Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

josip wrote: »

Whatever we would like to think of JRM, he is not a fool.
Almost certainly the reasoning behind his tweet is that he wants the EU to NOT grant any extension.
They are more likely to reject a request if they think the UK will be obstructive in the European parliament.

Firstly, JRM has contradicted his own long held argument that the UK do not have to power to dictate anything within the EU for themselves.

Secondly, JRM doesn't get to decide who the UK MEPs are, or their motivations!

Ironically, the whole Brexit movement has lead to a more visible pro-EU faction emerge within the UK than was seen before - SOME people have bothered to educate themselves on it now. This might just MIGHT actually lead to the UK electing more pro-EU MEPs whereas it was the anti EU population segment that were far more motivated to vote before now.

Deleted User wrote: »

I understand that in relation to the idea that countries could abuse it. But in this scenario, a definite two years is a security the EU would desire instead of these less enforceable? extensions.

Are the extensions as legally binding as Article 50? I don't know.

I don't think so. The current situation as I read it is the UK are likely to ask for an extension but need unanimous agreement from the rest of the EU and some countries have seemed sceptical about giving one. If they cancel and invoke straight away I think it'd be rightly seen as trying to just bypass that decision.

robindch wrote: »

Tempting as it is, that will backfire immediately by providing Brexit Ultras with a reason to hate the EU which others can support - it would be similar in noise, if perhaps not in scale or consequences, to what happened after WWI, when Germans were stumped with enormous war reparations, providing Hitler and friends a convincing justification for their "us versus them" mentality.

That's the thing.

The ultras will always be like that.

Instead, their betters need to stop messing us around.

I fear this delaying the inevitable is giving them an advantage and courtesy they don't deserve.

Indeed, as was said earlier, will focus their mind.

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I reckon if the Euro elections go ahead they might have the highest ever participation, including a big chunk of voters angry at the election going ahead at all and casting a protest vote for Farage or whoever...

Could be just as big a pro EU vote as well. The countries deadlocked because facts and reason have been undermined by the parasitical proponents of Brexit who's leaders every day are exposed as nothing more than oppertunists trying to profit on this and have only gotten this far purely because of the toxic ignorance and misinformation pushed for the last few decades by rags like the daily mail etc.

The elections could be an oppertunity though expecially if a concerted effort were mounted expecially against Farage leading to him failing to be elected. Ledbydonkeys would have a field day alone by following him everywhere and exposing every hypocritical lie hes spouted.

Laois_Man wrote: »

Not to mention the fact that giving them another 2 years effectively gives them all the benefits of the 2-year transition period, but without them having to either sign up to a backstop or pay the £39 billion, which I believe to be the motivation for delay in some people's minds on the UK side. They can't be allowed to do that.

Tell May straight, announce next week that you are going for a general election, or a second referendum, our you're out next Friday. End of discussion!

Well the transition period is EU membership but they would not have a say in anything the EU does so it does benefit the UK. As for the divorce payments, those are just obligations the UK has made before and it is just them confirming they will be paying them even though they are not EU members any longer.

If they are still part of the EU and some of those costs were included in the settlement agreement then if they do agree a deal in 2 years time and they leave the £39b may be down to £20b, but they have paid £15b in the meantime as normal costs of being a member. You could see it as a win but it really is the same for the EU, they just want the UK to pay what they said they would.

So yes extending for 2 years would be an advantage for the UK in that they will still have MEPs and be part of EU council meetings, other than that it is the same as the transition.

As for the talks between Labour and May, it has not gone well.

https://twitter.com/GuardianHeather/status/1114197896470118400

May didn't even compromise on the non-legal binding Political Declaration, so what chances were there on anything else? She is a failure that needs to be removed or no-deal will result.

cml387 wrote: »

Yes but I imagine the prospect of going out to elect MEP's for what is really a waste of time would not motivate any but the hardcore to go out. Hence UKIP would do well again and the moderates would lose out. Sorry but I see no hope in that situation at all.

Those people that have been ignored in all of this is not the hardcore UKIP vote, it is the 48% whose say or opinion has been ignored. Remember that May's deal is in fact hard Brexit and the only thing harder is basically no-deal. The only thing that is making it softer is the DUP, ironically, by insisting that the whole of the UK has the same regulations and thus the break from the EU is not as hard as she wanted.

So as with the marches I expect the pro-EU vote to be more determined and have more motivation to go out and vote for pro-EU candidates. They would also be able to give the Tories and UKIP a bloody nose as well, remember that Labour MEPs are very much the opposite of their fellow MEPs from UKIP and the Conservatives and are very much pro-EU, even if Corbyn is not.

Would EU elections in Britain end up being a proxy Brexit referendum rerun? It would be very interesting to see the outcome.

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Would EU elections in Britain end up being a proxy Brexit referendum rerun? It would be very interesting to see the outcome.

Would certainly be interesting in northern Ireland.
Would the current vote share change.

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Just copy and paste the url

https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1088058967572520961

Also he think Ulster is Norn Ireland embarrassing

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Also he think Ulster is Norn Ireland embarrassing

Not really. It's a classic unionist trope of differentiation.

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I reckon if the Euro elections go ahead they might have the highest ever participation, including a big chunk of voters angry at the election going ahead at all and casting a protest vote for Farage or whoever...

I've not lived in the UK for 11/12 years * but Farage was always a joke, a blokey bloke joke. Someone you'd meet down the pub and get fed up with before too long.





Spitting Image would have destroyed him.

I’m taking it as a given they’ll be in the European elections, seen as May is now talking openly about it. What an utter farce from a crowd of gobby Euro haters that can’t even leave the Union they purportedly hate. Such a big part of me wants them turfed out on their holes but realize we don’t need to suffer the fall out

cml387 wrote: »

I've highlighted the problem there in your quote. Would they be Labour,Conservative or Liberal, Green?

Remember, other than Corbyn and a few of his followers and Kate Hoey, Labour is still very much a pro-EU party.

Gintonious wrote: »

Channel 4 really have been great as of late, this is a great example of what SHOULD have been done for so long.

He just doubles down on his lie even when confronted with this. If you did this at your work you would be fired, but politicians are allowed and actually rewarded when this happens. Surely there should be something that can be done to ensure that MPs don't knowingly keep lying?

Laois_Man wrote: »

I would have preferred to see him quote actual polling findings rather than just continually assert "That's not true"

Ahem...polling figures quoted further up the thread support Redwood's view.