Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

igCorcaigh

Gintonious wrote: »

Of what though? Haven't the EU already said its this or nothing?

Yeah, I know. Some MPs are still demanding it though! I think it's pointless. Any delay increases the chances of a no deal scenario.

Tell me how

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Renegotiation, extention to A50 or GE are some possible options.

Renegotiation - Think EU are adamant and united that this will not happen
Extension - Hard to see the point of it unless renegotiation is going to take place
General Election - Seems most realistic option but expect a demand for both renegotiation and extension should this happen for obvious reasons.
No Deal - Good luck UK. We wish you well.
An Other - Theresa May throws curve ball and announces peoples vote and agrees extension to A50 until this is held. (Queue all hell breaking loose)

Mr.Nice Guy

Is there a chance Corbyn whips his party to abstain? That might get it through.

I noticed SDLP leader Colum Eastwood, of their sister party, has asked for the May deal to be supported. That could be an 'out' for Corbyn and Labour, that they won't vote against and threaten a No Deal Brexit because of the danger to the peace process, nor will they be able to bring themselves to support it.

Seth Brundle

Being widely reported now that Trump is sticking his small hands in saying how the deal favours the EU and not the UK and that the deal could make it more difficult to strike a deal between US & UK...
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/trump-says-brexit-deal-sounds-great-for-eu-but-not-for-uk-1.3711369

briany

Is the addition to the deal regarding technological solutions on the Irish border not a bit of a win for the UK? I thought the EU had been ruling this out as pie in the sky stuff ( subtext: they don't trust the UK to implement this effectively).

And why was there also language added regarding the UK pursuing an independent trade policy? I thought being in the customs union makes this effectively impossible, at least as far as goods are concerned.

Imreoir2

briany wrote: »

Is the addition to the deal regarding technological solutions on the Irish border not a bit of a win for the UK? I thought the EU had been ruling this out as pie in the sky stuff ( subtext: they don't trust the UK to implement this effectively).

And why was there also language added regarding the UK pursuing an independent trade policy? I thought being in the customs union makes this effectively impossible, at least as far as goods are concerned.

The EU has done nothing more than commit to considering the pie if the UK ever manages to find some in the sky.

Water John

Peston (ITV) says the vote ATM will be lost by about 100. He reckons Lb will move quickly to supporting a 2nd Ref then.
This IWT would be based on the fact that Con had fractured.

devnull

You know I keep thinking about this deal and if I had a vote on it, what way I would vote and honestly I don't know to be quite honest if I could vote the deal down, even if I was a Brit and the fact that it's not a great deal and I'd prefer to stay in the European Union.

My biggest fear of voting against the deal would be that it would end in a No Deal Brexit which would be a catastrophe. Even though I think the deal has it's flaws part of me says that I would vote for it, because of the fact that the risk of a No Deal is so great.

Ideally I'd like to see a peoples vote or the UK not to leave, but the question that keeps coming to me, is that is it worth risking plunging the country into the biggest catastrophe since World War 2, to try and get something that may not even happen? And honestly, I find it difficult to take that risk.

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Being widely reported now that Trump is sticking his small hands in saying how the deal favours the EU and not the UK and that the deal could make it more difficult to strike a deal between US & UK...
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/trump-says-brexit-deal-sounds-great-for-eu-but-not-for-uk-1.3711369

Indeed and you can be sure that Mr Putin, who is clearly going to be behind what the President of the United States is saying, is very happy with this affair and that may well be part of the motivation, given the obvious ties between Trump and Russia and also the ties between hard Brexiteers and Russia.

bilston

Gintonious wrote: »

So what will happen then if this doesn't get past parliament? Or am I not supposed to ask a question like that?

It's pretty much unknown territory. I'd guess some form of second vote...whether that includes an option for Remain or not I don't know. Maybe a general election. But I don't see that changing anything based on current opinion polls.

I don't want the UK to leave the EU but I'm increasingly coming round to the idea that a second referendum could be beyond toxic. In fact I'd genuinely fear what could potentially happen in the event of a Remain victory in a second referendum.

