Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

joe40 wrote: »

What would be the worst outcome for Ireland, a compromise on the backstop, maybe make it time limited, or a "no deal" Brexit.

In the short term, like with 5 years of a time limit, No Deal would be worse.

But a time limit just means No Deal at the end of the time limit, so in the longer term they are the same but the time limit has the disadvantage that when the UK run down the clock and go to a hard border, we will have agreed to it in advance, and the UK will have had 5 years or whatever to advance trade talks.

No Deal right now means the UK has to come back to negotiate a Free Trade Agreement as a 3rd country, and the EU will say fine, we will start talks as soon as you put the Divorce Bill, EU citizens rights and a permanent backstop into UK law. The UK cannot even start FTA talks until they sign up.

And if they crash out, they are really, really going to want a FTA. Now, it is a phony war, the UK can say any old nonsense they like about unicorns and sunlit uplands in the WTO. When there is no medicine in pharmacies, no fresh food on shop shelves, crops are rotting in the fields, the NHS is collapsing for lack of nurses and doctors, Sterling is trading below parity with the dollar, businesses and capital are fleeing, JIT supply lines have collapsed and factories are shuttered, they will not be able to pretend things are going great.

trellheim wrote: »

K some thoughts


1. This is nothing to do with no-deal, and everything to get a deal
2. to get a deal - need to remove time and space so that a deal is the only possible outcome
3. How to do - prorogue - part 1
4. part 2 - EUCO Oct 17 and return with WA minus something
5. Present fait accompli , refuse to extend , force HoC into voting for it , bang, brexit delivered, call GE , win majority
6. ( Why - very little noise from ERG ... .watch what the magicians hands are not doing, at the moment dead-catting is all over the place )

I was asked what it was all about this morning and I gave three possibilities:

1. As above; Take the WA with NI backstop and put it to parliament with less than two weeks to go and backs to the wall they have to pass it. In support of that is the almost absolutist no deal yapping that's coming from everywhere at the moment to frighten them into line. Hobson's choice.

2. Push parliament to pass a VONC so that he gets an election 'forced' on him and all the brexiters fall in behind the Tories as the only true brexit party who can deliver brexit (BP can't command the numbers). Only wrinkle here is (as far as I can figure it) the earliest such an election could be held is October 31st.

3. Cut off parliament from the time and space to table anything that can stop hard brexit.

The last one is obviously the worst case. I'm not convinced that it's the actual plan. The date parliament resumes is long enough before b-day 3 that other things can happen, including a new WA. If they really want hard brexit, then you choose a later date. Also, all the leaks about methods of undermining parliament are clear scare tactics. It's project fear on steroids. Who are they trying to frighten?

BarryD2 wrote: »

I was surprised that the queen agreed to his proposal - I'd say the stock of the monarchy might have sunk that bit more as a result.

The queen is aware that she is a figurehead only and has no real power. She will accept the advice of the PM as she doesn't want to get herself involved in politics. It is shameful that Johnson did this to get her involved though, I think the royal family would have been happy to be just in the background doing their thing. Having her agree to proroguing is getting her involved in politics and it is worse in that she cannot go against the advice of the PM really.

What is the mechanism by which it could be tested if parliament would accept the WA with an NI-only backstop?

Indicative votes?

Shelga wrote: »

What is the mechanism by which it could be tested if parliament would accept the WA with an NI-only backstop?

Indicative votes?

It would be a brand new Working Agreement. I would imagine that it would need to be voted on as the previous WA was voted on as it is legislation.

Shelga wrote: »

What is the mechanism by which it could be tested if parliament would accept the WA with an NI-only backstop?

Indicative votes?

To get the WA changed to have an NI-only backstop would require the EU to amend it. That will obviously happen in the open.

We can read the tea leaves from any pronouncements from MPs during that process.

Then put it to a vote. This "indicative vote" nonsense needs to be brought out back and put out of its misery as it confuses people about the processes involved.

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It's the political equivalent of putting the cocked loaded gun on a hairtrigger to the head.

To their own head, and then making demands.

Unfortunately Ireland is in the splash zone.

kuro68k wrote: »

It's happening again, the next Windrush scandal.

https://news.sky.com/video/anti-prorogation-protester-i-looked-after-your-children-now-you-kick-me-out-11796458

SHe's most likely totally misinformed. Why on earth does she this she would be kicked out when all around are saying people who are in UK are safe, and will be not asked to leave under any circumstances .

MrMusician18 wrote:

It's pure game theory and the British have calculated that the EU fear no deal more than they do. And they are probably right, the extremists in the UK do not have any fear even though they should.

