Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Capt'n Midnight · 31-03-2019 11:22PM

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Tomorrow's Telegraph claims 10 UK ministers favour a customs union, 13 want a no-deal Brexit, and four are undecided - so whichever way May jumps, the government will literally be split down the middle - GE the only way to maintain unity?

twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1112457769825849344

They have until April 12 to come up with a plan the EU will accept or it's Hard Brexit.

How about a GE on the same day as the EU elections to take the focus off them ? , because that's cynical enough.

But to get a GE they'd need 66% of the MP's on board.

Labour will want this, but there'll many others who won't whether to keep their seats or to put May in an even worse position or because it might let Labour win or because it would mean the end of their type of Brexit or whatever you're having yourself.

Or Labour might do a Lucy when Charlie Brown comes to kick the football. Especially if it looks like they might not win an election.

Expect May to go through more self inflicted humiliation which whichever way this goes.

Strazdas · 31-03-2019 11:50PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Ordinarily, you could dismiss this sort of number as nonsense, 13 want to flap their arms and fly to the moon, can't happen so can say any old thing.

But right now, this is extraordinary. No Deal brexit could happen within a month. 13 of the ministers of Her Majesty's Government want to cripple the United Kingdom for no damned reason at all.

Amazing.

Several of whom voted Remain (!) (incl. Hunt & Javid)

Gives an indication I suppose of the somewhat unusual relationship between the UK and EU

bob mcbob · 01-04-2019 12:29AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Ordinarily, you could dismiss this sort of number as nonsense, 13 want to flap their arms and fly to the moon, can't happen so can say any old thing.

But right now, this is extraordinary. No Deal brexit could happen within a month. 13 of the ministers of Her Majesty's Government want to cripple the United Kingdom for no damned reason at all.

Amazing.

The leadership of the Tory party is coming up soon and the one who wins needs to get the vote of the Tory party membership - who are on average, right wing english white males in their seventies. That is the current Tory party.

All of this is a game of chicken to pander to the membership, i.e. who is the toughest on the EU.

If no deal did actually happen - there would not be a Conservative party or a United Kingdom left.

Professor Moriarty · 01-04-2019 12:57AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

They have until April 12 to come up with a plan the EU will accept or it's Hard Brexit.

How about a GE on the same day as the EU elections to take the focus off them ? , because that's cynical enough.

But to get a GE they'd need 66% of the MP's on board.

Labour will want this, but there'll many others who won't whether to keep their seats or to put May in an even worse position or because it might let Labour win or because it would mean the end of their type of Brexit or whatever you're having yourself.

Or Labour might do a Lucy when Charlie Brown comes to kick the football. Especially if it looks like they might not win an election.

Expect May to go through more self inflicted humiliation which whichever way this goes.

May received a letter two days ago signed by 170 Tory MPs demanding that Brexit happens asap and that there be no long extension and no EU elections in Britain. Which means that 160 Tory MPs didn't sign the letter. Fun times ahead for Tory party unity.

Spook_ie · 01-04-2019 01:29AM

Now here's an odd thing, all this talk of revoke article 50 petitions, yet NI is one of the least represented regions percentage wise.

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=241584

briany · 01-04-2019 02:21AM

Headshot wrote: »

This shock would have a grave affect on Europe and especially Ireland. Why do we need to trigger the self destruct button?

Yes the British are the main architects of their downfall but if they go to Europe and ask for extension and we decline it, essentially we'll be blamed for a no deal Brexit which will do untold damage across Europe.

The EU have played a stormer in negotiations and I would hope when the British come back looking for an extension we let them have it on certain conditions like having a confirmation referendum etc

I agree. The EU should inform the UK that they have already used their first extension unwisely. It has produced no significant movement toward a conclusion. The EU wants a decision.

I think the EU should offer a two-phase extension. The first phrase would be up to the 22nd of May. This would be under two conditions - that the UK agrees to come back with a definitive plan by that date, and that they prepare for EU elections. If they fail to meet either of these conditions, they are out. If they meet them, they get one or two years during which they are under constant review by the EU to makes sure the obligations are being met.