Frank Bullitt

bilston wrote: »

It's pretty much unknown territory. I'd guess some form of second vote...whether that includes an option for Remain or not I don't know. Maybe a general election. But I don't see that changing anything based on current opinion polls.

I don't want the UK to leave the EU but I'm increasingly coming round to the idea that a second referendum could be beyond toxic. In fact I'd genuinely fear what could potentially happen in the event of a Remain victory in a second referendum.

I was thinking the same.

The only people asking for a second ref are remainers, those who want to leave would never want a second ref because they have what they want (well almost).

It's no longer just a case of those who want to remain or leave, you can throw in those who want to remain but will want to honour the vote and leave, and so on and so forth.

As for a GE, you are basically vying for the captaincy of a sinking ship.

The U.K basically has the option of being shot or being stabbed.

Water John

Politics is about analysis and then deciding. This means different sides, winners and losers. So put Remain or the TM Deal to the people, go with the answer.

Frank Bullitt

Water John wrote: »

Politics is about analysis and then deciding. This means different sides, winners and losers. So put Remain or the TM Deal to the people, go with the answer.

Current deal or remain wouldn't cover it though surely?

Water John

Yes it would. One is Remain, the other is leave. This is a negotiated leave, so people know it's what's available. Crash out Brexit is the field of nutters and has only the support of about 30 MPs. No Eu country would defy an Art 50 extension, as it's for the purpose of obtaining a democratic decision from the people.

Frank Bullitt

Water John wrote: »

Yes it would. One is Remain, the other is leave. This is a negotiated leave, so people know it's what's available. Crash out Brexit is the field of nutters and has only the support of about 30 MPs.

Would there not be the "we can get a better deal" crowd now?

trellheim

Off twitter : heres the note from the chief whip showing the debate schedule.

CCLA = Commons Consideration of Lords Amendments.

Final Vote 11 December. Or whatever you are having yourself

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ds8awmiXcAM7lLc.jpg:large

Water John

The only 'we can get a better deal' that might get an EU hearing is if they were suggesting staying closer to the EU than the present Deal, eg in the CU and the SM.

Capt'n Midnight

McGiver wrote: »

But then the GE would have to campaigned on a People's Vote manifesto by Labour and they would have to win it. Is this the Labour strategy? I know there is a rather large fraction in the party who support people's vote but I'm not sure Labour as a whole would go for this as an election manifesto.

Another option is not notifying the EEA that the UK is leaving and I understand that that is sufficient for the UK to stay in it. Joining EFTA is a different business though.

EEA membership is only open to EFTA or EU countries.

The EFTA would have to renegotiate 38 trade deals and allow the UK a dominant position due to GDP and population in return for Sweet FA.
http://www.ejinsight.com/20180411-can-britain-rejoin-efta-after-brexit/

since the EFTA has already concluded trade agreements with not only the EU but also 38 other economies (e.g., Canada, Mexico and South Korea), there is a grave concern among the Norwegians that they might have to renegotiate those deals since Britain’s re-entry would fundamentally change the EFTA’s existing structure and balance.

As far as Switzerland is concerned, it also doesn’t want Britain to rejoin the EFTA for fear that its status as the banking and financial hub of the association would be replaced by London.

...
As for Liechtenstein,... the tiny country is worried that once Britain is allowed to rejoin the EFTA, British overseas territories such as Guernsey and Jersey in the Channel Islands may threaten its thriving business.

I'd add that Norway and Iceland more aligned to Scotland than England.

Iceland. Fishing. Three Cod Wars. One winner.

Anthracite

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Iceland. Fishing. Three Cod Wars. One winner.

It's so funny to see all of the UK's colonial karma coming back and kicking it in the ass, especially as this Brexit thing is driven largely by those who have the mentality that a) the Empire was great and b) it's due a comeback.

Kermit.de.frog

Any deal must contain the backstop or there will be no deal as Theresa May says.

Either way the unionists are right to be worried because it seems to me in any Brexit they will remain in the EU's single market and customs union.

But that's not our fault, it's a consequence of Brexit which the DUP supported.

