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

Paranoid Bob

Enzokk wrote: »

The EU has rejected May asking for new negotiations and we have as well it seems.

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1090355988153155584

According to Laura Kuenssberg, "Irish govt reaction - 'The Withdrawal Agreement is not open for re-negotiation'"

So May will go back to Brussels to get nothing next week. In the mean time we are then one week closer to Brexit day and even if she gets to somehow get her deal passed with some magic dust, how will they have enough time to get it passed through parliament to make it law in the UK? They will need to ask for an extension of article 50 and I suppose the EU will grant it to them to get it passed.

I think that is very disappointing and there is a much better response to the Brady amendment.

The Irish government and EU should welcome the passing of that amendment with enthusiasm, and absolutely guarantee that once alternative arrangements to prevent a hard border are agreed then the backstop will not apply.

That was always the plan anyway ...

FrancieBrady

Verhofstadt having none of it either
https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1090364759982198789

Imreoir2

This kind of shyte is why we need a backstop.

Hurrache

Watching Prime Time I only now realise the Malthouse Compromise is named after an MP and not a restaurant or pub it was devised in.

Flex

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Next phase of the blame game has begun. May goes to Brussels with big smiles and warm words, pledging to battle for the British people.

They remind her - for the 1,000th time - that the backstop is not up for negotiation.

She returns to the UK and tells the country that Brussels has been intransigent and unreasonable. She then appeals to the Blitz spirit, stiff upper lip mentality that they are known for around the world.

Her country will be divided, the GFA will be in tatters, and she'll still have to return to the negotiating table only with a weaker hand, but on the plus side the Tories won't be so cross with her, the media will stop drawing funny pictures of her, and the DUP will pat her on the back for standing up to the bullies.

This is the woman that threw a strop at the suggestion she was 'nebulous'. To call her that is to be generous. She's criminally negligent.

This is exactly whats going to happen. She has been so disingenuous and disgusting carrying on with this pretence knowing beforehand that the EU will not open renegotiations. She will head to Brussels with this new 'mandate', claim the UK wanted to work out a solution and mutually beneficial agreement, blah blah blah, be rebuffed for wasting everyones time and return laying absolutely all of the blame on the EU and Ireland. "We wanted to talk and negotiate in good faith, but the EU being bullys and thinking they could steam roll us, wouldnt talk", it will be along those lines.

This has all been caused by the snap election she called resulting in her needing the DUP. It was they who caused the backstop to be applied to the entire UK, instead of just Northern Ireland (which would have been an incredible outcome for Northern Ireland as it originally stood). And perhaps its just frustration at the impending impact to Ireland as a result of Brexit, but I honestly believe the reason so many in the British Parliament cant stomach the backstop as it is now is because they view it as Ireland, for the first time, not being steamrolled in the history of the relationship of Ireland and Great Britain.

I remember when all of this started 2 years ago and people were saying how ill prepared and aimless the UK position was, but thinking in the end it would be fine. I honestly cant believe the series of events the UK government has caused and carried out during this. Staggering.

And as an aside, Ian Blackford's speech at the end of the debate was spot on.

An Ciarraioch

Not a numerically significant group, but European Greens press release:

http://twitter.com/europeangreens/status/1090357435083210752

Stacksofwacks

Gintonious wrote: »

Makes a good point, if they leave on the whole WTO garbage, who would want to try and deal with a shower like this?

Us poor sods. Only thing they are good for is bullying their neighbours.

Professor Moriarty

tuxy wrote: »

What would happen if they just refereed to each other as gentleman/woman and not the right honorable/the honorable gengleman/woman?

Who gives a crap what they call themselves. Sir, Lord, Dame, Honorable, whatever. They're just human beings. No better or worse than anyone else. A load of manure that only works if you buy into their rubbish.

Mr.Nice Guy

They sacrificed truth long ago. They know the media won't hold them to account so they'll say anything they want to drag it all out. That's their ultimate plan, to play for time.

https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1090193363649871872

Enzokk

devnull wrote: »

Unbelievable lines from Graham Brady on Sky News now, latest oddball claim from the Brexiteers seems to be that the EU have said that the backstop will only be used for a few weeks or a couple of months so there is no reason to not have an end time.

Also suggesting that the need for a backstop wasn't flagged up until late in the day and that the situation now will focus a few minds in the EU as to what is needed to get a deal over the line.

So who's fault is it that they weren't aware that the border will be an issue? On the first day they were told that three things will need to be sorted, finances and citizen rights and the Irish border. Did they think it was included for laughs and giggles?

lawred2

Hurrache wrote: »

Reaction from the US was discussed earlier today on this thread. First one I've seen is in
https://twitter.com/RepBrendanBoyle/status/1090351323550236675?s=19

We might see the Irish American lobby come into play in the next few months..

Remember the US was going to be the land of milk and honey for these Brexiteers

Frank Bullitt

Hurrache wrote: »

Reaction from the US was discussed earlier today on this thread. First one I've seen is in
https://twitter.com/RepBrendanBoyle/status/1090351323550236675?s=19

Makes a good point, if they leave on the whole WTO garbage, who would want to try and deal with a shower like this?

tuxy

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Look up maritime insurance contracts.

Words have meanings honed by hundreds of years and many trips to the law courts. Like Flotsam and Jetsam.

