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

lawred2

Leroy42 wrote: »

The deal already has a UK wide CU does it not?

That's what I thought

Strazdas

Synode wrote: »

RTE News saying they're considering staying in the Customs Union to remove the need for a backstop (I think, was only half listening). Does this sound realistic and if so would the EU find it acceptable?

No, I saw the RTE 9pm bulletin. Sean Whelan was suggesting no breakthrough, just that May is concentrating on keeping the ERG and DUP onside and there mightn't even be a 'Plan B'......just this strategy of appeasing the Brexiteers.

Leroy42

Synode wrote: »

RTE News saying they're considering staying in the Customs Union to remove the need for a backstop (I think, was only half listening). Does this sound realistic and if so would the EU find it acceptable?

The deal already has a UK wide CU does it not?

LeinsterDub

Synode wrote: »

RTE News saying they're considering staying in the Customs Union to remove the need for a backstop (I think, was only half listening). Does this sound realistic and if so would the EU find it acceptable?

Staying in the customs union would cost billions I can't see it getting support from the HoC. Also the customs union wouldn't be enough to avoid a hard border.

Nody

Synode wrote: »

RTE News saying they're considering staying in the Customs Union to remove the need for a backstop (I think, was only half listening). Does this sound realistic and if so would the EU find it acceptable?

For UK; sure. For NI? Not enough because without being in SM and CU there are extensive border controls (see Turkey for example).

Synode

RTE News saying they're considering staying in the Customs Union to remove the need for a backstop (I think, was only half listening). Does this sound realistic and if so would the EU find it acceptable?

Akrasia

Hurrache wrote: »

So yeah, Plan B is now official. So much for her seaking cross party consensus, it's still about staying in power.
https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1087068937941143554?s=19[;url}]

So crashing out it is then.

This woman is infuriating. You cant keep trying exactly the same thing over and over expecting different results

J Mysterio

Lemming wrote: »

So, the UK to not budge (i.e. give nothing) and for the EU to do all the moving (again), in the hope that something exposes itself to be exploited by the UK government.

Why, or how, did anyone consider Raab to be a political titan? Unless the Tory party is that incestuous that he is considered the cream of the crop, I fail to see how anyone could put him on a pedestal and not question their own intelligence.

The man who - while Brexit secretary - didnt realise how important trade with the EU was.

Nody

tuxy wrote: »

So Eu would no give her any legal guarantee on the time frame of the backstop so she can't honestly believe they would remove it altogether.

Just more time wasting.Remain as PM for yet another day and let tomorrow be tomorrow's problem.

Fixed that for you from May's perspective. To date at every single point, every single decision, every single question of leadership there has only, and will only, be one thing which matters. What makes May remain as PM for another day? Nothing else has or will ever matter beyond that no matter what lofty alternatives people have given May over the years.

Charles Babbage

RobMc59 wrote: »

There is no incentive for NI to want to become part of the Republic,it is dearer to live in the Republic-car tax,stamp duty,NHS just to name a few.

But not mentioning property tax, diesel, or things that are cheaper.

But of course it is dearer, people earn 40% more.

tuxy

So Eu would no give her any legal guarantee on the time frame of the backstop so she can't honestly believe they would remove it altogether.

Just more time wasting.

Hurrache

So yeah, Plan B is now official. So much for her seaking cross party consensus, it's still about staying in power.
https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1087068937941143554?s=19[;url}]

20silkcut

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Constitutionally, Prince Charles can do nothing.

However, a declaration by the Queen would carry a lot of weight. But as she is supposed to favour leaving her words would probably be along the lines of
You voted for a Referendum to be held to decide whether to leave the EU or to remain. The voters chose to leave and so the country is obligated to leave. If any legislation is sent to me which is designed to break your promise I will refuse to give my assent. Now do what you bound yourself to do without further delay.

Alternatively, she could prorogue Parliament.

I doubt the queen would be in favour of Brexit or at least no deal brexit.
Does she still meet Theresa May every week. She would likely be on the same page as her.
Gas to think that weekly meeting with the PM goes all the way back to Churchill with her.