An extraordinary own goal.

prinzeugen

Anthracite wrote: »

It's so funny to see all of the UK's colonial karma coming back and kicking it in the ass, especially as this Brexit thing is driven largely by those who have the mentality that a) the Empire was great and b) it's due a comeback.

Its also funny to watch France try to take over Europe. This idea that some here have about britex being about the British empire is utter bollox.

Look at the back of a €50 note. There are more French and Spanish colonies there than British.

But hey ho only the British are bad.

Peregrinus

prinzeugen wrote: »

Its also funny to watch France try to take over Europe. This idea that some here have about britex being about the British empire is utter bollox.

Look at the back of a €50 note. There are more French and Spanish colonies there than British.

France has six "overseas countries and territories" which are in a special relationship with the EU, though not part of it. Spain has one. The UK has thirteen.

Peregrinus

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Trump has weighed in on May's deal which won't help her cause.

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1067149444884455424

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1067157475030429697

This will be a blow to Liam Fox who has been keen on pushing a US deal. Wonder what he's thinking because I believe he's been supporting May up to now.

My sources at court tell me that HMG had been quietly lobbying Washington over the past few days from some supportive noises about the deal, which might help May sell it to those Brexiters who obsess about a US/UK trade deal.

Good to see Trump burnishing his reputation as a good friend, a rock of co-operation and encouragement.

Zubeneschamali

devnull wrote: »

My biggest fear of voting against the deal would be that it would end in a No Deal Brexit which would be a catastrophe.

Seeing the same nonsense from the Brexiteers 2 years on, I am coming around to the idea that the best outcome long term could be no-deal crashout.


After the chaos, the empty supermarkets, the riots and looting, the march on Westminster with torches and pitchforks, the UK might actually learn something.

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Seeing the same nonsense from the Brexiteers 2 years on, I am coming around to the idea that the best outcome long term could be no-deal crashout.

After the chaos, the empty supermarkets, the riots and looting, the march on Westminster with torches and pitchforks, the UK might actually learn something.

Possibly. But we in Ireland would pay a heavy price for them to learn that. And I'm not feeling quite that altruistic.

Iderown

Even if the present deal is accepted the UK government could well sit on its hands for the two years (telling all how wonderful it is) and then end with no trade deals or other necessary internal UK processes. OK - I'm a pessimist.

Peregrinus

Iderown wrote: »

Even if the present deal is accepted the UK government could well sit on its hands for the two years (telling all how wonderful it is) and then end with no trade deals or other necessary internal UK processes. OK - I'm a pessimist.

They could, yes. But if they do that the backstop kicks in at the end of the transitional period, and sheer self-interest will mean that they want very very much to avoid that. Or, if they can't avoid that, at least to be able to say that it wasn't their inaction that led to the backstop kicking in.

So I don't think they'll sit on their hands.

Infini

Tell me how wrote: »

Renegotiation - Think EU are adamant and united that this will not happen
Extension - Hard to see the point of it unless renegotiation is going to take place
General Election - Seems most realistic option but expect a demand for both renegotiation and extension should this happen for obvious reasons.
No Deal - Good luck UK. We wish you well.
An Other - Theresa May throws curve ball and announces peoples vote and agrees extension to A50 until this is held. (Queue all hell breaking loose)

Forgot one option that could be played there...

Brexit Cancelled May carries out her threat to cancel Brexit based on the fact that parliment cannot agree to the deal, there is no more time for negotiation, not enough time for a 2nd referendum, possible tanking of sterling in the aftermath of HoC rejecting WA and the strait up refusal of the majority of MP's to allow Brexiteers to have a no deal scenario play out. Total Nuclear Option for May but compared to a crash out its better to bite the bullet on this than contemplate and risk a potential UK breakup because of Brexit.

First Up

Infini wrote: »

Tell me how wrote: »

Renegotiation - Think EU are adamant and united that this will not happen
Extension - Hard to see the point of it unless renegotiation is going to take place
General Election - Seems most realistic option but expect a demand for both renegotiation and extension should this happen for obvious reasons.
No Deal - Good luck UK. We wish you well.
An Other - Theresa May throws curve ball and announces peoples vote and agrees extension to A50 until this is held. (Queue all hell breaking loose)

Forgot one option that could be played there...