AllForIt · 01-04-2019 02:50AM

Calina wrote: »

There is no way the UK population who voted in favour of EU exit understood the practical realities of leaving. They did not know that three years down the line they would be talking about stockpiling medicines or dealing with food shortages. They did not know or want to accept customs checks would turn Kent into a giant lorry park. They did not know or want to accept that the long term impact would be to lose manufacturing jobs in key industries over time. They did not see chunks of their main sources of taxes, ie the financial services industry would move to other EU states.

They may have wanted a fresh start but no one mentioned the sacrifices. I am not surprised Brexit won at the time but their media and their politicians brought that about.

I guarantee you if the Brexit campaigners had talked about medecine and food shortages as a necessary part of the sacrifice at the time, Brexit would not have won.

Emotive but wrong.

Of course the general UK public weren't able to articulate every nook and cranny about what it means on a practical level to leave the EU, but they did know there would be consequences, economic ones etc.

They on balance even not knowing the full implications voted to leave and accepted the implications even unknown for what they wanted.

How can anyone know the full implications. Even the politicians don't and argue these things to death every day.

I don't believe for a second that if there was a second ref that the result would be any different. I think you may get an even higher turnout but I think the result would be the same.

I am not arguing for Brexit. It is a mistake imo. What I have a problem with is the arguments ppl make about the ppl who voted to leave.

If the British ppl would prefer to make their own laws that aren't influenced by being part of the EU, I think that's a perfectly valid position to take. So I don't think those that voted to leave were completely unaware of the negative consequence of doing so, but thought on balance that it is what they would prefer and any problems they might experience as a result of leaving could be sorted out in time.

Infini · 01-04-2019 03:20AM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Caring about the UK's well-being means opposing Brexit. It's clearer now than ever.

Unfortunately the way thing's are going right now a no deal car crash Brexit might end up happening simply because those in charge are essentially incompetent fools and waster's with no interest beyond vainglorious delusions or selfish self interest.

The bitter irony is that if a hard brexit were to happen and Britain ends up crippled over it that hard reality despite every warning and chance given that once people start hurting that they stop putting up with these idiot's shouting the EU is evil etc and actually tell them to cut the BS as they're wrong and quite simply should not be given airtime or listened to. They're in the same league as anti-vaxxers: utterly devoid of any semblance of reality and absorbed in delusional conspiracies and lies.

AngryHippie · 01-04-2019 03:25AM

AllForIt wrote: »

Emotive but wrong.

Of course the general UK public weren't able to articulate every nook and cranny about what it means on a practical level to leave the EU, but they did know there would be consequences, economic ones etc.

They on balance even not knowing the full implications voted to leave and accepted the implications even unknown for what they wanted.

How can anyone know the full implications. Even the politicians don't and argue these things to death every day.

I don't believe for a second that if there was a second ref that the result would be any different. I think you may get an even higher turnout but I think the result would be the same.

I am not arguing for Brexit. It is a mistake imo. What I have a problem with is the arguments ppl make about the ppl who voted to leave.

If the British ppl would prefer to make their own laws that aren't influenced by being part of the EU, I think that's a perfectly valid position to take. So I don't think those that voted to leave were completely unaware of the negative consequence of doing so, but thought on balance that it is what they would prefer and any problems they might experience as a result of leaving could be sorted out in time.

I have to disagree there, now that the brexit campaigners have put their hands in the air and admitted that they have broken financing rules, provided false assertions, promised buttercups and only provided bull **** and broken promises. It is very clear that not only are they not capable of delivering the fantasy brexit they promised, but also that nobody can as it cannot exist.

With this information well and truly in hand, there must be a mechanism to revisit the primary referendum question posed by Pig-F***** in the first place.

(Ignoring the political machinations that it only came about as a knee-jerk reaction to prevent the Torys having to power-share with the extreme right [which they effectively are now anyway] and the current situation where TM is hanging on to power by her fingernails as the whole sh1t-show goes hurtling down a cliff face on to the rocks of the 21st century below)

a 2nd referendum will cause temporary division of society. a hard brexit will put people out of poverty and into destitution. Ask anyone working on the front-lines as a social worker or first responder in already hard-up areas....

