Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Interesting response from May there to Iain Duncan Smith. Said renegotiating the WA would result in new things on the table, including an NI-specific customs arrangement.

Is it possible May will now seek to offload the DUP altogether by looking to renegotiate to the original backstop that was proposed last December?

Laois_Man wrote: »

May has given a sting hint there that she wants to effectively cut N. Ireland adrift

How so?

Tony Connelly has an interesting take on it.

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1072158171534450688

Water John wrote: »

Bercow is embarrassing the Govn't into having a vote.

A lot of bad blood between him and the front bench so obviously going to have some fun with this. He and Leadsom absolutely loath each other.
The ERG, SNP, Labour and 2nd vote people are reveling in this craziness.

If renegotiating the backstop would now mean renegotiating back to the original backstop proposal last year, it's a tactic that could gain support in Brussels, after all they originally weren't offering a UK-wide customs arrangement. The obvious downside for May is that she'd leave herself open to the charge of doing what she was previously suggesting 'no British PM could ever sign up to': a customs border down the Irish sea. It would likely go down well with the likes of Liam Fox who want to get on with doing trade deals with the US and elsewhere ASAP, but probably not so much with the majority of her party.

I don't suppose she was being serious in putting it out there. More likely it was a kite floated to spook those unhappy with her current deal.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

If renegotiating the backstop would now mean renegotiating back to the original backstop proposal last year, it's a tactic that could gain support in Brussels, after all they originally weren't offering a UK-wide customs arrangement. The obvious downside for May is that she'd leave herself open to the charge of doing what she was previously suggesting 'no British PM could ever sign up to': a customs border down the Irish sea. It would likely go down well with the likes of Liam Fox who want to get on with doing trade deals with the US and elsewhere ASAP, but probably not so much with the majority of her party.

I don't suppose she was being serious in putting it out there. More likely it was a kite floated to spook those unhappy with her current deal.

That means a harder Brexit essentially, not in Irish interest or the EU27 as a whole either.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

If renegotiating the backstop would now mean renegotiating back to the original backstop proposal last year, it's a tactic that could gain support in Brussels, after all they originally weren't offering a UK-wide customs arrangement. The obvious downside for May is that she'd leave herself open to the charge of doing what she was previously suggesting 'no British PM could ever sign up to': a customs border down the Irish sea. It would likely go down well with the likes of Liam Fox who want to get on with doing trade deals with the US and elsewhere ASAP, but probably not so much with the majority of her party.

I don't suppose she was being serious in putting it out there. More likely it was a kite floated to spook those unhappy with her current deal.

She was being serious!
There is no chance that they are going to agree to the current deal!

LeinsterDub wrote: »

There is a thin line between courage and foolishness .

She seems have more cop-on than Boris

Shelga wrote: »

Why does the speaker of the house always bellow so theatrically like that?? Does my head in. “PRIME MINISTEEEEEEEEER!!!”

Remember we are hearing it with the benefit of microphones and he has to shout to be heard over the noise in the chamber. If there is a quieter debate you will hear him at a more moderate level.

Absolutely mind boggling.

May:

'Backstop ia temporary but we are going to go back to EU to... be reassured that backstop is temporary'

What?

This from May's speech:


So if you want a second referendum to overturn the result of the first, be honest that this risks dividing the country again, when as a House we should be striving to bring it back together.
If you want to remain part of the single market and the customs union, be open that this would require free movement, rule-taking across the economy, and ongoing financial contributions – none of which are in my view compatible with the result of the referendum.
If you want to leave without a deal, be upfront that in the short term, this would cause significant economic damage to parts of our country who can least afford to bear the burden.
I do not believe that any of those courses of action command a majority in this House.


She's spot on. Unfortunately, she neglected to mention that her deal doesn't command a majority in the House either.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Perhaps her hope is that the more time goes by, and the UK faces up to the prospect of a No Deal Brexit, and the EU continue to insist there will be no substantial renegotiation, most will then change their mind.

I think the majority would be far happier to say let N. Ireland go to hell

Few of them give a toss about it!

As to the proceeding so far, anyone have any idea what is happening? They will go back to negotiate a deal that cannot be changed according to her own words last week. They have delayed the vote on the deal to an undetermined date. They could take this all the way down to 28th March if they wanted to.

She could take it down to the wire and dare the MPs to vote for no deal because the amendment that the HoC must have a vote to stop no deal would then not come into effect.

https://twitter.com/HouseofCommons/status/1072139351168114688

https://twitter.com/DavideSands/status/1072139744971239424


This on the Grieve amendment,

https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1072162836846178304

https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1072162964629786626