Brexit Cancelled May carries out her threat to cancel Brexit based on the fact that parliment cannot agree to the deal, there is no more time for negotiation, not enough time for a 2nd referendum, possible tanking of sterling in the aftermath of HoC rejecting WA and the strait up refusal of the majority of MP's to allow Brexiteers to have a no deal scenario play out. Total Nuclear Option for May but compared to a crash out its better to bite the bullet on this than contemplate and risk a potential UK breakup because of Brexit.

That is not in her gift. It would need a majority in the HoC and you would need a pretty spectacular political re-alignment to achieve that.

It might reduce the damage to the UK economy from this madnesd but at the price of much of the British political system.

First Up

Infini wrote: »

Tell me how wrote: »

Renegotiation - Think EU are adamant and united that this will not happen
Extension - Hard to see the point of it unless renegotiation is going to take place
General Election - Seems most realistic option but expect a demand for both renegotiation and extension should this happen for obvious reasons.
No Deal - Good luck UK. We wish you well.
An Other - Theresa May throws curve ball and announces peoples vote and agrees extension to A50 until this is held. (Queue all hell breaking loose)

Forgot one option that could be played there...

Brexit Cancelled May carries out her threat to cancel Brexit based on the fact that parliment cannot agree to the deal, there is no more time for negotiation, not enough time for a 2nd referendum, possible tanking of sterling in the aftermath of HoC rejecting WA and the strait up refusal of the majority of MP's to allow Brexiteers to have a no deal scenario play out. Total Nuclear Option for May but compared to a crash out its better to bite the bullet on this than contemplate and risk a potential UK breakup because of Brexit.

That is not in her gift. It would need a majority in the HoC and you would need a pretty spectacular political re-alignment to achieve that.

It might reduce the damage to the UK economy from this madness but at the price of much of the British political system.

Peregrinus

First Up wrote: »

That is not in her gift. It would need a majority in the HoC and you would need a pretty spectacular political re-alignment to achieve that.

There's also the possibility, which hasn't really been discussed very much, that cancelling Brexit may not be easy even with a Commons majority.

The case which the CJEU will hear tomorrow, and will likely rule on before Christmas, may well hold that the UK cannot unilaterally withdraw A50 notice, and that this can only be done either if accepted by a qualified majority of member states, or if accepted unanimously. Academic opinion is divided about this.

Suppose the court rules that cancelling Brexit requires either majority or unanimous agreement of the member states. Various influential people have said that they think consent is likely to be forthcoming, if sought. But they said it at a time when it wasn't being sought. In reality, it may not be quite so easy. There's a couple of factors at work here:

Firstly, at this point there's very little goodwill left for the UK in Brussels. Both before and after the Brexit referendum the EU went a long way to try to accommodate UK concerns. This was repaid with the unexpected and shocking refernedum outcome, followed by frequently farcical and occasionally insulting posturing from Whitehall in the months and years since. This has not made for a good position from which to be seeking a welcome back and a slaughter of the fatted calf.

But, more to the point, even if HMG changes its mind and seeks to remain (whether with or without the backing of a second referendum) I think it's clear at this stage that the UK will remain bitterly divided on this question. So you'd be taking on a UK that was more discontented as a member than ever before, with a large minority feeling they have been cheated and betrayed and a political establishment, on both sides, clearly dominated by leaders who seem not to be committed to or enthusiastic about the European project. At the very least, a future British government would find it very hard, for domestic reasons, to agree to any reform of, or deepening integration of, the Union. Yet the need for some reform is widely accepted in Europe, even if politically difficult to bring about. Why make make the reform of the Union even more difficult by given the UK a weighty voice in the process?

In short, while the Union is sad to see the UK go, they've got used to the idea and the notion of the UK sticking around after all might not be entirely welcome. If nothing else, EU assent to the withdrawal of A50 notice might well come with conditions designed to ensure that UK exceptionalism cannot be allowed to forestall the development of the Union in whatever way the other Member States might agree. And those conditions might be very hard for Westminster to swallow.