Larbre34 · 01-04-2019 03:37AM

AllForIt wrote: »

If the British ppl would prefer to make their own laws that aren't influenced by being part of the EU, I think that's a perfectly valid position to take. So I don't think those that voted to leave were completely unaware of the negative consequence of doing so, but thought on balance that it is what they would prefer and any problems they might experience as a result of leaving could be sorted out in time.

They don't even know what are and aren't 'their own laws', i.e. what is under the competence of Westminster and what is under the competence of Brussels. Even if a harder brexit were to come about, it will shock many leavers the laws that do not change because they are necessary for a big economy of the modern world. I wonder has it occured to many either, that large scale immigration to Britain from southern Asia has never had anything to with the EU

That reality is the fault of decades of UK govts who failed to sell the EU benefits or at very least explain its function, ironic considering Britain was a lead architect of economic union in the 80s and 90s.

A row which typifies the whole thing was broadcast on Channel 4 news one evening last week:

Two guys protesting for either side on the street outside Westminster -

A. We want our democracy back, take back control from the EU commission!!

B. We elect our own Government, the Governments of the EU decide who the Commissioners from their country will be and send them to Brussels.

A. Rubbish!! You're project fear mate, go and move to Brussels then!!

Clearly it has gone beyond people caring whether they are right or wrong, investing the time to learn about the facts, they just see trigger symbols or hear trigger words and attack.

murphaph · 01-04-2019 07:38AM

Larbre34 wrote: »

They don't even know what are and aren't 'their own laws', i.e. what is under the competence of Westminster and what is under the competence of Brussels. Even if a harder brexit were to come about, it will shock many leavers the laws that do not change because they are necessary for a big economy of the modern world. I wonder has it occured to many either, that large scale immigration to Britain from southern Asia has never had anything to with the EU

That reality is the fault of decades of UK govts who failed to sell the EU benefits or at very least explain its function, ironic considering Britain was a lead architect of economic union in the 80s and 90s.

A row which typifies the whole thing was broadcast on Channel 4 news one evening last week:

Two guys protesting for either side on the street outside Westminster -

A. We want our democracy back, take back control from the EU commission!!

B. We elect our own Government, the Governments of the EU decide who the Commissioners from their country will be and send them to Brussels.

A. Rubbish!! You're project fear mate, go and move to Brussels then!!

Clearly it has gone beyond people caring whether they are right or wrong, investing the time to learn about the facts, they just see trigger symbols or hear trigger words and attack.

I wonder how many of the ringleaders on the Brexit at any cost side are on the Russian payroll, directly or indirectly.

FrancieBrady · 01-04-2019 08:10AM

Headshot wrote: »

What time are the indicative votes tomorrow?

8pm according to Morning Ireland RTE

Shelga · 01-04-2019 08:19AM

AllForIt wrote: »

Emotive but wrong.

Of course the general UK public weren't able to articulate every nook and cranny about what it means on a practical level to leave the EU, but they did know there would be consequences, economic ones etc.

They on balance even not knowing the full implications voted to leave and accepted the implications even unknown for what they wanted.

How can anyone know the full implications. Even the politicians don't and argue these things to death every day.

I don't believe for a second that if there was a second ref that the result would be any different. I think you may get an even higher turnout but I think the result would be the same.

I am not arguing for Brexit. It is a mistake imo. What I have a problem with is the arguments ppl make about the ppl who voted to leave.

If the British ppl would prefer to make their own laws that aren't influenced by being part of the EU, I think that's a perfectly valid position to take. So I don't think those that voted to leave were completely unaware of the negative consequence of doing so, but thought on balance that it is what they would prefer and any problems they might experience as a result of leaving could be sorted out in time.

There’s some validity in what you say, but how many Leave voters really care that much about those things to have Brexit cripple the UK’s political system for the next 5-10 years? Destroying any potential progress on the NHS, schools and jobs in the process.

