Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

trellheim · 02-09-2019 12:33PM

If I recall there are not many in the current UK Cabinet who have not voted for the backstop at one point or another.

ToBeFrank123 · 02-09-2019 12:34PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

What part of the ref result did the backstop go against? On what basis had the ERG and Johnson got to not vote for it?

Corbyn, SNP, DUP, and several more voted against it.

Had Corbyn or SNP voted for it, happy days. But you just keep ignoring this. Why?

Here's the bizarre reason the SNP oppose the backstop.

Backstop
Speaking of Northern Ireland, the SNP is unhappy with the Irish "backstop" proposal contained in the draft withdrawal agreement which Theresa May has negotiated.
The backstop would be triggered if the transition period expires without a new trade deal being ready in time. The SNP argues that if this happens, Northern Ireland will gain a competitive advantage over Scotland.
That's because Northern Ireland would be in a deeper customs relationship with the EU, and it would be closer entwined with the rules of the single market than the rest of the UK.
Ms Sturgeon says this would mean Northern Ireland businesses would get easier access to the single market, which she fears would have a "devastating" impact on Scottish jobs and investment.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-46289739

If the SNP had voted for the WA and backstop, it would have passed.

seamus · 02-09-2019 12:35PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

An unending backstop just has no mandate in the HoC, this seems to escape a log of people.

That's the UK's problem. The backstop is the emergency brake. It cannot be limited, temporary or otherwise fudged in a way that it can cease to exist. Because then it's not a backstop. The fact that a backstop by definition exists indefinitely seems to escape British politicians.

This backstop was the UK's idea, having shot down several other workable solutions. Everyone agreed it was now the only way forward. That the HoC doesn't want to support it, is not the EU's problem.

It's up to the UK now to propose an alternative that provides equal protections to the border as a backstop.

Kermit.de.frog · 02-09-2019 12:35PM

UK cabinet to meet today. Could be important as they are suppose to meet tomorrow.

Stop moaning ffs · 02-09-2019 12:36PM

Cabinet has been summoned to meet this afternoon

Looks like an election coming.

ToBeFrank123 · 02-09-2019 12:37PM

J Mysterio wrote: »

No one should be 'ready to accept' that vote as the basis for the scandalous carry on of the UK government. How you can defend this mania is beyond me.

The vote itself should be under full investigation for outside interference from foreign powers, fraud, illegal funding, illegal overspends, illegal influencing of voters on social media, illegal handling of information and outright fabrications designed to mislead.

These things will only happen in earnest after the fact, when the most damage is fully delivered. The UK apparatus cant even process this as its so fully engaged in tearing itself asunder.

Ah I knew a post like this was coming. I point out the facts and someone like you says I'm defending it.

Its like pointing out the facts of a serious crime in the past, and then being accused of condoning it.

Deal with the facts. You can ignore countless votes in the HoC all you like. They are still facts that you have to deal with.

Facts will always trump opinion.

J Mysterio · 02-09-2019 12:37PM

Flex wrote: »

I think she has been wrong about everything she has reported on Brexit. Her narrative has constantly been against what EU leaders and negotiators have been publically saying and she constantly makes out the EU is terrified of the UK and disarray. She's doing it again; suggesting (stating actually)
mini deals are up for discussion,

that if the UK can guarantee that a deal can pass the British parliament theyll concede and

that the EU is prepared to make "painful" concessions on the backstop.

And of course, that the EU are in disarray and the UK has them on the ropes.

All of this after Michel Barnier's piece in the Telegraph only yesterday too. She appears to take opinions or potential ' what if' musings but runs with them and reports them as fact. Total disservice to the people of the UK who need some solid information from their media

She may well be herself in a sort of Twitter echo chamber where the great majority of the media she consumes is of that ilk. Also, she probably hangs on the word of countless Tory MPs, and so her view is likely skewed by their delusional perspectives. Mostly though, I think she's just a bad reporter and so representative of the decline of BBC more generally.

ToBeFrank123 · 02-09-2019 12:38PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Cabinet has been summoned to meet this afternoon

Looks like an election coming.

That would probably guarantee a No Deal as the HoC would be unable to meet to stop it.

