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

redcup342

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Irish Government,
'' no room to move on '' back stop'' it's in deal and deal is not getting reopened, its there to avoid a hard border''

EU
'' Not reopening Brexit deal, it was agreed and signed by all parties, back stop remains to avoid hard border''

But how on earth can they both say this when a No Deal leads to a hard border.
Seems they have no choice, reopen Brexit deal, or it's no deal and a hard border !
Answer is obvious,, reopen deal and work back stop out so that everyone is happy, no one wants a hard border so it can't be difficult to agree something when all parties are on same page and want the same thing.

The Deal was agreed already, the issue is in the UK Government following through on the Deal they agreed to already.

They can extend Article 50 (as you said the EU doesn't want a Hard Brexit so it's likely a vote would go through)

That fact that they want a time limit on the backstop and this whole mess with how they've handled the whole negotiation would just mean we are kicking the can down the road

The UK is the equivalent of a basket case at this point, they don't know what they want and are dealing in ultimatums (agree to our deal or there will be a hard brexit)

If the EU goes back and reopens the already AGREED deal, whats to stop the UK negotiating for more concessions ?

charlie14

J Mysterio wrote: »

The Brexit ref was advisory...

I wonder just how many now wish the had done with the advisory Brexit referendum what they are going to do with the Brady referendum. Ignore it.

briany

Just had a quick look at the Brexit odds on PP. Still seems to be a bit of confidence that there won't be a no-deal and/or there will be a second referendum. Are these odds out of date, good value, or are the bookies just taking into consideration things that I am not, because right now I'm having a hard time seeing how no-deal is avoidable.

Leroy42

So lets play this out.

TM goes to the EU and convinces them to reopen the WA, EU doing so to try to avoid hard Brexit as the UK are incapable.
EU agree to remove the backstop but agree that NI should remain in the EU until at least a unification ref is undertaken in NI.
The UK will remain in The EU during this time as well, the UK limiting it to no later than mid 2021 to remain in the transition.

So TM has removed the backstop so clearly this will pass the Hoc. Everybody wins.

Macy0161

Watching newsnight... Delusional is the word for all brexiters, and Emily Maitlis (and several other BBC reporters/ correspondents over the evening).

J Mysterio

charlie14 wrote: »

Isn`t the Brady amendment practically irrelevant as it is only advisory, not binding ?

The Brexit ref was advisory...

charlie14

Paranoid Bob wrote: »

Yes. If, as the Brady amendment proposes, they want to replace the backstop with alternative arrangements then they will need to get those alternatives agreed.

So how is that going to be possible under this none binding Brady amendment when exactly the same has already been rejected by the hoc`s ?

Paranoid Bob

prawnsambo wrote: »

That's already in the agreement. What do you think "Unless and until" was all about?

That's my point. The whole Brady amendment is entirely consistent with the Withdrawal Agreement as-is. That's why I say that we should enthusiastically embrace it. It gives May and the UK parliament something to crow about while giving up nothing at all.

brooke 2

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?

The whole thing looks bizarre. Positively primitive. :mad:

Paranoid Bob

charlie14 wrote: »

For that to occur then will NI not have to remain in the CU until such alternative arrangements are in place and are acceptable to the EU would it not ?

Yes. If, as the Brady amendment proposes, they want to replace the backstop with alternative arrangements then they will need to get those alternatives agreed.

prawnsambo

Paranoid Bob wrote: »

Absolutely. The intent was to show the EU that the deal could be agreed if this change was made as a way of giving May a mandate to get the change and give the EU reason to give way.
The thing is that the EU can accept this change without giving away anything. They can agree, in a legally binding addendum, that the backstop will not be applied once the alternative arrangements are in place. This gives Brady and the UK parliament exactly what they asked for while giving away nothing at all.

That's already in the agreement. What do you think "Unless and until" was all about?

hotmail.com

The Daily Mail is telling it's readers that the vote was a Triumph!

Eh ok. I think I'm right in saying that the Mail supported the withdrawal agreement.

charlie14

Paranoid Bob wrote: »

Absolutely. The intent was to show the EU that the deal could be agreed if this change was made as a way of giving May a mandate to get the change and give the EU reason to give way.
The thing is that the EU can accept this change without giving away anything. They can agree, in a legally binding addendum, that the backstop will not be applied once the alternative arrangements are in place. This gives Brady and the UK parliament exactly what they asked for while giving away nothing at all.

For that to occur then will NI not have to remain in the CU until such alternative arrangements are in place and are acceptable to the EU would it not ?

FrancieBrady

ARNOLD J RIMMER wrote: »

It was over to the EU for 10min . Now back to the UK for 59 days

I counted 4 official statements from the EU today that today in parliament was a massive waste of everyone's time. Tusk answered the vote within 2 minutes - not 10.

Professor Moriarty

Today Juncker, Coveney, Macron and Tusk have said the agreement won't be renegotiated and I'm listening to a Tory minister talking about renegotiating the deal. Hmmm who to believe? So hard...

ARNOLD J RIMMER

downcow wrote: »

Just in and tried to quickly catch up on WM voting. Looks like a better night than I honestly expected.
Now at last it’s over to the EU. I will be very surprised if their position does not shift a little to meet the UK. Not for a while mind. I reckon it could still be a week or two before they begin to move publicly

It was over to the EU for 10min . Now back to the UK for 59 days

Paranoid Bob

charlie14 wrote: »

Isn`t the Brady amendment practically irrelevant as it is only advisory, not binding ?

