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

Tea Shock

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I also think it’s v suspicious

Likes of Gove and Rees Mogg praising the deal to the heavens

ERG appear to be happy

DUP doing a vow of silence

?!?

Something is up. Is it a tactic to lead to either no deal or an election?

Been trying to tell everyone this all week! If this WA passes, they can get around the Benn Act by failing to enact all required legislation by October 31st. If it is defeated as is likely, they will delay in the same way as Teresa May did....by bringing it back again or some other imaginative trick!

We knew all along they had a tactic. It seems most people have forgotten though!

The DUP don't need to say any more publically. They will be busily verifying Johnson doesn’t have the numbers

boggerman1

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1184834973662175234

So much wrong with this I don't know where to start . Junker didn't say that for a start but even if he did . Does Nigel support the "surrender act" now , does he want an extension ?

Nigal will support whatever Arron banks tells him to support

Zubeneschamali

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

the Tories will be further to the right and possibly in an alliance with a small Brexit Party. They will look to reopen new talks with No Deal in the background as a threat.

In that situation the EU will just say No. Take May's deal or Johnson's deal if you like, unless you move your red lines we are not negotiating further.

A Labour led government would be a different story, since they would move the red lines day one and negotiate a much less damaging Norway style Brexit and then probably remain in any case.

WomanSkirtFan8

J Mysterio wrote: »

UK have already made a laugh of democracy. UK is in serious need of political reform (not to mind everything else).

absolutely. they need serious fundamental reform in both their politics and their educational systems both of which are extremely damaged or broken at this point. The old FPTP system doesn't work anymore for them so they'll have to try and come up with some new. Problem is, I seriously doubt that there's the will in the HOC to do that. :rolleyes:

prawnsambo

Tea Shock wrote: »

Been trying to tell everyone this all week! If this WA passes, they can get around the Benn Act by failing to enact all required legislation by October 31st. If it is defeated as is likely, they will delay in the same way as Teresa May did....by bringing it back again or some other imaginative trick!

The Benn Act doesn't allow them to bring it back for another vote. It triggers the minute a vote fails or no new deal is brought to the HoC.

DFS UTD

Hilary Benn saying he will vote FOR deal - if amendment for confirmationary referendum included. Letwin amendment coming on Saturday me thinks!!

Danthemanhere

So I'm was bored with this years ago and don't want to watch anything on it. Will someone give me the update? Are the Brits going to **** off or what's happening?

GM228

The Court of Appeal will be live streaming a Benn Act related Judicial Review tomorrow at 10:-

https://twitter.com/JudiciaryUK/status/1184838484693004289?s=19

It will be on at the same time the Scottish Outer House considers the lawfulness of the new proposed WA.

Interesting few days ahead.

ToBeFrank123

Danthemanhere wrote: »

So I'm was bored with this years ago and don't want to watch anything on it. Will someone give me the update? Are the Brits going to **** off or what's happening?

In summary, they've been shown the door and are clinging to the door frame by their fingertips.

GM228

Excellent summary of the new WA:-

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1184838369735577602?s=19

In summary he concludes it is worse than the previous WA.

Danthemanhere

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

In summary, they've been shown the door and are clinging to the door frame by their fingertips.

Well give them a boot up the hole and send them flying out!

golfball37

The Benn act is redundant now with JCJ saying there will be no extension. Its either Boris deal or no deal now. Labour will look ridiculous voting against this if no deal is the consequence. Cummins and Boris have played this thing beautifully from a political strategy POV.

FrancieBrady

GM228 wrote: »

Excellent summary of the new WA:-

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1184838369735577602?s=19

In summary he concludes it is worse than the previous WA.

This is reminding me of May's deal, as time passed to the HoC vote it got more and more assessment and as a consequence, undermined.

It will be in tatters before a vote on Saturday.

[Deleted User]

GM228 wrote: »

Excellent summary of the new WA:-

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1184838369735577602?s=19

In summary he concludes it is worse than the previous WA.

That would be a lot more effective if argued against Labour's plan, not May's which they didn't go for.

