decided it was too "pro-EU" for them) + joined Conservatives up with a much more anti-EU grouping instead that contains some "oddballs" like Law and Justice Party and the True Finns.
He just looks relatively rational now (IMO) beside all the loons that have come out of the woodwork of the Conservative party since to fight for the Brexit cause.

An Ciarraioch

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Akrasia wrote: »

If she refuses to budge on her 'deal' and refuses to allow a 2nd referendum despite mounting pressure to do so, then if the UK ends up crashing out of the EU without a deal it will be 100% her fault.

true, but a second referendum would see most of the tories out of a job, the motions of no confidence would be insane. I am absolutely not a fan but a crash out Brexit is less dangerous for Britain than PM Corbyn.

After the rejection of the first vote, he surely has to pivot towards Norway?