Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

funkey_monkey wrote:

Remain. Customs Union is leaving but losing your voice.

You can't leave a club and expect to keep all the benefits of membership.

If Remain is off the table, CU is the most realistic compromise - they "regain control" of their borders and retain free access to the market that takes 44% of their exports - and can keep the complex supply chains in both directions. It also sorts the Irish issue.

Yes, they will have to comply with EU standards but the EU market will require that anyway and it means they can at least try to replicate the EU's trade agreements with third countries.

But that's a common sense, practical view and we know how little part that plays in the Brexit mindset.

devnull wrote: »

Libdems continue to play Russian Roulette and will abstain on anything but revoke or peoples vote.

Personally instead of abstaining on things they want which have a chance of winning a vote and voting for things that don't, I think everyone should be voting for all options that are acceptable to them.

But it seems some of them are so desperate to get revoke article 50, they're willing to risk a no deal to get it when they can tonight prevent that. This makes them no better than the other reckless politicians.

With there not being another indicative vote planned or allowed, the Lib Dems and The Independent Group could tonight condemn their country to a No Deal brexit by their desperation for remain with no way back.

Actually, i think they're right. The lib dems are a remain party, they campaigned on it in the last election. The best thing for the UK is to remain. Everything else is objectively worse.

In the game of chicken, if all other options are off the table, when the EU refuse an extension and its too late to accept Mays WA, it comes down to a choice between no deal or revoke, its a good bet that parliament will settle on revoke. If they refuse to pull the parachute cord and crash out, that will be the fault of the Tories, not the Lib Dems.

If a soft brexit gains majority support, the remainers will likely lose and the UK will leave and lose a lot of status and influence

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

Has there been any coverage on this on traditional media or discussion in HoC?

The Guardian is reporting it, anyway

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/01/electoral-commission-new-vote-leave-investigation-not-in-public-interest?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

A majority may well be reached which means the hard brexiters will be terrified of customs union membership and thus May will bring back her deal with them knowing it's the hardest Brexit possible.

That's what I think will happen.

Doesn't make a bit of difference. Without the DUP, her deal doesn't pass.

Spook_ie wrote:

Doesn't really sort the Irish problem, a CU would normally still have a border, EU/Ireland/UK don't want one so still stuck with a border somewhere

Border/compliance checks yes, but not necessarily physical infrastructure.

Shelga wrote: »

Could the deal still pass without DUP support if she had the numbers, or is there support crucial, seeing as they’re in a confidence and supply arrangement?

Basically, is she technically able to get it passed without the DUP.

All she needs is a majority, whether the DUP support her or not.

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Laura Ks Brexit feature the Brexit storm has just started on bbc 2

Terrible 'journalist'

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Such a rollercoaster. As soon as one vote is taken it is voted down, on we go to the next and that too is rejected. And so on.

What the feck do they ACTUALLY want is my question. But I suppose they don't know themselves at this stage.

As these are just indicative votes, if all are rejected what's left? No Deal.... which no one wants also. I think I am becoming swivel eyed at this stage.

How many times has the clock been ticking now? Honestly farce is not the word anymore.

75% of the Tory membership would vote for No Deal. The best of the Soft Brexit options gets 23%. Quelle surprise.

Harry Palmr wrote: »

A few interesting vignettes, esp Boris Johnson as a tramp. Political correspondents are 'freinds' with everyone who'll play the game. And she is a correspondent/reporter not an investigative journalist.

Faisal Islam on Sky is also a corespondent/reporter and not an investigative journalist, but I think he manages to provide some context and analysis rather than the he said-she said gossip of LK

It is not about being an investigative reporter, simply pointing out that the PM has gone back on 100+ times promise to deliver Brexit by 29th March, that she has no plan.

She should be pointing out that things like Salzborg are as much if not more down to TM and the UK than allowing the narrative that the EU is at fault to continue.

Where is she demanding answers from the PM, Davis, JRM et al about this promised 11th hour EU climbdown? Was it always the plan to actually miss the 29th? Is the 11th hour still an option?

But she does none of that. She seems more interested in the latest tweet she received, or the latest but of gossip she has been given without apparently ever actually stopping to ask what it means or even why it is being leaked to her.

She has said on may occasions that 'I've been told by sources that such and such is a distinct possibility". First off that isn't news, second it normal takes away from the actual news and in many cases it turns out to be nothing more than a rumour or IMO a strategic leak.

I get it that reporters want/need to break stories, but on such an important issue such as this, her and many others, really need to have got serious and start treating this with the seriousness it deserves.