[Deleted User]

golfball37 wrote: »

The Benn act is redundant now with JCJ saying there will be no extension. Its either Boris deal or no deal now. Labour will look ridiculous voting against this if no deal is the consequence. Cummins and Boris have played this thing beautifully from a political strategy POV.

There can be an extension. It's not up to JCJ.

GM228

golfball37 wrote: »

The Benn act is redundant now with JCJ saying there will be no extension. Its either Boris deal or no deal now. Labour will look ridiculous voting against this if no deal is the consequence. Cummins and Boris have played this thing beautifully from a political strategy POV.

I don't think that's what he is actually saying, besides it is not up to him to say that - it's an EU27 decision.

strawdog

golfball37 wrote: »

The Benn act is redundant now with JCJ saying there will be no extension. Its either Boris deal or no deal now. Labour will look ridiculous voting against this if no deal is the consequence. Cummins and Boris have played this thing beautifully from a political strategy POV.

Its obviously still uncertain how this will all play out but if it was their plan all along it was a nicely executed pivot in fairness

prawnsambo

golfball37 wrote: »

The Benn act is redundant now with JCJ saying there will be no extension. Its either Boris deal or no deal now. Labour will look ridiculous voting against this if no deal is the consequence. Cummins and Boris have played this thing beautifully from a political strategy POV.

The Benn Act is not redundant. JCJ doesn't decide on an extension, the EuCo do. And this is a summary of Section 1 of the Benn Act:

Section 1 obliges the Prime Minister to request an extension to the Article 50 negotiating period for the purpose of negotiating a withdrawal agreement, unless the House of Commons has passed a motion which either approves a withdrawal agreement or approves departure without a deal, and the House of Lords has debated the same motion. If such a motion is not approved, the Prime Minister is obliged to make the request no later than 19 October 2019.

[Deleted User]

Some strands of thought suggesting Corbyn won't muster the necessary support to tack on a confirmatory referendum. So if its a straight vote on the deal and its rejected, are we looking at an extension, an election, Boris to win a majority and try to get this deal approved again?

https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1184842987232223232?s=20

FrancieBrady

strawdog wrote: »

Its obviously still uncertain how this will all play out but if it was their plan all along it was a nicely executed pivot in fairness

Frosty Perception wrote: »

Can JC alone refuse an extension? and did he REALLY say that?
from the footage i thought he was referring to no more PROLOGATION by the HoC.

if you are correct, then i think it is Game, Set & Match to BJ.

Settle the head.

https://twitter.com/mattholehouse/status/1184833950193213441?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1184833950193213441&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boards.ie%2Fvbulletin%2Fshowthread.php%3Ft%3D2058016732%26page%3D160

robinph

Frosty Perception wrote: »

Can JC alone refuse an extension? and did he REALLY say that?
from the footage i thought he was referring to no more PROLOGATION by the HoC.

if you are correct, then i think it is Game, Set & Match to BJ.

Even if JCJ meant what you think he meant, it still means nothing and has zero bearing on if an extension will be granted or not...other than it might scare a few MP's who are a few sandwiches short of a picnic into caving in and voting for the deal.

If what JCJ said had any significance then does that mean we get to hold Johnson to his comment about being dead in a ditch in two weeks time?

ancapailldorcha

Juncker looks to have added more than what was reported according to Adam Boulton:

https://twitter.com/adamboultonSKY/status/1184830781581074434

robinph

Deleted User wrote: »

Some strands of thought suggesting Corbyn won't muster the necessary support to tack on a confirmatory referendum. So if its a straight vote on the deal and its rejected, are we looking at an extension, an election, Boris to win a majority and try to get this deal approved again?

https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1184842987232223232?s=20

Who are the idiot MP's who are against a bad deal and against no deal, but can't bring themselves to let the people have another say on the matter?

Do they just need someone other than Corbyn to be submitting the amendment?

moon2

prawnsambo wrote: »

House of Commons has passed a motion which either approves a withdrawal agreement or approves departure without a deal

I wonder if this is the loophole which people kept alluding to. The intention of the bill, from all reading, was that either a motion approving an agreement needed to be passed, or a motion approving departure without a deal needed to be passed.