Enzokk · 02-09-2019 12:38PM

An election before Brexit could be disastrous for Johnson. He could pivot to no-deal with the Brexit Party, but that is apparently against what he wants. Or the Brexit Party will take seats from Johnson with their stance on a no-deal.

I could only see him getting a majority if an election was done after they left and he could sideline the Brexit Party, but doing it before Brexit day when all the focus will be on Brexit is a mistake.

josip · 02-09-2019 12:38PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Here's the bizarre reason the SNP oppose the backstop.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-46289739

If the SNP had voted for the WA and backstop, it would have passed.

Why do you think the SNP's reason is bizarre?

Enzokk · 02-09-2019 12:40PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

That would probably guarantee a No Deal as the HoC would be unable to meet to stop it.

The EU would grant an extension if a Remain Alliance won the most seats though, even if the results are only confirmed on the 31st October. The only way no-deal is guaranteed from an election is if it is one of the Parties manifesto leader and they win a majority.

Stop moaning ffs · 02-09-2019 12:40PM

Enzokk wrote: »

An election before Brexit could be disastrous for Johnson. He could pivot to no-deal with the Brexit Party, but that is apparently against what he wants. Or the Brexit Party will take seats from Johnson with their stance on a no-deal.

I could only see him getting a majority if an election was done after they left and he could sideline the Brexit Party, but doing it before Brexit day when all the focus will be on Brexit is a mistake.

Keeping a close eye on twitter this afternoon.

Elections two months don’t they? Do they do snap elections over there? Could it be held sooner than the 31st?

ToBeFrank123 · 02-09-2019 12:41PM

seamus wrote: »

That's the UK's problem. The backstop is the emergency brake. It cannot be limited, temporary or otherwise fudged in a way that it can cease to exist. Because then it's not a backstop. The fact that a backstop by definition exists indefinitely seems to escape British politicians.

This backstop was the UK's idea, having shot down several other workable solutions. Everyone agreed it was now the only way forward. That the HoC doesn't want to support it, is not the EU's problem.

It's up to the UK now to propose an alternative that provides equal protections to the border as a backstop.

Nope, they understood fully the backstop was indefinite unless there was a legally guaranteed timeline to end it.

Which is the reason an indefinite backstop would never clear the HoC. The facts back this up. Too much opposition from across the parties such as Labour, DUP, SNP, as well as ERG. It never had a hope.

It became an exercise in flogging a dead horse in the end and is still being flogged by many, well past its death!

Kermit.de.frog · 02-09-2019 12:42PM

BJ addressing all tory MP's at 6 pm.

Election?

https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1168488875075035137

Stop moaning ffs · 02-09-2019 12:43PM

Full list of rebels. Lewis Goodall saying he reckons earliest election could be is October 17th

https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1168481026873729025?s=21

ToBeFrank123 · 02-09-2019 12:44PM

josip wrote: »

Why do you think the SNP's reason is bizarre?

Because it made No Deal a much greater possibility and also because they took the same side as the likes of the DUP and ERG.

Ultimately they opposed the backstop which is the key point. Not much finger pointing at them though.

May proposed and was in favour of the backstop. Corbyn, SNP, etc opposed it. So who is the bad guy here? From an Irish point of view, May tried to help Ireland with the backstop and Corbyn and SNP wanted none of it. Yet they get off scot free.

trellheim · 02-09-2019 12:46PM

Secondly I don't think you have accepted the UK voted to leave the EU, fully and entirely.

I am quoting TBF123 here. I personally believe this is the cause of all the problems with Brexit and why it is so divisory.

1. The referendum choice includes no comma, or words after it - the words "fully and entirely" do not appear.

2. Therefore everyone was entitled to define 'Leave' any way they chose , and have felt free to do so ranging from BRINO to No Deal.

3. However 'Easiest Deal Ever' was the phrase de jure . As we have seen this is completely not the case , three years and still not even past WA to pol dec yet.

4. There remains a group of Eurosceptics in the Commons for whom "fully and entirely" is now within their grasp and will do absolutely anything in their power to get it.

5. All they have to do to achieve this end is inertia - run the clock down.

1 -5 are facts and not hyperbole. All the sides pretty much agree on this.

Edit : more facts.