Absolutely. The intent was to show the EU that the deal could be agreed if this change was made as a way of giving May a mandate to get the change and give the EU reason to give way.
The thing is that the EU can accept this change without giving away anything. They can agree, in a legally binding addendum, that the backstop will not be applied once the alternative arrangements are in place. This gives Brady and the UK parliament exactly what they asked for while giving away nothing at all.

downcow

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Irish Government,
'' no room to move on '' back stop'' it's in deal and deal is not getting reopened, its there to avoid a hard border''

EU
'' Not reopening Brexit deal, it was agreed and signed by all parties, back stop remains to avoid hard border''

But how on earth can they both say this when a No Deal leads to a hard border.
Seems they have no choice, reopen Brexit deal, or it's no deal and a hard border !
Answer is obvious,, reopen deal and work back stop out so that everyone is happy, no one wants a hard border so it can't be difficult to agree something when all parties are on same page and want the same thing.

Excellently put. Common sense

VinLieger

downcow wrote: »

There’s no comparison. Both parties said they would abide by what the people said in advisory referendum. No one has said that about the advisory vote tonight. They can’t commit to both as they are opposed to each other.

The same politicians also said before the referendum that no deal was not a possibility and that a second referendum on the deal thats negotiated would make sense.

Its funny the cognitive dissonace you employ to be able to ignore the things politicians have said that you disagree with or dont want to remember

Larbre34

Let them bedamned. Once they've had their civil war and the UK has ceased to exist in its current form, those nations that wish to can come back and join the Union with a clean sheet.

briany

View wrote: »

Except that doesn’t work. EU and WTO rules require border checks etc etc which means a hard border on every other one in the world (bar ones with formal customs union arrangements). If we are saying no to a hard border, we are saying no to our honouring the commitments of our EU membership. We are in real danger of damaging our EU membership (and becoming a half-in/half-out member) and being seen as a country utterly dependent on Brexit Britain.

If Ireland is going to get the same result whether pushing for a backstop or accepting border controls, then we may as well go with the option that is at least being seen to lean towards Irish interests, tries to safeguard the Peace Process and doesn't constitute a major U-turn. The GFA and Brexit aren't compatible, and there's no really great outcome for Ireland, save Britain cancelling the thing altogether, and that's something which is looking more and more and more unlikely.

blackcard

downcow wrote: »

Just in and tried to quickly catch up on WM voting. Looks like a better night than I honestly expected.
Now at last it’s over to the EU. I will be very surprised if their position does not shift a little to meet the UK. Not for a while mind. I reckon it could still be a week or two before they begin to move publicly

It is already back to the UK, Tusk has rejected any change to the agreement

hotmail.com

blanch152 wrote: »

Which British MP would you take instead of her?

The mess of Brexit doesn't stop us from criticising our own lot every now and then. Obviously Helen has a lot of fans here.

BorneTobyWilde

Irish Government,
'' no room to move on '' back stop'' it's in deal and deal is not getting reopened, its there to avoid a hard border''

EU
'' Not reopening Brexit deal, it was agreed and signed by all parties, back stop remains to avoid hard border''

But how on earth can they both say this when a No Deal leads to a hard border.
Seems they have no choice, reopen Brexit deal, or it's no deal and a hard border !
Answer is obvious,, reopen deal and work back stop out so that everyone is happy, no one wants a hard border so it can't be difficult to agree something when all parties are on same page and want the same thing.

bob mcbob

The Guardian sums up tonight perfectly.

A pyrrhic success built on fantasy.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/29/the-guardian-view-on-theresa-mays-victory-a-pyrrhic-success-built-on-fantasy

Scott Tenorman

This section from the Ian Dunt piece quoted above sum up May perfectly

it was typical May tactics. She prioritised vague promises over content. She sabotaged something - anything - in order to fight another day. She made promises she could not keep on issues she knew to be false. Once again, she said anything, anything at all, to survive just a little longer.

All she cares about is clinging on. Leadership? Don't make me laugh!

downcow

Just in and tried to quickly catch up on WM voting. Looks like a better night than I honestly expected.
Now at last it’s over to the EU. I will be very surprised if their position does not shift a little to meet the UK. Not for a while mind. I reckon it could still be a week or two before they begin to move publicly

charlie14

Paranoid Bob wrote: »

Why do you say the condition has been rejected by the EU? The EU and Ireland have always said that the backstop is only required until there is an agreed alternative that does not require a hard border. The Brady amendment is about replacing the backstop with an alternative arrangement that does not require a hard border.
... all the UK govt has to do now is explain the alternative that does not require a hard border and everyone is happy!

Plus, of course, the brexiteers have promised that it would be easy to use 'technology' to avoid a hard border.

Isn`t the Brady amendment practically irrelevant as it is only advisory, not binding ?

Capt'n Midnight

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

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

In the 2015 GE they got SIX times as many votes as the DUP. But single seat constituencies so they can be safely ignored.

1,111,603 votes vs 184,260

downcow

briany wrote: »

The delicious kicker is that the other passing amendment - that the UK must not leave without a deal - is only advisory. And when the UKgovernment reminds us of this on no-deal Brexit day, everyone would do well to remind them it was an advisory referendum that started this whole mess.

There’s no comparison. Both parties said they would abide by what the people said in advisory referendum. No one has said that about the advisory vote tonight. They can’t commit to both as they are opposed to each other.