nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Quin_Dub

This is the eleventh incarnation of our Brexit discussion thread,

Same warnings etc still apply:

As we are approaching the critical end of March October 2019 period, please bear the following in mind before posting:
Insults directed at popular figures are not acceptable in this forum
Please do not post memes, videos or comedy links here
Please do not be uncivil to other posters
Please use the report function to alert the mods when necessary

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The Brexit party, whose only raison d'etre is to get Brexit done, are key. They are polling about 12% If they step aside, the only party who will 'get Brexit done' for Leavers will be the Tories. If that's the case, because of FPTP, the Tories will get a commanding majority.

Farage demanded far too high a price before for such cooperation. Polling at 12% means very little given that 12.6% of the vote in 2015 got them one seat.

Hurrache

Verhofstadt has kicked the proposals off the park in his presser this afternoon.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Farage demanded far too high a price before for such cooperation. Polling at 12% means very little given that 12.6% of the vote in 2015 got them one seat.

That 12% would be the difference between a Tory opposition or a Tory government with a large majority. Other than that, the Brexit party are irrelevant in a GE.

Galway56736

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Farage demanded far too high a price before for such cooperation. Polling at 12% means very little given that 12.6% of the vote in 2015 got them one seat.

Irrelevant in the sense it won't win them a seat but very relevant in that the majority of that 12% will come from the Tories and potentially cost Tory seats.

dePeatrick

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That 12% would be the difference between a Tory opposition or a Tory government with a large majority. Other than that, the Brexit party are irrelevant in a GE.

They will be irrevelent after Brexit, I think they will join the Tories.

liamtech

Hurrache wrote: »

Verhofstadt has kicked the proposals off the park in his presser this afternoon.

Has there actually been a press statement today from Guy?

Iv been jumping between BBC24, Sky News, Euro News, and EBS - need a few more TV's at this stage!

quokula

Watching the news at lunch and the UK media are totally focussed on playing up the fact that the deal could get through parliament. Ignoring the fact that it's completely unworkable.

Quin_Dub

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That 12% would be the difference between a Tory opposition or a Tory government with a large majority. Other than that, the Brexit party are irrelevant in a GE.

Exactly - Farage et al won't win any seats but they could lose quite a few for the Tories . Hence everything that Boris Johnson has been doing.

They care about nothing else other than having an election and taking out Farage.

Any collateral damage , like the UK economy or NI Security and peace is meaningless to them

Professor Moriarty

dePeatrick wrote: »

They will be irrevelent after Brexit, I think they will join the Tories.

Or slink back to UKIP.

J Mysterio

By glutinous emollience he means he will be very soothing and comforting.

It's distracting crap. Those words don't even work together.

dePeatrick

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Or slink back to UKIP.

Possibly if it is true that Johnson hates Farage but at this stage if either told me the day of the week I would check my diary.

Looks like a hard Brexit...

CelticRambler

J Mysterio wrote: »

By glutinous emollience he means he will be very soothing and comforting.

It's distracting crap. Those words don't even work together.

Any chance that one person could have mis-transcribed the spoken word emollients, and everyone else has retweeted the error?

Glutinous emollients are readily available in most supermarkets and pound shops. :cool:

CelticRambler

quokula wrote: »

Watching the news at lunch and the UK media are totally focussed on playing up the fact that the deal could get through parliament. Ignoring the fact that it's completely unworkable.

Ian Dunt (at least I think it was him) made that very same point this morning on Sky, saying it was essentially a re-run of the Chequers lock-in: Tories negotiating with themselves, come up with some harebrained scheme that has no chance of getting approval from the EU, yet the UK media immediately fall into the trap of "running the numbers" over and over again ... until the EU issue a statement say "yeah, thanks ... but that's a definite no."

fash

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Less than 9 months ago. It was one of the options that the HoC voted on

Thanks. That's a powerful fact for Ireland and the EU to point out repeatedly. An awful lot of Tories must have voted for. I'm going to guess Johnson abstained.

Correct. Now I will accept that parties vote for and against the WA or any amendment (even this 600 to 24 one) for all sorts of reasons - however Tobefrank123 ignores the fact that Labour or the LibDems are in fact very happy with the backstop as such- in fact they want a much much softer or no Brexit than that.

J Mysterio

Ian Dunt on radio1 now

Strazdas

CelticRambler wrote: »

Ian Dunt (at least I think it was him) made that very same point this morning on Sky, saying it was essentially a re-run of the Chequers lock-in: Tories negotiating with themselves, come up with some harebrained scheme that has no chance of getting approval from the EU, yet the UK media immediately fall into the trap of "running the numbers" over and over again ... until the EU issue a statement say "yeah, thanks ... but that's a definite no."

The EU could never agree to it. It's a mishmash of ill thought out proposals hastily thrown together in the space of an afternoon, grabbing ideas from here, there and everywhere......no basis at all for an international treaty.

BobbyBobberson

As David McWilliams pointed out today, who the **** is going to invest in a country where the trading rules can change in four years? Whole thing is a disaster for NI.