MrFresh · 01-04-2019 08:51AM

AllForIt wrote: »

Emotive but wrong.

Of course the general UK public weren't able to articulate every nook and cranny about what it means on a practical level to leave the EU, but they did know there would be consequences, economic ones etc.

They on balance even not knowing the full implications voted to leave and accepted the implications even unknown for what they wanted.

How can anyone know the full implications. Even the politicians don't and argue these things to death every day.

I don't believe for a second that if there was a second ref that the result would be any different. I think you may get an even higher turnout but I think the result would be the same.

I am not arguing for Brexit. It is a mistake imo. What I have a problem with is the arguments ppl make about the ppl who voted to leave.

If the British ppl would prefer to make their own laws that aren't influenced by being part of the EU, I think that's a perfectly valid position to take. So I don't think those that voted to leave were completely unaware of the negative consequence of doing so, but thought on balance that it is what they would prefer and any problems they might experience as a result of leaving could be sorted out in time.

Leaving aside the illegal acts and the blatant lies told by the Brexit campaign, the fact remains that the leave vote is very split between the different kinds of Brexit and some would now rather remain than leave under the options available.

Zubeneschamali · 01-04-2019 09:03AM

MrFresh wrote: »

some would now rather remain than leave under the options available.

I think I even saw Farage say he would rather Remain than take Mays deal.

LuckyLloyd · 01-04-2019 09:14AM

Meanwhile, four more people were stabbed to death in England last week, a continued shocking consequence of austerity, cuts in essential services and the essential war on the poor. The Tories will do anything to avoid a general election right now, including a disorderly Brexit.

McGiver · 01-04-2019 09:31AM

JRM on LBC talking right now, 1 April 2019. Still regurgitating the "I would like to leave with no deal" notion - must be an April fools' prank? He is trying hard to justify why he supported MV3 while before he had said that MV1/MV2 was a "vote for slavery". A huge hypocrite he is, charlatan and a criminal.

A politician intentionally wishing to cause their country a significant disruption to people's, government's and business' life, causing significant unemployment, increase in inequality, drop of living standards and loss of GDP higher than the Global Financial Crisis is outright traitorous and should be tried at court. The fact that these kind of people continue to appear on TV, radio shows and write in newspapers mostly unchallenged is alarming. Kudos to James O'Brien who has recently started playing recordings of old statements from various people (Davis, Raab, JRM) and comparing then with recent statements showing their hypocrisy, stupidity, incompetence and/or an outright malice.

And funnily enough, a caller talking to JRM is saying that "MPs who oppose no deal or Brexit itself should have their pay since the last election taken away from them". You know because they didn't do what the corrupt, colluded, illegal, advisory referendum advised them to do with a very narrow margin.

Enzokk · 01-04-2019 09:39AM

And reason number 1 million on why the backstop is needed and why we are right to push for it even if it means we get a border,

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1112619959295885312

Because it will most likely happen in any case if we give in to the UK demands as all they need is someone taking over from the weakest PM in history and imposing their will on the cabinet.

Leroy42 · 01-04-2019 09:42AM

It was posted earlier that some 13 ministers in the cabinet wanted to leave with no deal.

Given that they would have access to the reports, given that they would have been provided with ample forecasting by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and given that they must know that many of the stuff promised in the Ref (350m pw to NHS etc) are not deliverable, what could be driving these politicians to this end?

That is about 50% of the cabinet, who in possession of all the facts still favour the hardest Brexit. Is it any wonder, therefore, that roughly the same level of non politicians would have the same outlook?

Spook_ie · 01-04-2019 09:59AM

murphaph wrote: »

I wonder how many of the ringleaders on the Brexit at any cost side are on the Russian payroll, directly or indirectly.

If the idea was to create discontent, you could also ask how many remainers are on the payroll too, after all if you want to divide a country then why not play both sides of the table?

Spook_ie · 01-04-2019 10:10AM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Meanwhile, four more people were stabbed to death in England last week, a continued shocking consequence of austerity, cuts in essential services and the essential war on the poor. The Tories will do anything to avoid a general election right now, including a disorderly Brexit.

