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 VI

johnnyskeleton

Hi folks, as Theresa May has won the vote of no confidence and we are heading into Brexit day early next year, I thought for the new thread people might give their summary of their views on Brexit to date before we get into the more day to day discussions.

So what do you think about what has happened so far? Who has come off well, who has come off badly?

Where do you think Brexit is going? What is going to be the likely impact on Ireland, Northern Ireland, the rest of the U.K. and the E.U. respectively?

Both this thread and the Mark V thread will remain open simultaneously for the next day or so and Mark V will be closed as it gets closer to the server busting 10,000 mark. Hopefully we can set down a solid foundation now for a top quality thread to come!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

MarkHenderson

Until somebody starts to actually address the issues behind the Brexit vote and why the UK is so divided nothing will change. Brexit may be overturned by the globalists eventually but a political movement will rise up for the majority who wanted out and take control. The actual long term damage done to peoples trust in democracy by ignoring their vote will lead to far further reaching problems down the line.

robinph

Berserker wrote: »

There is no point in requesting an extension. We are leaving with no-deal, so we might as well leave on March 29th on that basis and start to prepare for that. I'm happy to leave on those terms, cut ties with the EU as of now and start preparing in earnest.

But the majority of the country are not happy to leave on those terms. Only a teeny tiny number of MP's would accept no deal and only a small subset of those who voted leave would be happy with no deal. The vast majority of the population want to either remain or leave with a deal and those are both far more acceptable options.

Wanderer78

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Reducing public expenditure to prevent a country from going bust is not inflicting harm on the country. Sure, it might not feel great for the citizens, but it's actively trying to save the country.

there no conclusive evidence to support that this actually works, but mounting evidence that shows, it does more harm than good to a society, but we continue to believe this nonsense, according to political scientist mark blyth, there is in fact no evidence anywhere on this planet that supports this idea is beneficial to a society.

Hurrache

Wanderer78 wrote: »

oh you could argue that one, austerity comes to mind

Which wasn't done for the craic.

FreudianSlippers

Wanderer78 wrote: »

oh you could argue that one, austerity comes to mind

Reducing public expenditure to prevent a country from going bust is not inflicting harm on the country. Sure, it might not feel great for the citizens, but it's actively trying to save the country.

VinLieger

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Most governments aren't actively looking to inflict harm on their own country

Thats the thing about the UK most other governments are elected by a majority of the people, thanks to FPP the UK hasnt elected a government with the majority vote for over 50 years

Wanderer78

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Most governments aren't actively looking to inflict harm on their own country

oh you could argue that one, austerity comes to mind

LeinsterDub

Wanderer78 wrote: »

i wouldnt overly worry about it, most governments are shameful at this stage

Most governments aren't actively looking to inflict harm on their own country

LuckyLloyd

Peregrinus wrote:

What we know about May is that, if she were a superhero, her superpower would be clinging to things with the tenacity of a fossilised limpet.

I apologise for this trivial post, but I feel it important to draw attention to this rather magnificent description!

Berserker

Thomas_IV wrote: »

I'd rather reckon with the UK not requesting an extension but just go full no-deal Brexit by 29th March 2019.

There is no point in requesting an extension. We are leaving with no-deal, so we might as well leave on March 29th on that basis and start to prepare for that. I'm happy to leave on those terms, cut ties with the EU as of now and start preparing in earnest.

Deleted User wrote: »

A new PM won't really help anyone. It's added chaos for the possibility of much of the same from Corbyn.

Corbyn is worse than May. He's got nothing to offer when it comes to Brexit. I reckon he could go before May.

[Deleted User]

Hurrache wrote: »

With British politics the way it is, it can, and will.

The DUP and ERG publicly don't agree with May and openly criticise her, there's obviously a bunch of back benchers who feel the same.

But yet they're willing to put party before country in order to keep Labour out of government and have said they'll support her in a no confidence vote before the meaningful vote even happened What a sad bunch they are.

A new PM won't really help anyone. It's added chaos for the possibility of much of the same from Corbyn.

Wanderer78

kuro68k wrote: »

I feel quite ashamed of my government.

i wouldnt overly worry about it, most governments are shameful at this stage

Penn

Christy42 wrote: »

Maybe an info session on what the EU is should have been done a few years ago for all MPs?

At this point I would not mind them passing a pie in the sky deal. They won't get it but it would at least show that there is something they could agree on.

Now it looks like they told May they hate everything she has done in this and will come in later today and tell her they still think she is the right person for the job. Madness!

Agreed. The 120-odd Tory MPs who voted against May in December and who would have also voted against her deal last night will no doubt vote to keep her in power today. Because they don't want to lose their power. It's not about what happens to the country, it's about what happens to them. If they're still in power, whether it's No Deal or the EU gives some concessions to get a new deal, so long as the Tories are still in government they'll be in the best position to profit off it and shape the post-Brexit Britain in their favour.