Meanwhile you can imagine the conversations in the boardrooms of companies doing business with/in the UK.

Parliament is treating this like a 6th form debating society but the real world is watching.

Could the house vote on the deal on the table again without BJ's consent? If all else fails they should vote on May's deal on Oct 31st and pass it.

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

SHe's most likely totally misinformed. Why on earth does she this she would be kicked out when all around are saying people who are in UK are safe, and will be not asked to leave under any circumstances .

Because the actual operation of the system has been at best poor and at worst deliberately hostile. A lot of people are getting 'pre-settled' status, which means that they have to reapply again after five years. And that's for those who can produce all the paperwork required, which is ridiculously granular. Even the ASA have banned the ad for the settlement process for being misleading.

Enzokk wrote: »

The queen is aware that she is a figurehead only and has no real power. She will accept the advice of the PM as she doesn't want to get herself involved in politics. It is shameful that Johnson did this to get her involved though, I think the royal family would have been happy to be just in the background doing their thing. Having her agree to proroguing is getting her involved in politics and it is worse in that she cannot go against the advice of the PM really.

Why can't she ?

She can do whatever the hell she wants if Johnson gives her a carte blanche, which he is proposing to do.

The numbers don't stack up in favor of this freakshow.
The politicians are to incompetent to get it done and save the union.
She can put her Queeny boots on any time she likes and force a democratic injunction for the good of the nation i.e. Referendum followed by general election.

The entire parliament from day one has displayed an elite arrogance that is completely out of touch with the limitations of their power, the will of the people and their ability to deliver a tolerable solution which is a subset of both. I can't believe it has gotten this far without Labour booting Corbyn to touch and putting someone with the slightest understanding of their electorates in power to instead negotiate a remain position with Europe by.

• Calling out the Lies in the original campaign in a deliberate and structured statement - identifying the liars
• Identifying any practical points of policy on which the UK disagree with the EU in order to open a dialogue to negotiate a policy change (Bringing NI and ROI into the discussion to get an EU partner on board)
• Make it a point of party policy and get your MPs and candidates out on the ground to organise their electorates
• Wait for the far right nuts and nationalist wings to come out of the woodwork and clearly display that THEY ARE THE PROBLEM
• Watch the Tory Elite lose their bravado and balls as soon as the bobbies start paddywagoning the right wingers en masse for public order offences (if it happens), if not then they have lost their fighting cocks and it becomes about FACTS again.

British Politicians have completely failed to grasp the narrative in this whole process on the off chance that they might not get re-elected instead of polishing the sh1t off it and looking for the diamond opportunity hidden inside to find a compromise, improve standing within the EU, avert a disaster, take the credit for avoiding an economic catastrophe and making the Tory party look like the party of complete assclowns they truly are.
As for Farage and co, they just need to be called out on their lies. Interruption. Every time they utter a falsehood, in public, in private, on the air, on the web - call it out publicly, every interview hammer them. They only have about 5 people with a clue and they are all spin specialists. kill the spin by taking the ball. the ball is the attention. they lose it when they get caught lying.

The BBC has been wrapped up in this from the very early days and rooting out the culprit(s) there should be the first order of business.
Find out who it is, play dirty and get them out. (I mean drugs, hookers and telephoto lenses if need be)
Its been very obvious for a long time that the panel invitees on quite a number of their shows has been stacked against the facts.

I'm embarrassed for them.
It's like when you have foreign friends visiting and your next door neighbour is wandering around pissed as a newt abusing his missus and defecating on the front lawn while his kids are playing in the dirt with a dead cat.

They can turn this into a serious opportunity but when and if they do, they need to press hard and press charges against the electoral misconduct that brought this about. From Pigrooter on.

InTheShadows wrote: »

Absolutely pathetic. These people need to get a job and except the will of the majority

Show me where in provable detail the will of the majority then AND now is to leave with no deal

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Mallon? That's a gas one! Bitter old fool that he is!

Needed by who?

If they were needed people would vote for them.

The flickering of the eyelashes towards FF says all you need to know about the SDLP.

Mallon was only ever their deputy leader

They are still needed by the up-to 190,000 people who used to vote for them in general elections - but 50% of them can't anymore (and they'll be even less in any 2019/2020 election), because they're ****e. So we're in full agreement!

Jizique wrote: »

Who resigned?
The only one i can think of is Davidson, who resigned as Scottish Conservative leader, because she doesn't agree with the Brexit policy and because she think Johnson is a ****.
She has no vote in parliament.

Young gone too.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/29/lord-young-quits-government-over-boris-johnson-proroguing-parliament