Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

prawnsambo

Water John wrote: »

The Guardian is putting it as 227 For and 412 Against the Deal. They have 93 Cons voting against.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/26/how-will-your-mp-vote-on-theresa-mays-brexit-deal

What if Labour abstain as has been mooted? It seems from your numbers that it would carry.

seamus

trellheim wrote: »

OK you are picking me up wrong. To take one point to illustrate

1) We do not currently have a EU Army.
2) There are proposals for one - as linked above.
3) If the EU voted 26 to 1 for an EU Army, would we leave ? Would that be enough for Ireland to put in an Article 50 ?

If you don't like EU Army replace it with "common corporation tax base" .

The UK is leaving for its own reasons - I think our threshold would be higher.

We have specific opt-outs on both an EU Army and tax unification. So it's kind of irrelevant. There are no scenarios where the EU can outvote us to accept something we are ideologically opposed to.

I agree our threshold would be higher; it would be a scenario where the EU breaks its own rules and treaties.

Brexit didn't come about because the EU was attempting to force the UK to accept things that they didn't like. There was no "trigger" for it.

Professor Moriarty

prawnsambo wrote: »

What if Labour abstain as has been mooted? It seems from your numbers that it would carry.

Why would they not vote against a deal that they have publicly rejected?

ancapailldorcha

prawnsambo wrote: »

What if Labour abstain as has been mooted? It seems from your numbers that it would carry.

I don't see how they could to be honest. It's getting very close to make or break time for Corbyn. He either sides with May and kills the notion that he is any sort of opposition or does the opposite and calls for a vote. Simply voting against isn't really good enough any more and there isn't time for a general election.

Water John

Haven't heard as see no reason for Lb to abstain. That would be abandoning their duty as elected MPs, to decide issues. Not happening.
A good bit of debate and opinion as to what will follow this vote against the Deal. Peston say Lb sources saying JC will move to a 2nd Ref and that TM then will try a trump that by mooting a Govn't of National Unity.
You can see the manouverings as to what happens after the vote is already under way.

CelticRambler

devnull wrote: »

You know I keep thinking ...

That's why you'll never grow up to be a Brexiteer!

RobMc59 wrote: »

YIf the TM deal is rejected the EU would probably negotiate with a different government although if this deal is rejected surely remaining is the `no brainer`alternative?

Leroy42 wrote: »

If you look at all of the Brexiteers calling for renegotiation, none of them actually lay out what they will offer in return. And that has been the core problem throughout. The has never come to terms that they will not, ever, get everything they want and need to offer something to get something in return.

The curse of isolationism (them-or-us) strikes again. Neither the UK Govt nor the myriad versions of the Brexiteers understand that "the EU's position" is, in fact, the compromise position of 27 other states. Yes, the EU acts as one (especially - and surprisingly - so during these negotiations), but there are still 27 different points of view feeding into that final published position.

Yet somehow Sky News has no trouble finding a parade of Brexiteers who believe that they can go back to Brussels with 27 equal-but-oppostite, alternative Made-In-Britain notions that may, or may not, possibly (if the planets align correctly) satisfy about half of the members of their own party (with the wind blowing in the right direction), and that that's a perfectly reasonable demand.

Thinking is in short supply on that side of the argument.

prawnsambo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't see how they could to be honest. It's getting very close to make or break time for Corbyn. He either sides with May and kills the notion that he is any sort of opposition or does the opposite and calls for a vote. Simply voting against isn't really good enough any more and there isn't time for a general election.

Well for a start, Corbyn is not pro-EU. And that's putting it mildly. So abstaining would see the deal through and a withdrawal on 29th March. It would suit him to have the Tories carry the can for whatever the fallout is and then sweep in at the next GE.

Imreoir2

demfad wrote: »

The full permutations as I see them are:

Leave:

• May's deal accepted by Commons
• May's deal accepted in Referendum
• No Deal default Leave
• Another off the shelf position requiring almost no negotiation: Norway+ is the only option to avoid backstop. So Norway + Customs Union.

Remain:

• Remain chosen in Referendum
• A50 revoked to avoid no-deal disaster

I reckon the 4 bolded options are most likely.

The only two realistic choices in my opinion are No Deal or May's deal.