You cannot say Theresa May is unfit to lead the party and negotiate a deal, vote against May and what appears to be the best deal she could have negotiated, and then the very next day turn around and vote to keep her in power as the one who has to negotiate a deal. It's insane. It's party politics at its sh*ttiest.

Hurrache

doc_17 wrote: »

I know Tories will vote for her tomorrow. But she’s finished. That madness can’t carry on.

With British politics the way it is, it can, and will.

The DUP and ERG publicly don't agree with May and openly criticise her, there's obviously a bunch of back benchers who feel the same.

But yet they're willing to put party before country in order to keep Labour out of government and have said they'll support her in a no confidence vote before the meaningful vote even happened What a sad bunch they are.

seamus

Christy42 wrote: »

Maybe an info session on what the EU is should have been done a few years ago for all MPs?

They wouldn't listen. It would be accused of being "propaganda" and MPs "outraged" that it was allowed to happen.

UK MPs would start an argument in a phone booth and it has been that way since the start. As murphaph astutely points out above, Westminster doesn't know how to do compromise. One party drags the country along by the nose while the other parties scream and shout at them. The notion of cross-party unity is foreign to it.

prawnsambo

seamus wrote: »

We also have EU elections on 23rd May. If an extension was allowed past that date, the UK would be obliged to take part, and the toxin in the UK could spread to the EU parliament. Or at the very least the poll in the UK would be so farcical that it could undermine the democratic process.

I think in the event that an extension is permitted, it will be for a short period of time; up to the end of April maybe. Just enough time for a general election to happen and for the UK to pick a path and go with it.

This. An extension past the European elections has always seemed a non-runner to me. Apart from the very valid points you make, there'd be the ludicrous situation of UK MEPs sitting in parliament with their country outside the EU. I assume there's some kind of mechanism to remove them, but even the thought of that possibility gives me shudders.

FreudianSlippers

prinzeugen wrote: »

Trump started a trade war with China. The EU wants the same with the UK.

1) Trump is losing his trade war with China. Bigly;
2) The EU does not want a trade war with the UK, hence the deal on the table and the desire for Brexit not to happen.

Not valid as the EU is not a government but likes to think it is.

I'm not sure you know what "government" means, but let's put it this way: European Parliament literally has "parliament" in the name and has legislative authority.

The EU want Ireland in Schengen. We will have a wall if that happens. (UK will get the blame)

Source required, but the EU does not care if Ireland is in Schengen.

Christy42

ednwireland wrote: »

the channel 4 political correspondent called it right this morning on RTE.

the tory brexiteers think they can stop paying into europe, keep all the trade with the eu and go off an negaotiate different deals if they want, and the EU cant have that as what would be the point of the EU everyone would do that if the UK is allowed to do that.

this should, from the start been a cross party committee agreeing some guidelines before triggering article 50.

Maybe an info session on what the EU is should have been done a few years ago for all MPs?

At this point I would not mind them passing a pie in the sky deal. They won't get it but it would at least show that there is something they could agree on.

Now it looks like they told May they hate everything she has done in this and will come in later today and tell her they still think she is the right person for the job. Madness!

FreudianSlippers

prinzeugen wrote: »

There is so much wrong with that comparison. The USA is more democratic than the EU.

Absolute nonsense that you're going to need to explain.

prinzeugen wrote: »

The point I am making is that the other than voting for a MEP, the population has zero say in who does what. The EU parliament is like a communist congress. They dish out the jobs to the boys.

So, the same as the US. Gotcha.

prinzeugen wrote: »

But the high up EU jobs are so diluted to the point its undemocratic. You can vote for a president in the US. You cant in the EU.

The President of the EU is a completely different position to the President of the USA. Looks like you need a basic government/politics book.

Enzokk

murphaph wrote: »

I agree he's useless but he's not the only reason Labour have a big problem....many of their heartlands voted for something that will make their deprived areas even worse and Labour don't know how to get that message across to them without alienating voters.

Almost the entire political system in the UK is broken at present. The only remotely functioning part seems to be Holyrood.

The question is whether those Labour areas that voted to Leave would abandon Labour and vote Conservative. It is up to Labour MPs in those areas to shine the light on why those people that voted leave are struggling. It is not the EU and if their MP votes against the deal and votes to withdraw article 50 then they have to show them why they did it and get the message across that Labour will ensure that immigration will have the rules enforced that the EU has in place and also that they will ensure that there is investment in the areas where people are concerned right now.

ednwireland

the channel 4 political correspondent called it right this morning on RTE.

the tory brexiteers think they can stop paying into europe, keep all the trade with the eu and go off an negaotiate different deals if they want, and the EU cant have that as what would be the point of the EU everyone would do that if the UK is allowed to do that.

this should, from the start been a cross party committee agreeing some guidelines before triggering article 50.

seamus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If the UK request an extension, I know we won't object. Who is most likely to emerge from left field to object in the EU, if anyone?