Capt'n Midnight

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

In fairness, they're not in government in Holyrood.

I'm not really sure how Ruth Davidson can countenance being a Tory in the current situation they're in to be honest. That said, both major parties are opposed to IndyRef2. Labour need the Scottish votes if the SNP slip up any further while no Tory wants to preside over the breakup of the United Kingdom despite Brexit being highly likely to be the catalyst for just that.

In fairness though, the DUP haven't been in government in Stormont for a wee while either.

The Scottish Tories should be making hay while the sun shines. If there's a Tory majority in the next election they can be safely be ignored. but for now they can pull the plug on May anytime. So they should be getting concessions to minimise the effects of Brexit on Scotland and try to head off indyref2.

Otherwise they are just toadies of an English party.

And not so long ago Ruth was looking like a serious contender for party leader. Or maybe she's just earning her place.

Nody

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Have the Scottish Conservatives delivered anything for Scotland since the election apart from Ruth's baby ?

May needs them. And has practically ignored them while fawning to the DUP and "ERG". The DUP have extracted money and concessions but the Scottish Tory Party have done what exactly ?

If there is a GE or Indyref2 they could be toast.

Far from an expert but from what I've seen their promise was basically Brexit = tons of new fishing rights for you guys which won them votes. The problem is of course that Brexit will do sod all of that exactly as the NHS bus and the existing problems will not be fixed. Hence I'd expect them to lose significant number of their seats in the next election again but May don't care because it's not an issue today.

ancapailldorcha

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Have the Scottish Conservatives delivered anything for Scotland since the election apart from Ruth's baby ?

May needs them. And has practically ignored them while fawning to the DUP and "ERG". The DUP have extracted money and concessions but the Scottish Tory Party have done what exactly ?

If there is a GE or Indyref2 they could be toast.

In fairness, they're not in government in Holyrood.

I'm not really sure how Ruth Davidson can countenance being a Tory in the current situation they're in to be honest. That said, both major parties are opposed to IndyRef2. Labour need the Scottish votes if the SNP slip up any further while no Tory wants to preside over the breakup of the United Kingdom despite Brexit being highly likely to be the catalyst for just that.

Capt'n Midnight

Have the Scottish Conservatives delivered anything for Scotland since the election apart from Ruth's baby ?

May needs them. And has practically ignored them while fawning to the DUP and "ERG". The DUP have extracted money and concessions but the Scottish Tory Party have done what exactly ?

If there is a GE or Indyref2 they could be toast.

ancapailldorcha

Below standard posts deleted.

Mr.Wemmick

The breadth of their ignorance is really laid bare by Brexit. We know, those of us who spend a lot of time in the UK, that years of constantly dismantling essential services across communities and relentless austerity has weakened the country on so many levels. Weak knowledge and skills with poor standards in education over time results in much of the claptrap we hear from many MPs about how things will and should work. It’d be rather laughable if it wasn’t so tragic.

Clearly they can’t handle brexit, not in any way, shape or form.

One word: undeliverable. How long this circus will go on for is anyone’s guess.

Akrasia

Raab claiming that a private members bill that binds the government is 'undemocratic' is pathetic given that the government are only in power because they used a billion pounds of public money to bribe the DUP into signing a confidence and supply agreement.

judeboy101

EdgeCase wrote: »

I wonder if the Queen still has authority to use the Tower... ?

I'm actually starting to think she needs to make a speech and actually shame them into coming up with a sensible solution.

I'm not a fan of the concept of monarchy but someone needs to snap them back to pragmatism. It's something I think a presidential address might be used for here if something similarly crazy were to happen, but I have my doubts that the Queen has the backbone to actually stand up and overstep the line a bit and actually call for some sanity. She's just far too constitutionally polite.

All she needs to do is stand up and say that the House of Commons needs to start thinking about the future of the country and not narrow mindedly thinking only of their political parties and careers.

There's been no big picture leadership from within the House, and it would be a useful function for her to play. I just don't see it happening though as she is really only a highly overpaid figurehead / mascot really. This crisis is underlining that.