Well it's more likely to be May's fault again

Theresa May, as home secretary, led efforts to drive down the number of stops, but there's anecdotal evidence from police that young people are now more inclined to carry knives because of growing confidence they won't be stopped.

And probably a degree of the race card being involved or played

From 2009, the number of stops fell sharply across England and Wales, especially in London, primarily because of concerns that the measures unfairly targeted young black men, wasted police resources and were ineffective at catching criminals.

Professor Moriarty · 01-04-2019 10:18AM

Leroy42 wrote: »

It was posted earlier that some 13 ministers in the cabinet wanted to leave with no deal.

Given that they would have access to the reports, given that they would have been provided with ample forecasting by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and given that they must know that many of the stuff promised in the Ref (350m pw to NHS etc) are not deliverable, what could be driving these politicians to this end?

That is about 50% of the cabinet, who in possession of all the facts still favour the hardest Brexit. Is it any wonder, therefore, that roughly the same level of non politicians would have the same outlook?

I dunno. I wonder if it's a bit like the Brexit referendum where their argument was mostly self-serving rhetoric as they tried to advance their profiles. I would imagine that quite a few would not want No Deal in reality.

Balanadan · 01-04-2019 10:21AM

https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1112107188821082113

I think we've all come across people like this. It's hard to see how they're going to repair the divisions.

ancapailldorcha · 01-04-2019 10:22AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I think I even saw Farage say he would rather Remain than take Mays deal.

Yeah, EVERYONE hates that deal. It pleases nobody except for the Brexiters who are willing to compromise like Fox and Gove. The second the UK acquiesced to the EU's negotiating timeline, that was it. They should have agreed a consensus negotiation position, particularly in relation to the Irish border and then triggered Article 50 but May decided on yet another attempt to placate the right wing of her party. When she goes, it will have meant Europe claiming the scalp of a fourth consecutive Conservative Prime Minister.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Meanwhile, four more people were stabbed to death in England last week, a continued shocking consequence of austerity, cuts in essential services and the essential war on the poor. The Tories will do anything to avoid a general election right now, including a disorderly Brexit.

What would they even run on in a GE? They have nothing save for bungling Brexit.

briany · 01-04-2019 10:25AM

McGiver wrote: »

JRM on LBC talking right now, 1 April 2019. Still regurgitating the "I would like to leave with no deal" notion - must be an April fools' prank? He is trying hard to justify why he supported MV3 while before he had said that MV1/MV2 was a "vote for slavery". A huge hypocrite he is, charlatan and a criminal.

I do not agree with Mogg's approach to Brexit, but he can easily draw a line through his reasoning. He can still say he hates May's deal, but that he hates it less than a certain alternative.

Nody · 01-04-2019 10:29AM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Yeah, EVERYONE hates that deal. It pleases nobody except for the Brexiters who are willing to compromise like Fox and Gove. The second the UK acquiesced to the EU's negotiating timeline, that was it.

That would always happen anyway; the 2 year limit was designed with that in mind and EU blocked any attempts (and there were multiple) to start negotiations before the A50 letter was submitted for that very reason.

They should have agreed a consensus negotiation position, particularly in relation to the Irish border and then triggered Article 50 but May decided on yet another attempt to placate the right wing of her party.

Honestly and without sarcasm here but why? We know what the position would be; magical drones and technology because no one in the UK bothered to think longer than what they wanted assuming EU would roll over and bark on command. The problem is not that they agreed a particular position but rather then complete lack of any sort of competence in negotiation thinking EU will do what ever UK asks. Had they spent even a week thinking what EU would potentially say they would not have bothered to pull the A50 notice because they would know anything they got would be worse than what they had now. The problem is not a unified position; the problem is the contempt and lack of understanding in the leadership team in the first place that's the root cause here.

joe40 · 01-04-2019 10:31AM

Larbre34 wrote: »

They don't even know what are and aren't 'their own laws', i.e. what is under the competence of Westminster and what is under the competence of Brussels. Even if a harder brexit were to come about, it will shock many leavers the laws that do not change because they are necessary for a big economy of the modern world. I wonder has it occured to many either, that large scale immigration to Britain from southern Asia has never had anything to with the EU

That reality is the fault of decades of UK govts who failed to sell the EU benefits or at very least explain its function, ironic considering Britain was a lead architect of economic union in the 80s and 90s.