6. Boris cannot call a GE ; all he can do is put forward a motion for one and hope 2/3 of MP's vote for it.

7. I'd expect a Cabinet meeting before the resumption of Parliament in any event

seamus · 02-09-2019 12:46PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

That would probably guarantee a No Deal as the HoC would be unable to meet to stop it.

That might be the plan. "Nobody's to blame because we were all out campaigning when we should have been saving our economy!".

Not so easy now though. Johnson needs the support of 2/3rds of the house or a vote of no confidence.

I can't see the HoC giving him a free pass to let no-deal go through by inaction, and the opposition can scupper any no confidence motion.

They might force Johnson to be sitting in the captain's chair as the ship goes down.

prawnsambo · 02-09-2019 12:47PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Nope, they understood fully the backstop was indefinite unless there was a legally guaranteed timeline to end it.

Which is the reason an indefinite backstop would never clear the HoC. The facts back this up. Too much opposition from across the parties such as Labour, DUP, SNP, as well as ERG. It never had a hope.

It became an exercise in flogging a dead horse in the end and is still being flogged by many, well past its death!

There is an other way to end the backstop. Come up with something that negates its necessity. And that something could be the agreed future relationship, alternative ways of keeping the border seamless or a combination of both. The actual problem is that the UK don't want to bear the responsibility of dealing with an issue that is actually their responsibility. NI is part of the UK after all.

kuro68k · 02-09-2019 12:48PM

My understanding is that Parliament needs to pass legislation for an election, so presumably will try to amend it to make sure the date is before brexit...

CelticRambler · 02-09-2019 12:50PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Deal with the facts. You can ignore countless votes in the HoC all you like. They are still facts that you have to deal with.

Facts will always trump opinion.

Fact: the Brexit referendum did not give a mandate to politicians leave the EU. It was advisory, not binding.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

not to respect referendum results would fundamentally undermine credibility in UK politics.

:pac: :pac: :pac: :pac: ... and you think that using funny money to manipulate the results of a non-binding referendum, and then to have one party decide to embark on Brexit without any coherent plan, and then to have one politician decide to shut down parliament so that he can have his (revised, new improved) vision of Brexit forced on the country; that none of that undermines credibility in UK politics? :rolleyes:

ArmaniJeanss · 02-09-2019 12:50PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Keeping a close eye on twitter this afternoon.

Elections two months don’t they? Do they do snap elections over there? Could it be held sooner than the 31st?

35 days is the minimum figure to remember (from when QE2 gives the go-ahead).
So 7th October is now the earliest election possible.
But in reality it's at least couple of days more than that (has to voted on etc)
Also it will likely be the next Thursday after the 35 days.

BarryD2 · 02-09-2019 12:51PM

CelticRambler wrote: »

Really struggling to understand what world you're living in, or what news your listening to, or what forums you're reading - but for the last four years, contributors to this forum have been saying that things will not be grand..

With all due respect to you, a couple of dozen random posters on a boards thread does not constitute the Irish public or represent public discourse in same. You might as well write on a jacks door.

It's plain to be seen and heard that the average citizen of this Republic, like many citizens of the UK are totally bored out of their trees with BREXIT. It's just boring background noise for them and frankly they're more interested in what happened to the guys and gals of Love Island etc. As regards Brexit they hear Coveney drone on about backstops and their eyes glaze over.

We have had almost unanimous united support here from all political parties for the Gov strategy. Sometimes unanimity is good, sometimes it's not so good as people get lazy and don't challenge inherent assumptions. Until the consequences hit them in the face. Maybe that explains the unanimous approach by other parties, they figure this ain't going to end well for FG and then they can stick the boot in and get their own bums in the seat?

trellheim · 02-09-2019 12:52PM

Seriously lads think for a moment. They cannot call a GE unless Labour agrees. Since Labour has always wanted one they are betting Labour will go for it. Since Corbyn has now come over to 2nd Ref this is all a ploy to make Labour out to be the bad guys

swampgas · 02-09-2019 12:52PM

seamus wrote: »

That might be the plan. "Nobody's to blame because we were all out campaigning when we should have been saving our economy!".

Not so easy now though. Johnson needs the support of 2/3rds of the house or a vote of no confidence.

I can't see the HoC giving him a free pass to let no-deal go through by inaction, and the opposition can scupper any no confidence motion.