Lets look at all possible outcomes:

May's deal is put to the commons and accepted
or
May's deal is put to the commons and defeated.

If it is defeated, then May most likely remains in the driving seat and can continue to prevent all other options other than Her deal or No deal.

Lets look at all options.

A) A leadership challenge against May, which is likely to fail as no one else has the support to topple her and a leadership challenge by the rules of the tory party would take to long anyway.
A vote of no confidence in the government, which I think is also likely to fail as the DUP have no reason to topple the government once the deal is rejected by the commons.
A general election. If May survives A and B, and I think she will, then it is her choice if she wants to go with a GE. I can't see why she would.
C) A referendum. Again unlikely as May can rule it out and is even unlikely if May does want it as it does not have support within the conservatives.
D) A renegiotation, which is unlikely because the EU has many reasons to oppose it
E) An extension to article 50, which is only likely in combination with something else and not a viable option by itself
E) The deal is put to the commons a second time after mounting pressure on MP's
F) Revocation of A50 by the UK government, another option that May has control of initiating and can block if she wants. Unlikely as it would cause political turmoil in the UK.
G) Give up and go with a no-deal exit

(Let me know if I have missed something)

The two options that Labour talk about should the deal be rejected, a general election or a referendum can both be effectivly blocked by May. The option that Brexiteers talk about, a renegiotation of the deal can be blocked by the EU.

If she want's to, May will most likely be able to hold the line and present MP's with no other choice than no-deal or her deal. While her deal is likely to be rejected first time round, come January I think it has a good chance of getting through assuming May surivies and can continue to make it a choice between her deal and no deal.

ancapailldorcha

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well for a start, Corbyn is not pro-EU. And that's putting it mildly. So abstaining would see the deal through and a withdrawal on 29th March. It would suit him to have the Tories carry the can for whatever the fallout is and then sweep in at the next GE.

Right but if Labour abstain then their claim to be an opposition dissipates. He needs as much credibility as he can get so abstaining would torpedo his chances at the next GE. Remember 2017? May tried to effectively tax dementia and downgrade the sacred double lock. He made such a mess of that that abstaining would be the final nail in his coffin.

10000maniacs

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well for a start, Corbyn is not pro-EU. And that's putting it mildly. So abstaining would see the deal through and a withdrawal on 29th March. It would suit him to have the Tories carry the can for whatever the fallout is and then sweep in at the next GE.

No, his position (and Labours) would be untenable if he abstained after all his protestations since Chequers.

prawnsambo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Right but if Labour abstain then their claim to be an opposition dissipates. He needs as much credibility as he can get so abstaining would torpedo his chances at the next GE. Remember 2017? May tried to effectively tax dementia and downgrade the sacred double lock. He made such a mess of that that abstaining would be the final nail in his coffin.

I've given up trying to apply logic to Corbyn's thinking. He has failed signally to oppose the government at a time when a shook finger would rattle them. He got away with his wishy-washy remain campaign when he was clearly out of step with his party's stated policy. But he could just as easily stand up and say that Labour supporters were in favour of brexit (which is true) and he's abstaining in order that he both supports their position and yet doesn't support the Tories. And I'm sure that would make perfect sense in his head.

Tell me how

prawnsambo wrote: »

I've given up trying to apply logic to Corbyn's thinking. He has failed signally to oppose the government at a time when a shook finger would rattle them. He got away with his wishy-washy remain campaign when he was clearly out of step with his party's stated policy. But he could just as easily stand up and say that Labour supporters were in favour of brexit (which is true) and he's abstaining in order that he both supports their position and yet doesn't support the Tories. And I'm sure that would make perfect sense in his head.

And in the head of his fan base. The parliamentary party made moves to oust him not so long ago and the party base rowed in behind him.

He's the backup quarter back standing on the sideline with the kit on, the polish under his eyes and shouting instructions to those on the field. But when the starter gets injured, he is the one praying hardest that he gets up again.

demfad

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The only two realistic choices in my opinion are No Deal or May's deal.

Lets look at all possible outcomes:

May's deal is put to the commons and accepted
or
May's deal is put to the commons and defeated.

If it is defeated, then May most likely remains in the driving seat and can continue to prevent all other options other than Her deal or No deal.

Lets look at all options.