I don't think it's "left field" so much as a consideration of overall impact. An extension under any circumstances is just an extension of uncertainty. It's not good for markets anywhere.

It suits us because the more time we have to prepare, the better. And the more opportunity we have to get the UK to come to its senses, the better.

It also follows that it suits France, Spain, Netherlands, Belgium & Germany a lot too to have more time to prepare.

Outside of that though, countries have less and less involvement with the UK, and they will want more robust debate on it than a simple "more time to prepare" mantra. They don't have the tinted glasses on, for them it's a matter of weighing up the cost of uncertainty versus the value of further preparation.

My sense is that despite the tough timeline, the EU as a whole is very mature in its preparation for this outcome, and delaying further sees a diminishing return.

We also have EU elections on 23rd May. If an extension was allowed past that date, the UK would be obliged to take part, and the toxin in the UK could spread to the EU parliament. Or at the very least the poll in the UK would be so farcical that it could undermine the democratic process.

I think in the event that an extension is permitted, it will be for a short period of time; up to the end of April maybe. Just enough time for a general election to happen and for the UK to pick a path and go with it.

murphaph

kuro68k wrote: »

I feel quite ashamed of my government.

Bad system -> bad government. The UK electorate was offered a better system (AV) in a referendum and rejected it on a low turnout. That decision is really coming back to bite them in the rear end now. AV would have introduced coalition government as the norm to the UK (as it is in most of Europe, where it conditions politicians to build consensus) and this referendum would never have been possible as it was only an internal Tory spat that needed solving.

Enzokk

Donald Trump wrote: »

Listened to an interview with JRM about importing beef grown with hormones. Which are banned under EU standards but used in Australia. Said he was fine with it and that people could choose for themselves. Complained about EU rules and standards increasing prices for people

That is very much a US way of thinking. Give people 15 choices from unhealthy to healthy and let the people decide what they want. If they want to eat food that makes them obese it is their choice. This type of thinking misses a million other factors like the cost of items and what people can afford to buy, but it seems to placate those who advocate for this system.

Peregrinus wrote: »

This is complete nonsense. I don't know what website you're getting this tripe from, prinzeugen, but you had better stop reading it, because it is lying to you, and you are being made a fool of. I'm guessing you won't like that.

Good post, I have cut it down to just this point. Seems that the poster has just regurgitated the same story that was printed in The Sun and The Daily Mail as well. That would explain a lot of his views and how they are so off base if that is where he is getting his facts from.

I am not opening any links from The Sun but if you google "kids costumes flammable eu" then on the first page is two articles from the The Sun, one from 2017 and one last year, and one from The Daily Mail as well.

Google Search, kids costumes flammable eu

Peregrinus wrote: »

I'm not sure how much of a revelation this is, though. The WA has been cruising to a massive defeat in this vote for months, now. If May were willing to countenance a more palatable alternative, it was very much in her interests to do that before being publicly humiliated, not afterwards. So, if she didn't do it before the vote, there was never much reason for optimism that she would do it after the vote.

What we know about May is that, if she were a superhero, her superpower would be clinging to things with the tenacity of a fossilised limpet. There's general agreeement that this WA is pretty much the only one possible give, (a) the EU's strategic advantage in negotiations, (b) the EU's priorities, and (c) May's red lines. Only one of these is within May's control but, happily for her, the EU has long made it clear that if the red lines shift, all sorts of things become possible in the WA that are currently impossible. Unhappily for May shifting the red lines requires her to let go of the position she has adopted, and that's the precise opposite of what she is good at doing.

So it seems to me the options are:

1. May shifts her red lines, which is difficult and scary for her personally, and also not without political risk (though, N.B., her own party can't challenge her leadership before next December).

2. May resigns, and allows in another leader who will shift the red lines. This also involves May letting go, in this case of her office rathe than her political position, but that's equally difficult for her. Shifted red lines allows the WA to be negotiated but, NB, only to make it softer, not harder.

3. No-deal Brexit.

4. No Brexit.

As I've said before, options like "general election" or "second referendum" are just different mechanisms for choosing between the same basic options. They don't open up new possibilities that aren't in this list.

I think it is becoming clear that the only way she was going to get a deal through parliament, especially after her disastrous GE in 2017, was to work with the other parties to get a cross party consensus and deal that can get through parliament. This would have meant cutting off the right of her party and the extreme left of the Labour party but at least she would have done what she set out by enacting Brexit.

https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1085453695205212160

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't understand why people are a) mad at Corbyn and b) wondering what he is going to do.