A row which typifies the whole thing was broadcast on Channel 4 news one evening last week:

Two guys protesting for either side on the street outside Westminster -

A. We want our democracy back, take back control from the EU commission!!

B. We elect our own Government, the Governments of the EU decide who the Commissioners from their country will be and send them to Brussels.

A. Rubbish!! You're project fear mate, go and move to Brussels then!!

Clearly it has gone beyond people caring whether they are right or wrong, investing the time to learn about the facts, they just see trigger symbols or hear trigger words and attack.

Why is only in Britain that there seem to be this narrative that they have to obey EU rules, like they were being governed by a foreign power.
Germas, French, Irish, Belgians..... we all obey the same rules.

Maybe the same level of discontent about the EU exists in other countries and I'm simply not hearing it.

The question is never posed by the British press, but if EU membership is so harmful why are other countries, including big economies like France and Germany not trying to leave. Everyone is subject to the same conditions even moreso than Britain.

Enzokk · 01-04-2019 10:33AM

Spook_ie wrote: »

Well it's more likely to be May's fault again

And probably a degree of the race card being involved or played

Sure, those did play a part, but the biggest problem is the cuts to the police budgets which meant less officers on the street and less community officers as well. Those are vital as they are able to get the trust of the community by being there all the time and talking to leaders and establishing a rapport. This is not only for knife crime but terrorism as well.

She was warned and she didn't care or she isn't imaginative enough to see the consequences. She is a disaster and unfortunately she is our disaster now as she is in charge of Brexit.

No link between knife crime and police cuts, says Theresa May

Theresa May has dismissed claims that an increase in police numbers will help solve knife crime, insisting there is “no direct correlation” between the two.

Speaking after a spate of knife violence, the prime minister said she would tackle the root causes of the crisis. However, as police officers and politicians called for more help to deal with the problem, May said it was not a question of resources.

There was “no direct correlation between certain crimes and police numbers”, the former home secretary said. “What matters is how we ensure that police are responding to these criminal acts when they take place, that people are brought to justice.”

This is reminiscent of Boris Johnson claiming that cutting the number of firefighters actually makes it safer, because cutting numbers of firefighters doesn't matter if you reduce the incidence of fire. I wasn't aware that fires were sentient and if they knew you were increasing the coverage that the fire brigade has that they will go into hiding.

Just to highlight one more quote from the article of knife crime, this sums it up really and May doesn't seem to want to understand,

May’s remarks will frustrate critics who say cuts to police and youth services are a key factor in knife crime. The Metropolitan police said they could not “magic officers out of thin air” to tackle the problem.

EKRIUQ · 01-04-2019 10:36AM

Balanadan wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1112107188821082113

I think we've all come across people like this. It's hard to see how they're going to repair the divisions.

It would be impossible to even have a discussion with these people they will never change their mind and they only want one brexit, they will never listen to facts and then fall back to we won 2 world wars.

Nody · 01-04-2019 10:37AM

joe40 wrote: »

The question is never posed by the British press, but if EU membership is so harmful why are other countries, including big economies like France and Germany not trying to leave. Everyone is subject to the same conditions even moreso than Britain.

Because zee Germans along with those cowardly French frogs are all ruling over Britannia as they got their asses kicked (Germany) and saved (France) in WW2 and this is their revenge on the noble nation of Britannia. Those smaller nations are simply boot licking fan boys trying to ride the coattail to humiliate UK further by refusing to side with them.

Much more selling narrative then the fact 96% of all EU decisions went UK's way for the last decade and UK was a driver in many of the major policies implemented. Because in the first narrative you can blame the foreigner (which is always a welcome escape goat no matter the class of the reader to explain why things are not as good as they should be) while the second one would force people to told their own people accountable. Much easier to blame foreigners instead of having to educate the population after all.

Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments