Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

bilston · 04-12-2018 7:15pm

Lady Hermon (Independent Unionist MP) just put the DUP in their place in the HoC by eloquently pointing out they in no way represent the majority of people in Northern Ireland. Alas she is only one MP, but we need to hear a lot more from her.

ancapailldorcha · 04-12-2018 7:31pm

Post deleted. Don't dump links here please.

Enzokk · 04-12-2018 8:02pm

maximoose wrote: »

Yep, it'll be out tomorrow

I guess it depends if they want MPs to see the advice or not. Nowhere does it say that they will publish it, only that they will respond to finding of contempt. They surely would have more plans to delay the publication if they are determined not to have it published.

All other comments on it so far seems to be that the government cannot delay much longer but no action to make them publish it either.

cml387 · 04-12-2018 8:06pm

Since the Grieve amendment was passed, there is a path for the PM to win the vote.
If the Brexiteers vote no and the house vote on a way forward, they loose the possibility of a no deal.

Therefore the agreement as it stands is the best worst option.

Meanwhile Corbyn is on his feet, once again confusing everybody.

Enzokk · 04-12-2018 8:08pm

As for the debate on the Withdrawal Agreement, it seems to me that Theresa May is back to being in dream land. They will leave the jurisdiction of the ECJ, they will not be paying exorbitant amounts to the EU, they will end free movement of people. The deal is not brilliant but it is a good deal that has something for everyone.

On a second referendum, it will only prolong the debate on the EU and the UK in the EU. But I don't see how taking her deal makes it go away.

10000maniacs · 04-12-2018 8:12pm

cml387 wrote: »

Since the Grieve amendment was passed, there is a path for the PM to win the vote.
If the Brexiteers vote no and the house vote on a way forward, they loose the possibility of a no deal.

Therefore the agreement as it stands is the best worst option.

Meanwhile Corbyn is on his feet, once again confusing everybody.

I think the Grieve amendment makes the no-Brexit scenario more likely.

devnull · 04-12-2018 8:13pm

Corbyn is completely clueless, can someone explain to me what he actually wants?

It seems to be that he believes he will make his own idea of what Brexit should be like and the EU will just go along with it?

He's really not living in the real world, a proper opposition would have buried this laughable Tory party ages ago.

tuxy · 04-12-2018 8:15pm

It looks like the confidence and supply agreement is now broken with the DUP and this is how the vote for Mays deal will go unless she can somehow get them back on side. Not sure how the Tories can continue in power from here.

Nody · 04-12-2018 8:17pm

devnull wrote: »

Corbyn is completely clueless, can someone explain to me what he actually wants?

It seems to be that he believes he will make his own idea of what Brexit should be like and the EU will just go along with it?

He's really not living in the real world, a proper opposition would have buried this laughable Tory party ages ago.

Pretty much yes; take your deluded hardcore Brexiteer and replace crisis capitalism with 50s social state owning all major utilities etc. and you're pretty much there.

Seth Brundle · 04-12-2018 8:19pm

tuxy wrote: »

It looks like the confidence and supply agreement is now broken with the DUP and this is how the vote for Mays deal will go unless she can somehow get them back on side. Not sure how the Tories can continue in power from here.

...but the alternative to vote for Mays agreement is to side with SF loving Corbyn.
They're in a pickle!

theguzman · 04-12-2018 8:19pm

Nody wrote: »

Pretty much yes; take your deluded hardcore Brexiteer and replace crisis capitalism with 50s social state owning all major utilities etc. and you're pretty much there.

Whatever about Brexit etc. the UK will really be catastrophic trouble if Corbyn gets his hands on power, in the US there was an entire system dedicated to ensuring people like Corbyn never got anywhere near political power.

cml387 · 04-12-2018 8:20pm

10000maniacs wrote: »

I think the Grieve amendment makes the no-Brexit scenario more likely.

Don't see that. If the commons have a say in the post-rejection scenario, a crash out scenario will be voted down by a majority.

Fann Linn · 04-12-2018 8:21pm

theguzman wrote: »

Whatever about Brexit etc. the UK will really be catastrophic trouble if Corbyn gets his hands on power, in the US there was an entire system dedicated to ensuring people like Corbyn never got anywhere near political power.

And to think they did this themselves. Marvellous just watching them tear each other apart.

An Ciarraioch · 04-12-2018 8:24pm

cml387 wrote: »

10000maniacs wrote: »

I think the Grieve amendment makes the no-Brexit scenario more likely.

Don't see that. If the commons have a say in the post-rejection scenario, a crash out scenario will be voted down by a majority.

Which is what he said.

ancapailldorcha · 04-12-2018 8:25pm

Looks like the BBC have cancelled the Brexit debate:

https://twitter.com/MarkDiStef/status/1069985007459069954

Can't see it achieving much anyway.

Nody · 04-12-2018 8:27pm

cml387 wrote: »

Don't see that. If the commons have a say in the post-rejection scenario, a crash out scenario will be voted down by a majority.

They can vote for no crash out all they want but there are three options on the table only:

1) May's deal - Will be voted down
2) Vote to reject A50 and somehow get May/Corbyn to do it - Not going to happen
3) Vote for May to go back and negotiate a new deal which will not happen

Then on March 29th hit and they crash out because they can't organize themselves enough to get drunk in a brewery. Crash out is the default option if nothing else gets through parliament and only option 1 stops that which they already rejected as an option. Hence they need to somehow strong arm May to hold an election (why would she?) or a new referendum (which DUP and Tories would block along with enough hardcore Corbinites) which basically leaves crash out basically. May is running scared but there is no scenario I see her going for a new election (she'd lose her PM position in the GE), a new referendum (she's to afraid of getting kicked out by her party) and since her overarching goal beyond all else is to remain PM she'll do exactly nothing and crash out to stay in the chair for as long as possible.

10000maniacs · 04-12-2018 8:28pm

cml387 wrote: »

Don't see that. If the commons have a say in the post-rejection scenario, a crash out scenario will be voted down by a majority.

We all agree that the crash out will be voted down, but what then?
The commons can then argue for amendments to May's deal, withdrawal of article 50 (no-Brexit) or a people vote.

cml387 · 04-12-2018 8:30pm

Well I've been watching the debate on BBC Parliament and I have to say that TM was very impressive, particularly as she emphasised that without the backstop, there would be no deal.

As for Corbyn, he wants to move the debate onto everything except the motion up for debate. It's just pathetic.

By the way, it's interesting to note that Irish affairs haven't had such a fundamental affect on British constitutional affairs since the Home Rule debates.

devnull · 04-12-2018 8:31pm

10000maniacs wrote: »

We all agree that the crash out will be voted down, but what then?
The commons can then argue for amendments to May's deal, withdrawal of article 50 (no-Brexit) or a people vote.

You cannot vote down crashing out.

Crashing out happens automatically if you don't have any other arrangement.

10000maniacs · 04-12-2018 8:33pm

devnull wrote: »

You cannot vote down crashing out.

Crashing out happens automatically if you don't have any other arrangement.

You know what I meant. Crashing out is a valid outcome that can be voted upon.

Professor Moriarty · 04-12-2018 8:43pm

In other news, Nige has left UKIP. Ironically, it has become too racist for him.

Larbre34 · 04-12-2018 8:44pm

So, we all agree there is no majority for anything.

Do we agree that crash out is the default consequence? After all, an extension to Article 50 must be requested and that has no majority, especially as Brussels will not contemplate renegotiation.

Water John · 04-12-2018 8:51pm

BJ speaking in HoC ATM. Very poor performance. Ken Clarke points out how deluded he is.

10000maniacs · 04-12-2018 8:56pm

Larbre34 wrote: »

So, we all agree there is no majority for anything.

Do we agree that crash out is the default consequence? After all, an extension to Article 50 must be requested and that has no majority, especially as Brussels will not contemplate renegotiation.

Not quite, Grieve's vote has handed power from May to Parliament on Brexit. There is no government position that matters anymore on Brexit. That's why I say no-Brexit is the most likely outcome.

BonnieSituation · 04-12-2018 8:57pm

theguzman wrote: »

Whatever about Brexit etc. the UK will really be catastrophic trouble if Corbyn gets his hands on power, in the US there was an entire system dedicated to ensuring people like Corbyn never got anywhere near political power.

Whatever about the jokeshop that is the UK political system it's almost infinitely superior to the sham in the States.

Welcome back though. Your contrarian views will be most welcome.

Econ__ · 04-12-2018 8:59pm

devnull wrote: »

You cannot vote down crashing out.

Crashing out happens automatically if you don't have any other arrangement.

Larbre34 wrote: »

So, we all agree there is no majority for anything.

Do we agree that crash out is the default consequence? After all, an extension to Article 50 must be requested and that has no majority, especially as Brussels will not contemplate renegotiation.

Lads, why don't you just try to think this through for a second.

Worst case scenario: It's the 15th of March and the Commons is deadlocked, and cannot decide upon a way forward.

There is a deal already negotiated and sitting on the table. In what world do MPs, after realising that a consensus on an alternative course of action has failed to materialise, actively choose to walk off the cliff instead of demanding that they vote again on the already negotiated deal?

No such world exists. The fact that no deal is the default outcome is nothing more than a theoretical footnote.

Nody · 04-12-2018 9:09pm

Econ__ wrote: »

Lads, why don't you just try to think this through for a second.

Worst case scenario: It's the 15th of March and the Commons is deadlocked, and cannot decide upon a way forward.

There is a deal already negotiated and sitting on the table. In what world do MPs, after realising that a consensus on an alternative course of action has failed to materialise, actively choose to walk off the cliff instead of demanding that they vote again on the already negotiated deal?

No such world exists. The fact that no deal is the default outcome is nothing more than a theoretical footnote.

There's no difference between today or 15th March and chances of that deal getting voted through then is about as similar as now. You only need to see how every single person basically bends under the party whip no matter how strong their objections are esp. if they can use it to blame the other side (i.e. Corbyn wanting to use the Brexit crash out to get into government and get a new deal that's everything they dream off). Secondly and this is the part you (along with the UK parliament appear to miss) voting through the deal on the 15th is still leading to a crash out because there's simply not enough time to run it through all relevant parliaments etc. in EU and May asking for more time is about as likely as her resigning or withdrawing A50. The deal needs to pass now or there is simply not enough time to get it approved; and if it's not approved you can take a wild guess on what's the alternative is.

MrMusician18 · 04-12-2018 9:10pm

Infini wrote: »

It certainly is possible even more that being able to rescind A50 is actually an option now by the looks of things. The refererendum was ultimately advisory they arent compelled to Brexit as the result could very well be argued as a deadlock.

The result wasnt an overwhelming one with less than 2% majority in favour of leave and thats only out of those who did vote. Take into account the russian troll factor, blatent lies of the campaign, cheating and dodgy spending of the leave campaign amongst others and the fact that 2 1/2 years of this results in a WA most cannot agree to and the economic costs and Parliment can very well direct the UK government to cancel brexit and revoke A50 based on the above and because Brexit simply cannot be delivered without either giving up control (not taking it back) or suffering drastic economic damage.

The problems the UK have are their own homegrown ones not the EU's and they cant keep blaming others for their own failures. They need to bite the bullet on this and end this charade its either stay in the EU with control, leave and give up control with no say or crash and wreck their own country. The choice is obvious to us but its up to them to cop on and make the best one.

Sigh... We've been over this ground, maybe a thousand times since the first Brexit thread. Yes the referendum was advisory but that's only because parliament is sovereign and all referendums are ultimately advisory in the UK.

Politically, the referendum was binding, therefore the result has to be implemented (in some fashion) or overturned by popular vote.

The vote cannot be ignored.

Water John · 04-12-2018 9:11pm

Sky News saying BJ's contribution to the debate didn't go down well in the HoC's.
Basically, BJ was saying we go back to the EU, basically with threats, and be ready to Crash out.

lawred2 · 04-12-2018 9:13pm

cml387 wrote: »

Well I've been watching the debate on BBC Parliament and I have to say that TM was very impressive, particularly as she emphasised that without the backstop, there would be no deal.

As for Corbyn, he wants to move the debate onto everything except the motion up for debate. It's just pathetic.

By the way, it's interesting to note that Irish affairs haven't had such a fundamental affect on British constitutional affairs since the Home Rule debates.

Yeah but back then, whatever the problem was, even after earnest discussions at great length, when something was in the balance they could ultimately just choose the well trodden path of shafting the Irish..

That's not as available to them now as it once was

Professor Moriarty · 04-12-2018 9:16pm

Water John wrote: »

Sky News saying BJ's contribution to the debate didn't go down well in the HoC's.
Basically, BJ was saying we go back to the EU, basically with threats, and be ready to Crash out.

Bojo has modelled himself on Churchill so this was an attempt to sound Churchillian. Unfortunately, he has neither Churchill's wit nor his wisdom and so Bojo comes across as a petulant rich kid wannabe. Which is exactly what he is.

Thargor · 04-12-2018 9:18pm

Boris got savaged there.

Econ__ · 04-12-2018 9:21pm

Nody wrote: »

There's no difference between today or 15th March and chances of that deal getting voted through then is about as similar as now. You only need to see how every single person basically bends under the party whip no matter how strong their objections are esp. if they can use it to blame the other side (i.e. Corbyn wanting to use the Brexit crash out to get into government and get a new deal that's everything they dream off). Secondly and this is the part you (along with the UK parliament appear to miss) voting through the deal on the 15th is still leading to a crash out because there's simply not enough time to run it through all relevant parliaments etc. in EU and May asking for more time is about as likely as her resigning or withdrawing A50. The deal needs to pass now or there is simply not enough time to get it approved; and if it's not approved you can take a wild guess on what's the alternative is.

This is profoundly wrong.

If MPs reject the deal now, there is significant hope for them than alternative avenues can be successfully pursued - there is time available.

This is not the case if they were to vote down the same deal on March 15th, and many would adjust their vote accordingly.

Your assumption only works if you pretend that time doesn't exist as a significant & material variable.

SimonTemplar · 04-12-2018 9:23pm

Sorry, things move so fast I've been kept out of the loop on this. Why did the government attempt to keep the legal advise secret. It is supposed to contain some damning criticism of Brexit or TM's deal?

prawnsambo · 04-12-2018 9:29pm

SimonTemplar wrote: »

Sorry, things move so fast I've been kept out of the loop on this. Why did the government attempt to keep the legal advise secret. It is supposed to contain some damning criticism of Brexit or TM's deal?

We don't know... yet.

Nody · 04-12-2018 9:30pm

Econ__ wrote: »

This is profoundly wrong.

If MPs reject the deal now, there is significant hope for them than alternative avenues can be successfully pursued - there is time available.

This is not the case if they were to vote down the same deal on March 15th, and many would adjust their vote accordingly.

Your assumption only works if you pretend that time doesn't exist as a significant & material variable.

No, your assumption only works if you assume EU AND May will agree to an extension on the 15th of March out of the blue. No extension = Crash out no matter what the parliament votes for and that extension can ONLY be requested by May and only if EU approves it because the deal needs at least 3 months to go through all 30ish parliaments in EU for approval (and that's assuming they approve it). EU has not been talking about the deal require signature in November/December for the fun of it; no signature by UK = full swing on hard crash set up inc. all plans swinging into motion accordingly in EU with all the implications this will have in the countries voting for an extension because UK can't organize a basic vote in parliament. That's from a basis of basically zero good will as it stands today and after significant expenses have been taken by said countries come March 15th; I'd not be surprised if it would get voted down simply out of frustration...

SimonTemplar · 04-12-2018 9:32pm

prawnsambo wrote: »

We don't know... yet.

Ah, I see. So there could be a smoking gun in it, and given the government's efforts to prevent its publication, I'd wager that seems likely.

amacca · 04-12-2018 9:34pm

What a complete and utter shambles and mess of a ****show.

Rhineshark · 04-12-2018 9:34pm

prawnsambo wrote: »

We don't know... yet.

Some of it appears to be (?) that the UK can unilaterally withdraw A50, which the gov preferred not to be known as it removes most of the invented difficulties with an option to vote Remain in another referendum.

Or, as an assistant politics editor for the BBC interpreted it, that they can unilaterally extend A50 and the ECJ said so (which is wrong on all counts).