What Boris is proposing now is a single motion which has two options: vote for this deal or no deal. By proposing this choice in the first place the Benn act would then be nullified as no extension request would be needed.

With that reading the lawsuit about the legality of bringing the motion forward in the first place is critical. The only way Boris would be legally obligated to request an extension would be if he can't table the motion he intends to.

robinph

Frosty Perception wrote: »

if Boris got to the people with this deal, he'll win hand down imo.
apart from political anoraks people are totally fed-up with this nonsense. it's seriously impacting people's lives, families, businesses, sanity.

he will got to the country with the slogan of "Get it Done!" and i wouldnt blame anybody for going along with that.

There is a difference between being fed up with Brexit and picking a bad Brexit deal just because to are fed up with it.

If you've been threatening to shoot yourself in the foot for three and a half years and then someone comes along and asks you "are you really sure about this?" would you still go ahead with shooting yourself in the foot just to be done with it?

Tea Shock

prawnsambo wrote: »

The Benn Act doesn't allow them to bring it back for another vote. It triggers the minute a vote fails or no new deal is brought to the HoC.

That‘s why I said some other trick. They can request the extension but ask the EU not to give an answer on it til they try pass WA II a second, and maybe a third time. They will leave with no deal if WA II passes and I’m certain they’ve thought of a way to also bring about no deal in the other eventuality

There’ll be twists and turns tho. The opposition aren’t thick. And neither are the EU.

They also asked for the perogation the second time to cover the possibility that they would be bringing back Teresa Mays exact deal a fourth time - they needed a new session to make that possible

There isn’t a single doubt in my mind that Johnson’s government have no intention of this deal becoming effective!

ancapailldorcha

Frosty Perception wrote: »

if Boris got to the people with this deal, he'll win hand down imo.
apart from political anoraks people are totally fed-up with this nonsense. it's seriously impacting people's lives, families, businesses, sanity.

he will got to the country with the slogan of "Get it Done!" and i wouldnt blame anybody for going along with that.

Seriously? If he goes to the public, he'll be annihilated. The way to stop this is cancelling it. Even if the deal passes, we'll be back to this nonsense when it comes to negotiating the FTA.

Seth Brundle

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Juncker looks to have added more than what was reported according to Adam Boulton:

https://twitter.com/adamboultonSKY/status/1184830781581074434

So I presume that Farage will amend his tweet then

Separately, the Economist don't appear to have much faith in the new agreement...
https://twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/1184779166576795648

Kermit.de.frog

We need a strong statement from the council that it's this deal or no deal tbh.

Time to bring this to an end.

Imreoir2

Bambi wrote: »

I could care less about Varadker when it comes to this, if he wasn't running the show it would be Michael Martin and I would have held him to the same standard. I supect you'll defend Varadker and Coveney regardless

All along our government had support across the board based on their two red lines:

They would not sign up to anything that could create a hard border
The Good Friday agreement could not be compromised.

When push came to shove they abandoned both on the basis that it might never happen. "Might never happen" in an era where Donald Trump is president of the USA.

It should not be withing the gift of politicians in the north to destroy the Good Friday agreement it was an All Ireland agreement ratified by the people of this island north and south via referendum not elections.

You can try engage in some jesuitical justification for this reversal but the reality is that they abandoned a position that had support right across the island. And people go on about Boris not being trustworthy.

I think you overstep the mark on our role as a country in the affairs of NI. As signatories to the GFA we have to vindicate that agreement and ensure that it is not undermined either through our own actions or the actions of the British, and we have done so.

It does not, however, give us the right to impose our will on NI or to decide their future for them. If as you say, the people of NI support the arangements agreed, then there is nothing stopping them from remaining within them. The British government has accepted that they cannot force NI out of these arangements against their will, neither should we claim to right to keep them in those arangements if they wish to leave. Only the people of NI themselves can choose to leave. If the people of NI do at some point in the future decide to leave these arangements, then that is their choice to make. We don't have a right to prevent them from doing so, however much we might regret such a choice on their part.