They might force Johnson to be sitting in the captain's chair as the ship goes down.

Presumably it would be easier to amend or repeal the FTPA with a 50%+1 majority if getting 2/3rds looked tricky? Surely at this stage anything that breaks the deadlock must be considered.

ToBeFrank123 · 02-09-2019 12:55PM

trellheim wrote: »

I am quoting TBF123 here. I personally believe this is the cause of all the problems with Brexit and why it is so divisory.

1. The referendum choice includes no comma, or words after it - the words "fully and entirely" do not appear.

2. Therefore everyone was entitled to define 'Leave' any way they chose , and have felt free to do so ranging from BRINO to No Deal.

3. However 'Easiest Deal Ever' was the phrase de jure . As we have seen this is completely not the case , three years and still not even past WA to pol dec yet.

4. There remains a group of Eurosceptics in the Commons for whom "fully and entirely" is now within their grasp and will do absolutely anything in their power to get it.

5. All they have to do to achieve this end is inertia - run the clock down.
1 -5 are facts and not hyperbole. All the sides pretty much agree on this.

Edit : more facts.

6. Boris cannot call a GE ; all he can do is put forward a motion for one and hope 2/3 of MP's vote for it.

7. I'd expect a Cabinet meeting before the resumption of Parliament in any event

Tell us exactly what not fully and entirely leaving the EU means and I will answer that.

Numerous attempts have been put forward in the HoC to begin the process of leaving the EU. All failed.

So unless you have something wonderful to propose that a majority in the HoC can vote for, then nothing has changed.

Do you have something to propose that would get a majority in the HoC?

Stop moaning ffs · 02-09-2019 12:55PM

trellheim wrote: »

Seriously lads think for a moment. They cannot call a GE unless Labour agrees. Since Labour has always wanted one they are betting Labour will go for it. Since Corbyn has now come over to 2nd Ref this is all a ploy to make Labour out to be the bad guys

He wants one. This just today

https://twitter.com/bbcpolitics/status/1168490237351387136?s=21

swampgas · 02-09-2019 12:57PM

BarryD2 wrote: »

It's plain to be seen and heard that the average citizen of this Republic, like many citizens of the UK are totally bored out of their trees with BREXIT. It's just boring background noise for them and frankly they're more interested in what happened to the guys and gals of Love Island etc. As regards Brexit they hear Coveney drone on about backstops and their eyes glaze over.

If your livelihood is threatened by Brexit, and you tune it out because it's "boring", that's ... what can I say? Darwinian?

02-09-2019 12:59PM

kuro68k wrote: »

My understanding is that Parliament needs to pass legislation for an election, so presumably will try to amend it to make sure the date is before brexit...

The fixed term parliament act requires a 2/3 majority to call an early election. So Labour would have to back it - Corbyn has called for an election I believe so it would be hard for him to oppose it.

prawnsambo · 02-09-2019 01:05PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Because it made No Deal a much greater possibility and also because they took the same side as the likes of the DUP and ERG.

Ultimately they opposed the backstop which is the key point. Not much finger pointing at them though.

May proposed and was in favour of the backstop. Corbyn, SNP, etc opposed it. So who is the bad guy here? From an Irish point of view, May tried to help Ireland with the backstop and Corbyn and SNP wanted none of it. Yet they get off scot free.

Well I don't think Corbyn got off scot free. He's been lambasted for sitting on the fence on brexit, not enforcing a three-line whip on votes and allowing brexiter Labour MPs defy the whip without sanction. But trying to apply blame to the parties in the HoC is equivalent to herding chickens. No party has shown a consistent policy via their MP's voting records on the subject. Focusing on the backstop is just aiming at a moving target. The ERG have admitted that if it were removed, they still wouldn't vote for the WA. You quoted the SNP's objection to the backstop, but ignored their opposition to the WA in general. Like this quote from Nicola Sturgeon:

The withdrawal agreement has lots of flaws within it, and fundamentally, there is no clarity whatsoever about the future between the UK and the EU.The House of Commons is going to be asked to effectively endorse a 'blindfold Brexit', where all the difficult issues that have dogged these negotiations for two-and-a-half years are simply kicked further down the road.
I think it would be a mistake and deeply irresponsible for the House of Commons to endorse that.

Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Comments