SimonTemplar · 04-12-2018 9:35pm

Brexit was always going to be messy but I doubt anyone could have predicted this mess. I saw this comment on BBC and thought it summed up things nicely

This whole thing is the stupidest, saddest, most infuriating, pointless omnishambles I've *ever* experienced.

Those of you who seem to feel the EU is the source of all your problems in life, I've got news for you: it really isn't. You've been brainwashed by years of tabloid propaganda.

Sure, the EU isn't perfect (what political entity is??), but the overall benefits outweigh the negatives.

Folkstonian · 04-12-2018 9:41pm

Rhineshark wrote: »

Some of it appears to be (?) that the UK can unilaterally withdraw A50, which the gov preferred not to be known as it removes most of the invented difficulties with an option to vote Remain in another referendum.

Or, as an assistant politics editor for the BBC interpreted it, that they can unilaterally extend A50 and the ECJ said so (which is wrong on all counts).

Well, if Article 50 can be unilaterally withdrawn there would presumably be nothing stopping the british government doing so, waiting a week, and invoking it once more thereby giving themselves an extra two years of preparation and negotiation time

It’s a bizarre notion that it may be as easy as saying ‘no thanks, we’ve changed our minds’ in Parliament.

Water John · 04-12-2018 9:41pm

Parliament will be giving orders to the Govn't on, extending Art 50, not TM's decision anymore. After today's votes the possibility of a 2nd Ref has increased and it's more likely to be between TM's Deal and Remain. I am presuming JC doesn't get the opportunity of dealing with the EU where he offers a permanent CU.

SimonTemplar · 04-12-2018 9:43pm

TM barely has any authority anymore.

Water John · 04-12-2018 9:46pm

Govn't lost 3 key votes today. Parliament rules even if it's messy.

SimonTemplar · 04-12-2018 9:47pm

Water John wrote: »

Parliament will be giving orders to the Govn't on, extending Art 50, not TM's decision anymore. After today's votes the possibility of a 2nd Ref has increased and it's more likely to be between TM's Deal and Remain. I am presuming JC doesn't get the opportunity of dealing with the EU where he offers a permanent CU.

What do you see as the path to a 2nd ref. Is it:
- TM's deal not passing HoC vote, then
- MPs voting to hold second ref as the next step forward

Hurrache · 04-12-2018 9:47pm

Folkstonian wrote: »

Well, if Article 50 can be unilaterally withdrawn there would presumably be nothing stopping the british government doing so, waiting a week, and invoking it once more thereby giving themselves an extra two years of preparation and negotiation time

It’s a bizarre notion that it may be as easy as saying ‘no thanks, we’ve changed our minds’ in Parliament.

It's explicitly worded so something like that can't be done.

DOCARCH · 04-12-2018 9:49pm

Folkstonian wrote: »

Well, if Article 50 can be unilaterally withdrawn there would presumably be nothing stopping the british government doing so, waiting a week, and invoking it once more thereby giving themselves an extra two years of preparation and negotiation time.

EU could possibly refuse to allow A50 be revoked if it appeared that was the strategy/approach.

There is something in 'there' (Advocate General recommendation to the Court of Justice) saying yes, A50 can be revoked, as long as it does not involve an abusive practice.

LeinsterDub · 04-12-2018 9:52pm

How does the Gove bill stack up against brexit being enshrined in law?

Professor Moriarty · 04-12-2018 9:56pm

DOCARCH wrote: »

EU could possibly refuse to allow A50 be revoked if it appeared that was the strategy/approach.

There is something in 'there' (Advocate General recommendation to the Court of Justice) saying yes, A50 can be revoked, as long as it does not involve an abusive practice.

From the Advocate General:

“good faith and sincere cooperation must also be observed” in any withdrawal of the exit notice.

briany · 04-12-2018 10:01pm

SimonTemplar wrote: »

What do you see as the path to a 2nd ref. Is it:
- TM's deal not passing HoC vote, then
- MPs voting to hold second ref as the next step forward

I certainly wouldn't claim to know what'll happen, but it wouldn't surprise me if enough Brexiteer MPs made a subtle pivot on the issue of a 2nd referendum, now that parliamentary sovereignty is looking less and less likely to get get them over the line. Remain MPs would be happy enough with that, too as they think there's a good chance of winning such a vote.

Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Comments