If it works it's OK

What would happen if they just refereed to each other as gentleman/woman and not the right honorable/the honorable gengleman/woman?

devnull

Unbelievable lines from Graham Brady on Sky News now, latest oddball claim from the Brexiteers seems to be that the EU have said that the backstop will only be used for a few weeks or a couple of months so there is no reason to not have an end time.

Also suggesting that the need for a backstop wasn't flagged up until late in the day and that the situation now will focus a few minds in the EU as to what is needed to get a deal over the line.

SimonTemplar

The British institutions loves their pomp and circumstance. Of all the things wrong with British politics today, pomp and circumstance is at the end of the list.

Hurrache

Reaction from the US was discussed earlier today on this thread. First one I've seen is in
https://twitter.com/RepBrendanBoyle/status/1090351323550236675?s=19

Capt'n Midnight

hotmail.com wrote: »

The Medieval practices within the so called debates is completely ridiculous. Referring to each as the Right honourable etc. Is this democracy?

Look up maritime insurance contracts.

Words have meanings honed by hundreds of years and many trips to the law courts. Like Flotsam and Jetsam.

If it works it's OK

Enzokk

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Adam Boulton very upbeat about concessions from the EU but not on the legally binding Withdrawal Agreement. Surely the Backstop is part of the agreement, if it goes the whole thing goes?

They will only get changes to the political declaration which is not a legal document. This is ridiculous now, May has spurned the chance she had to get a deal through with cross party support to try and keep her party united. While she is doing this she is increasing the likelihood of a no-deal Brexit.

Joe_ Public

Enzokk wrote: »

The EU has rejected May asking for new negotiations and we have as well it seems.

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1090355988153155584

According to Laura Kuenssberg, "Irish govt reaction - 'The Withdrawal Agreement is not open for re-negotiation'"

So May will go back to Brussels to get nothing next week. In the mean time we are then one week closer to Brexit day and even if she gets to somehow get her deal passed with some magic dust, how will they have enough time to get it passed through parliament to make it law in the UK? They will need to ask for an extension of article 50 and I suppose the EU will grant it to them to get it passed.

Sounds like the most likely course of events to me. Bit of can kicking to be done yet.

Hurrache

At last someone on UK TV has said that the UK government has just shown why there's even more need for a backstop, Dr Hannah White from the Institute of Government on Sky News.

fash

Hurrache wrote: »

They're using it to say to the EU that they have a mandate for a deal without the backstop, therefore give it to us.

Really should counter with "time limit to backstop for GB" - as an appendix to WA, no need to change WA. Get her to go back to WM with that.

[Deleted User]

Irish Government response:

The withdrawal agreement is not open for renegotiation. The agreement is a carefully negotiated compromise, which balances the UK position on customs and the single market with avoiding a hard border and protecting the integrity of the EU customs union and single market. The best way to ensure an orderly withdrawal is to ratify this agreement.

We have consistently said that we want the closest possible future relationship between the EU and the UK. A change in the UK red lines could lead to a change in the political declaration on the framework for the future relationship, and a better overall outcome. We will continue our preparations for all outcomes, including for a no-deal scenario.

Sensible all round I think.

J Mysterio

Christy42 wrote: »

They can also take a run and jump about "alternative" ideas to stop the border. They have none, it is two months out. Therefore there needs to be a backstop if we are serious about ensuring we don't return to violence in Northern Ireland.

On top of how brazen they are about setting the agenda re negotiations is that they are putting this to the EU again. 'We want alternative arrangements - what you got for us?'.

Stacksofwacks

Cluelessness bordering on malice

FrancieBrady

Adam Boulton very upbeat about concessions from the EU but not on the legally binding Withdrawal Agreement. Surely the Backstop is part of the agreement, if it goes the whole thing goes?

Enzokk

The EU has rejected May asking for new negotiations and we have as well it seems.

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1090355988153155584

According to Laura Kuenssberg, "Irish govt reaction - 'The Withdrawal Agreement is not open for re-negotiation'"

So May will go back to Brussels to get nothing next week. In the mean time we are then one week closer to Brexit day and even if she gets to somehow get her deal passed with some magic dust, how will they have enough time to get it passed through parliament to make it law in the UK? They will need to ask for an extension of article 50 and I suppose the EU will grant it to them to get it passed.

J Mysterio

This headline says it all really

MPs vote to bin backstop - but spurn chances to take control and avert no deal

Just unbelievable to have voted down Cooper and Grieve amendments and pass Brady. This lot are absolutely deluded. Hard Brexit it is.

Christy42

eagle eye wrote: »

You are in for a big shock in the wake of innocent people getting killed. Minds will change very quickly if that happens.

The Brady amendment is a hard border in the north. Therefore if we don't want that and a trip back to paramilitary action on this island we have to oppose it. What is worse is that it would be the Irish government agreeing to a hard border.

They can also take a run and jump about "alternative" ideas to stop the border. They have none, it is two months out. Therefore there needs to be a backstop if we are serious about ensuring we don't return to violence in Northern Ireland.

Enzokk

hotmail.com wrote: »

The Medieval practices within the so called debates is completely ridiculous. Referring to each as the Right honourable etc. Is this democracy?

That is for members who is part of the Privy Council.

Privy Council of the UK

Hurrache

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I know that some amendments were binding and some weren't. Was the Brady amendment binding on the government ?

They're using it to say to the EU that they have a mandate for a deal without the backstop, therefore give it to us.