A) A leadership challenge against May, which is likely to fail as no one else has the support to topple her and a leadership challenge by the rules of the tory party would take to long anyway.
A vote of no confidence in the government, which I think is also likely to fail as the DUP have no reason to topple the government once the deal is rejected by the commons.
A general election. If May survives A and B, and I think she will, then it is her choice if she wants to go with a GE. I can't see why she would.
C) A referendum. Again unlikely as May can rule it out and is even unlikely if May does want it as it does not have support within the conservatives.
D) A renegiotation, which is unlikely because the EU has many reasons to oppose it
E) An extension to article 50, which is only likely in combination with something else and not a viable option by itself
E) The deal is put to the commons a second time after mounting pressure on MP's
F) Revocation of A50 by the UK government, another option that May has control of initiating and can block if she wants. Unlikely as it would cause political turmoil in the UK.
G) Give up and go with a no-deal exit

(Let me know if I have missed something)

The two options that Labour talk about should the deal be rejected, a general election or a referendum can both be effectivly blocked by May. The option that Brexiteers talk about, a renegiotation of the deal can be blocked by the EU.

If she want's to, May will most likely be able to hold the line and present MP's with no other choice than no-deal or her deal. While her deal is likely to be rejected first time round, come January I think it has a good chance of getting through assuming May surivies and can continue to make it a choice between her deal and no deal.

I don't agree with you there. I would need to look at the wording again on the vote incase the UK Government could table a neutral motion which would try and force a straight choice between deal or no-deal.

Otherwise it is parliament that instructs Government not vice versa as Millars case established..
The Norway+ option is emerging as a credible alternative. If parliament was to vote this through then Government would be instructed to and would have bring this to the EU, likewise a revocation request.

Edit:

(3)Subsection (4) applies if the House of Commons decides not to pass the resolution mentioned in subsection (1)(b).

(4) A Minister of the Crown must, within the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the House of Commons decides not to pass the resolution, make a statement setting out how Her Majesty’s Government proposes to proceed in relation to negotiations for the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union.

(5) A statement under subsection (4) must be made in writing and be published in such manner as the Minister making it considers appropriate.

(6) A Minister of the Crown must make arrangements for—

(a) a motion in neutral terms, to the effect that the House of Commons has considered the matter of the statement mentioned in subsection (4), to be moved in that House by a Minister of the Crown within the period of seven Commons sitting days beginning with the day on which the statement is made, and

(b) a motion for the House of Lords to take note of the statement to be moved in that House by a Minister of the Crown within the period of seven Lords sitting days beginning with the day on which the statement is made.

Anyone??

Zubeneschamali

Imreoir2 wrote: »

If it is defeated, then May most likely remains in the driving seat and can continue to prevent all other options other than Her deal or No deal.

She might threaten No Deal to get her deal passed, but Labour aren't voting for it anyway and the ERG say they like No Deal.

If she wants this passed, she should threaten to call a 2nd vote if the deal does not get through parliament with the options being Leave with her Deal or Remain.

Water John

Imreoir, you're forgetting that it's Parliament will decide not TM. Parliament will not countenance a Crash out Brexit. A lot of manouvering will go on post Govn't Brexit being defeated.
A lot can happen politically, in a few days.

Professor Moriarty

demfad wrote: »

I don't agree with you there. I would need to look at the wording again on the vote incase the UK Government could table a neutral motion which would try and force a straight choice between deal or no-deal.

Otherwise it is parliament that instructs Government not vice versa as Millars case established..
The Norway+ option is emerging as a credible alternative. If parliament was to vote this through then Government would be instructed to and would have bring this to the EU, likewise a revocation request.

Why would EFTA allow Britain to join on a temporary basis? There is nothing for them to gain and Norway has already said they would be against temporary membership. Also, it's not a simple matter of signing up - it would take a year to sort out the legalities. It also requires acceptance of the four freedoms and doesn't fully address the Irish border question.

Leroy42

Water John wrote: »

Imreoir, you're forgetting that it's Parliament will decide not TM. Parliament will not countenance a Crash out Brexit. A lot of manouvering will go on post Govn't Brexit being defeated.
A lot can happen politically, in a few days.

But what can they do to stop it? TM is offering them this deal, which seems doomed to failure. So what happens then? A No deal by default, unless something happens as the clock is ticking.