This is all a blame game and designed to fail, when you see the ERG positioning themselves behind it, it tells you everything. Extension and a GE is the next step, not that a GE solved anything the last time.

Igotadose

BobbyBobberson wrote: »

As David McWilliams pointed out today, who the **** is going to invest in a country where the trading rules can change in four years? Whole thing is a disaster for NI.

This is all a blame game and designed to fail, when you see the ERG positioning themselves behind it, it tells you everything. Extension and a GE is the next step, not that a GE solved anything the last time.

I liked whoever the MP was that congratulated BoJo today on negotiating a deal between the ERG and the DUP.

But, otherwise, this is groundhog day yet again.

Professor Moriarty

The European Parliament's Brexit Steering Group has said that these proposals "do not even remotely match what was agreed as a sufficient compromise in the backstop." So that's that. Unless the Glutinously Emollient One backs down.

john9876

Assuming this deal is rejected and the Benn law delays no deal until, say May next year, if the Tories get a clear majority in a general election (hypothetical), what would Johnson do, continue to negotiate meaningfully with the EU or just wait for no deal or throw the DUP under the bus and leave NI in EU customs Union and single market?

An Ciarraioch

liamtech wrote: »

Has there actually been a press statement today from Guy?

Iv been jumping between BBC24, Sky News, Euro News, and EBS - need a few more TV's at this stage!

https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1179751901832912899

An Ciarraioch

Solidarity from Donald Tusk:

https://twitter.com/eucopresident/status/1179762497466830848

dePeatrick

john9876 wrote: »

Assuming this deal is rejected and the Benn law delays no deal until, say May next year, if the Tories get a clear majority in a general election (hypothetical), what would Johnson do, continue to negotiate meaningfully with the EU or just wait for no deal or throw the DUP under the bus and leave NI in EU customs Union and single market?

Difficult to forecast, Benn act may fail. Boris will lose face if he goes for an extension, looks he'll bent on a hard Brexit and the EU is not going to blink.

So be it, we are better off without them.

farmchoice

dePeatrick wrote: »

Difficult to forecast, Benn act may fail. Boris will lose face if he goes for an extension, looks he'll bent on a hard Brexit and the EU is not going to blink.

So be it, we are better off without them.

there is a clear majority in parliament to stop a no deal and they have plenty of time to act now, if boris will not send the letter they will arrange to have it sent for him.
this will suit boris as well as it suits everyone else.

GM228

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1179751901832912899

Semantic point, it is being widely reported that the European Parliament (as is evident in that Tweet for example) have made today's statement, they have not, rather it comes from the Brexit Steering Group of the European Parliament, not quite the same.

The group statement is here:-

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20191003IPR63303/brexit-recent-uk-proposals-do-not-offer-the-safeguards-the-eu-and-ireland-need

Nody

farmchoice wrote: »

there is a clear majority in parliament to stop a no deal and they have plenty of time to act now, if boris will not send the letter they will arrange to have it sent for him.
this will suit boris as well as it suits everyone else.

The problem is the parliament needs to actually have an alternative solution and not only demand no crash out and extension. And that's were the coin falls down; the parliament are good at stating what they don't want but they can't unite on what to do instead.

joe40

john9876 wrote: »

Assuming this deal is rejected and the Benn law delays no deal until, say May next year, if the Tories get a clear majority in a general election (hypothetical), what would Johnson do, continue to negotiate meaningfully with the EU or just wait for no deal or throw the DUP under the bus and leave NI in EU customs Union and single market?

If the following happens: extension followed by election and a conservative majority government.
Will Boris not simply undo the Benn act with another law and then leave with "No deal"

Would he be compelled to wait out any EU extension (if one was granted)

Also in an election will all the tory candidates now run on a manifesto of "no deal" since it is patently obvious now they can't negotiate a deal, without major concessions from their hardline stance.
Surely this will be a major problem for some. One would imagine, but maybe I'm giving them too much credit.

So much uncertainty

lawred2

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1179751901832912899

Puts deal under custody of the DUP

That's some straight talking right there

GM228

lawred2 wrote: »

Puts deal under custody of the DUP

That's some straight talking right there

+1, From the Brexit Steering Group:-

BSG wrote:

the right of consent being offered to the Northern Irish Assembly effectively makes an agreement contingent, uncertain, provisional and unilateral decision, instead of the safety net provided for by the backstop. Furthermore, the Northern Irish Assembly has not sat for nearly three years and it is questionable whether it would be able to reconvene and take on the responsibility for an international treaty of this nature

Professor Moriarty

GM228 wrote: »

Semantic point, it is being widely reported that the European Parliament (as is evident in that Tweet for example) have made today's statement, they have not, rather it comes from the Brexit Steering Group of the European Parliament, not quite the same.

The group statement is here:-

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20191003IPR63303/brexit-recent-uk-proposals-do-not-offer-the-safeguards-the-eu-and-ireland-need

Tusk unequivocal today when speaking to Johnson and Varadkar:

Told Varadkar: We stand fully behind Ireland.
Told Johnson: We remain open but still unconvinced.