Considering her husband got away with a road traffic offence (driving no seat belt on public road) while Joe public would have a fine, doesn't give her much street cred the moment.

LeinsterDub

Bit cynical wrote: »

I do think there is a willingness for a deal in the UK. Yes, I think a request by TM would be refused but remember that TM is most likely to be gone by the time any extension is called for.

An extension would give both sides an opportunity to completely rethink their approach.

The EU aren't going to change their approach. The EU have been extremely open with the UK. Do you recall the chart with all the options available to the UK and what it would mean

road_high

Thargor wrote: »

What a complete and utter joke this lad is:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1086921072333725696

Funny, wasn’t he the Brexit Minister for about 5 days there recently? It’s amazing when he was there he didn't manage to get all he wanted then.

Capt'n Midnight

Bit cynical wrote: »

I do think there is a willingness for a deal in the UK. Yes, I think a request by TM would be refused but remember that TM is most likely to be gone by the time any extension is called for.

An extension would give both sides an opportunity to completely rethink their approach.

When you say both sides do you mean

UK vs EU

or within the government - Tory vs DUP

or Leave vs Remain

or Tory vs Tory

or Labour vs Labour

And of all of those the EU are going by their initial reply to Article 50 and negotiating rules published at the time and have shown some compromises with allowing special status for NI, and allowing the full country to stay in the CU during the withdrawal phase where the real negotiations will begin.

Remember too that while May may feel bound by an promise on a limited backstop her successors probably won't. Which is why the backstop can't be time limited. Also May has promised to step down at the next election so not a lot of time and besides Labour would like to have a GE tomorrow.

I can easily imagine May's successor
If you had a contract, it was with him. And it died with him.
- Pappagallo , Mad Max 2

Sam Russell

Bit cynical wrote: »

I don't think Loyalists are necessarily fans of the UK Queen as a person, so her personal opinions would carry little weight, but rather they are loyal, in their view, to the institution of the UK monarchy. In any case, the convention is for the Queen not to voice political opinions.

It was often said that Loyalists were more loyal to the half-crown than the Crown.

Sam Russell

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Constitutionally, Prince Charles can do nothing.

I never suggested he would have a constitutional backing for any opinion expressed, just that it would carry weight with the popular press, but not necessarily be popular with that press.

He could express a wish that TM's deal would be the best that can be achieved, and should be approved by parliament.

Capt'n Midnight

Hurrache wrote: »

A bit of movement from the EU today towards a solution to break the UK impasse. Not sure anyone will be left alive afterwards though.
https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1086975258069008385?s=19

He's not to first to suggest that. Must have been watching UK television.

Can't remember which program but someone said to lock them up like choosing a pope and wait for the white smoke.

Bit cynical

Sam Russell wrote: »

The Queen never admonished Loyalists from forcing their way down the 'Queen's Highway' when it was clearly not wanted and was a source of grave civil unrest. I'm sure a few words from her would have made those Loyalists toe her line and desist from such unwanted action in her name. But she never did.

I don't think Loyalists are necessarily fans of the UK Queen as a person, so her personal opinions would carry little weight, but rather they are loyal, in their view, to the institution of the UK monarchy. In any case, the convention is for the Queen not to voice political opinions.

ThePanjandrum

Sam Russell wrote: »

Actually, Prince Charles could do that. He has been inappropriately out-spoken in the past, and is not so restrained constitutionally as the Monarch, but presumably will be the monarch one day and so his words would carry some weight.

Constitutionally, Prince Charles can do nothing.

However, a declaration by the Queen would carry a lot of weight. But as she is supposed to favour leaving her words would probably be along the lines of

You voted for a Referendum to be held to decide whether to leave the EU or to remain. The voters chose to leave and so the country is obligated to leave. If any legislation is sent to me which is designed to break your promise I will refuse to give my assent. Now do what you bound yourself to do without further delay.

Alternatively, she could prorogue Parliament.

Thargor

What a complete and utter joke this lad is:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1086921072333725696