Very unlikely to be a 2nd Ref, very unlikely to be a GE, Maybe a 2nd vote on the deal, but what if that fails as well.

Parliament can say they won't countenance a No deal as much as they like, but what they they actually do to stop it?

Leroy42

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Why would EFTA allow Britain to join on a temporary basis? There is nothing for them to gain and Norway has already said they would be against temporary membership. Also, it's not a simple matter of signing up - it would take a year to sort out the legalities. It also requires acceptance of the four freedoms and doesn't fully address the Irish border question.

Exactly, nobody was opting for Norway style deal a few weeks ago, but suddenly it is something worth thinking about? The reason it didn't ever gain traction is the points raised by the good Professor. It actually is probably a worse option that the deal TM has got.

ancapailldorcha

prawnsambo wrote: »

I've given up trying to apply logic to Corbyn's thinking. He has failed signally to oppose the government at a time when a shook finger would rattle them. He got away with his wishy-washy remain campaign when he was clearly out of step with his party's stated policy. But he could just as easily stand up and say that Labour supporters were in favour of brexit (which is true) and he's abstaining in order that he both supports their position and yet doesn't support the Tories. And I'm sure that would make perfect sense in his head.

I don't disagree with any of this.

He simply isn't going to do anything one way or another which will risk either his cosmopolitan left wing socialists or his impoverished Northern, Welsh and Scottish working class base. Momentum strongly favour another referendum so hopefully they can pressure him into one.

prawnsambo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't disagree with any of this.

He simply isn't going to do anything one way or another which will risk either his cosmopolitan left wing socialists or his impoverished Northern, Welsh and Scottish working class base. Momentum strongly favour another referendum so hopefully they can pressure him into one.

Yeah, they could. But the 'Blairites' also favour a second referendum and that'd be a bit of a paradox for him. And his supporters. It's the perfect storm in British politics right now with both main parties split on a fundamental issue.

Professor Moriarty

Leroy42 wrote: »

Exactly, nobody was opting for Norway style deal a few weeks ago, but suddenly it is something worth thinking about? The reason it didn't ever gain traction is the points raised by the good Professor. It actually is probably a worse option that the deal TM has got.

It's more hurler on the ditch deflection by Gove and his buddies. We'll just saunter into EFTA temporarily because we are Britain, renegotiate a much better deal with the EU because we are Britain and sail away into the dawn of a glorious future because we are Britain. The fact that the EFTA won't work, the fact that, existentially, the EU can't possibly give them a better deal and the fact that they will be very much worse off when they finally leave, is all irrelevant fake news.

ancapailldorcha

prawnsambo wrote: »

Yeah, they could. But the 'Blairites' also favour a second referendum and that'd be a bit of a paradox for him. And his supporters. It's the perfect storm in British politics right now with both main parties split on a fundamental issue.

The problem isn't his supporters. Momentum and the centrists favour another referendum. The problem is twofold.

First, there is his working class base who will, not unjustifiably feel betrayed by him supporting another referendum.

Secondly, there is the man himself and his circle which includes Seumas Milne and John McDonnell. He is a Eurosceptic through and through as are they. He won't crumble unless he thinks it will cost him too many votes. He can't have too many more chances to be PM left after all.

Sort of shows the "For the many, not the few" slogan in a new light.

Nody

Well the big question mark will come up from January forward; here's how I see things play out:

Dec. parliament votes down the current deal and instructs May "to get a better deal"
Jan. May goes back to Brussels and gets told take it or leave it

Now what happens in the parliament? Will they believe that they can't get a better deal and if so by whom? How are they going to get it? That's when things will start to get very interesting and I'd expect UK to really start ramping up the No Deal preparations and panic will start to fill the air. How many Tories/Labour are willing then to vote for the deal or push against their whips on a rerun of the vote? May can also escape it by simply holding a new referendum on either remaining in EU or leaving with no deal (since there's no majority vote for the deal) as a way out of the whole mess which will also enable her to remain PM without a crashed economy. However I doubt she'd have the guts to try for that.

LuckyLloyd

demfad wrote: »

The full permutations as I see them are:

Leave:

• May's deal accepted by Commons
• May's deal accepted in Referendum
• No Deal default Leave
• Another off the shelf position requiring almost no negotiation: Norway+ is the only option to avoid backstop. So Norway + Customs Union.