He is implementing Labour policy as set out at Conference in September.

He will table a motion of No Confidence, and when he loses, call for a new referendum.

It does seem that the strategy, at least last night, for Labour was to call numerous no-confidence votes in the government. They can call as many as they like but that seems clearly like Corbyn is subverting the voice of those he said he would craft Labour policy. He is almost as bad as May in that he will say and do what he wants. UK politics are devoid of strong leaders right at the point where we need them to be strong.

Jeremy Corbyn offers little hope for people's vote campaigners

Jeremy Corbyn has offered no encouragement to supporters of a second EU referendum after he called for a vote of no confidence in Theresa May’s government and an immediate general election.

The Labour leader did not refer to a second referendum in his two Brexit speeches on Tuesday evening, and risked antagonising the party’s pro-remain wing, some of whom want him to back another poll by the end of the week.

In his first, longer speech at the end of the full Brexit debate, Corbyn said: “Labour believes that a general election would be the best outcome for the country if this deal is rejected tonight.”

James O'Brien has said that Brexit has revealed that the emperor has no clothes when it comes to the likes of Farage, Johnson and JRM in that what they have promised the people is so obviously not true. For Labour voters that is also becoming true of Corbyn.

Peregrinus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If the UK request an extension, I know we won't object. Who is most likely to emerge from left field to object in the EU, if anyone?

Well Macron, for one. He's very down on any notion of extending A50.

But he might not be the only one. You describe opposition to extension as "left field" but, actually, it entirely depends on what an extension is for. If the UK looks for an extension so that they can continue to faff about, being in denial of the issues, refusing to engage and generally failing to make difficult choices, opposition to an extension will be a pretty mainstream position in the EU. The only realistic chance of an extension is:

- if it's an extension to do something definite; and

- if that something is going to lead to a choice being made; and

- if that choice is going to be something other than a no-deal crash-out.

So, for example, an extension to accommodate a referendum offering a choice between May's deal and Remain would very likely be granted. An extension to attempt to renegotiate the deal on the basis of a significant change by the UK in its red lines would possibly be granted - it depends on the change in the UK red lines. An extension to allow the UK to have a bit of think about things in general would almost certainly not be granted. An extension to allow the UK to make better preparations for a no-deal Brexit would definitely not be granted.

kuro68k

I feel quite ashamed of my government.

Thomas_IV

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If the UK request an extension, I know we won't object. Who is most likely to emerge from left field to object in the EU, if anyone?

I'd rather reckon with the UK not requesting an extension but just go full no-deal Brexit by 29th March 2019.

mrbrianj

Yes, some of the soundings yesterday were baffling.

"there is a majority in the HoC for leaving with a deal" - not on that result

"Parliament wont leave without a deal"- but what deal and who is going to agree to it?

"its time for the German car manufacturers to step and tell Angela Merkel to sort this out" - pure comic gold!

Flipped around several TV channels for the different views - when you put the different sides ideas together its clear they really are in a mess, and there is no where for reason or direction to come from.

Wanderer78

Fr Tod Umptious wrote:

Labour are a mess right now and Corbyn is to blame for that mess.

Not necessarily true, labours disarray has been a long time in the making, particularly since the Blair era, there's nothing like abandoning your Base to unsteady the ship

Thomas_IV

seamus wrote: »

I think most clearly illustrated yesterday by the commentary from a number of MPs that, "Parliament has had their say, now the EU needs to come up with something else".

They still don't get that the EU is not subservient to the UK parliament and that the UK is not calling the shots here.

They clearly believe that the EU "will not allow" a no-deal Brexit to happen. This is a guy in a mini playing chicken with a train.

I think that not less of the diehard no-deal Brexiteers know quite well that the EU is almost ready to go for a no-deal Brexit and the worst thing in this is that the former really want that to happen. Either they calculate with the consequences and don't give a damn or they are deliberately want to push the UK off the cliff. I think that it is both cos nobody really can be that stupid to think that after rejecting this deal there will be a better deal despite the EU telling the Brits for many times that is this or nothing.

No doubt that the turmoil this no-deal Brexit will bring unto the EU 27 will have some negative effects, but the negative effects it'll have for the UK and its people I would estimate to be far worse. The Brits will have to pay dearly for this folly one way or another.

An extension of the exit date into July 2019 is meaningless unless there is a BrexitRef2 cos a snap GE won't solve this Brexit problem and it certainly won't bring Corbyn into No 10 due to his refusal to back up a peoples vote which will alienate Labour voters and party members who already signalled him more than once that they want to have a BrexitRef2.