Remain:

• Remain chosen in Referendum
• A50 revoked to avoid no-deal disaster

I reckon the 4 bolded options are most likely.

This is a good summary of where we are imo. One could certainly argue your choices as "most likely" but we're coming up so close to the final decision points that such punditry is almost beside the point. As are the daily recalculations of likely vote tallies for Dec 11th.

We can assume the deal as negotiated will be rejected. What therefore becomes more interesting is the immediate ramifications. How will Sterling react to such a rejection? Will we see contingency announcements from Businesses? Will the EU actually initiate some of its No Deal plans?

As I've often thought throughout this process, the politicking in London is somewhat irrelevant. Upon the rejection of the deal there will be a lot of noise in London and the UK media, maybe even a leadership challenge to May. There will be bluster about renegotiating, etc. But what will really move the needle is how the EU and Business react. If the EU hold firm in their position that there is no room for renegotiation and business / market show a discernible panic at the prospect of No Deal the political consensus will be moved towards a more realistic position.

So I guess that's my perception of the process from here: Westminster ultimately make a decision but they will not be driven by their own ideas / thoughts. External reaction to their initial rejection of this deal will narrow the path they pursue during December and January.

Imreoir2

Water John wrote: »

Imreoir, you're forgetting that it's Parliament will decide not TM. Parliament will not countenance a Crash out Brexit. A lot of manouvering will go on post Govn't Brexit being defeated.
A lot can happen politically, in a few days.

Parliament might not countenance a crash out Brexit, but I do not see how they will ever be given a deal to vote on that avoids a crash out Brexit other than May's deal.

Parliament might pass a majority vote in favour of this deal or that deal, but unless the EU accepts this deal or that deal, then it is all hot air and it is no-deal anyway. It is possible that a motion of no confidence in the government is passed and either a GE or some sort of government of national unity follows, but I don't think that is very likely, and even then, May's deal is the only one that the EU has approved.

Cato the Elder

Was catching up with the latest there.. It sill boggles the mind that Arlene Foster is the voice of Northern Ireland. And not only that, for the position she has to be elevated to such importance in the Commons. It simply cannot last.


Furthermore, I consider that Carthage must be destroyed.

serfboard

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

External reaction to their initial rejection of this deal will narrow the path they pursue during December and January.

Yep, I think that's it.

"This deal, no deal, or no Brexit".

Minus "this deal" leaves:

No deal - no MP (apart from the ERG Zealots) wants to inflict this on their constituents
No Brexit - doesn't recognise the result of the referendum.

So, yeah, the steps look like:

1. Deal voted down
2. TM goes back to Brussels for renegotiation
3. Brussels tells her to bugger off (AKA "there is no other deal")
4. Back to Commons for another vote
5. Voted Through (mind-changing MPs coming out with "It is with a heavy heart that I do this, but I do it for the good of the country").

Posters on here months ago saying that they thought that TM's strategy was to conclude a deal right up to the wire, leaving no time for renegotiation have, I think, proven to be correct.

Water John

Some people here are pressing the panic button. We had that before when some posters were expressing the belief that, the EU would betray the ROI, didn't happen.
It isn't TM who will decide if or what would be in a 2nd Ref if that is what happens, Parliament will decide that. If a softer Brexit was indicated by Parliament, another option, then the EU would engage in that and probably entertain a Art 50 Ext on that basis.
How it works out is anyone's guess, but lots to happen before Parliament or indeed the Govn't will allow a No Deal Brexit. I think most have looked into that abyss and were horrified.

Why are the Govn't refusing to obey the vote in the HoC to release in full the legal advice? They will be forced to.
Bercow will have key roles in how the next 3 months unfolds.

trellheim

I wonder if power sharing in NI returning would change anything. Karen Bradley on QT last week was as useless as it gets

Sam Russell

Today, high winds prevented the LoLo freight from being loaded in Dublin Port. There were lorry queues back as far as Balbriggan within hours.

Imagine if this was Dover, and it affected RoRo. The queues would be back to the M25, and possibly to the Ai(M),M1, M4, M40 and possibly further. I think No Deal would be catastrophic.