Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

snailsong

Blowfish wrote: »

The UK could in theory have an automatic 2 year extension just by revoking A.50 and then resubmitting it immediately afterwards, they wouldn't be very popular afterwards but it is an option, they could then spend the 2 years gearing up for a hard brexit.

Actually, right now they legally can't, not due to the Article 50 text, but due to their own Withdrawal Bill text which states the EU treaties will no longer be in effect from 'Exit day'. It then defines exit day to be 29th March 2019. They'd have to go through the absolute political shitstorm of revoking the withdrawal bill before they can cancel Article 50.

This raises an already entertainingly funny situation to new levels of hilarity.
There seems to be no hope that the HoC could pass any legislation related to Brexit at all right now. Thus their fate is sealed, Britain will crash out with no deal on March 29. It makes little difference who's in charge.

robinph

joe40 wrote: »

It beggars belief that the vast majority of the British Parliament do not want a no deal brexit, but they are heading that direction.

Surely they must realise at this stage that it is the WA or no deal. Nothing else is on the table. I don't see how a tory government will give another referendum, it would be a humiliating u turn after all their rhetoric over the past 2 years.

But what is more humiliating?

Making the uturn and throwing the decision back to the population so that they can take the blame for it. Or sticking with the WA plan that absolutely nobody wants or the no deal that only a few extremists want.

Which option is history going to give you the best write up for carrying out?

There is no positive outcome from this situation, there are ones that are less negative though.

Professor Moriarty

snailsong wrote: »

This raises an already entertainingly funny situation to new levels of hilarity.
There seems to be no hope that the HoC could pass any legislation related to Brexit at all right now. Thus their fate is sealed, Britain will crash out with no deal on March 29. It makes little difference who's in charge.

It's funny, but it's gallows humour. Ireland will suffer badly if they crash out.

Shelga

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It's funny, but it's gallows humour. Ireland will suffer badly if they crash out.

Any chance of a reduction in property prices??- so some of us may have some hope of buying somewhere before we’re 40?

No? Carry on.

funkey_monkey

Leroy42 wrote: »

So I assume that in the round of interviews the likes of JRM, Johnson etc will be asked why it is reasonable for the Tory party to have another vote on the leader that they choose only 2 years ago yet it completely undemocratic to ask the people about Brexit again?

It completely blows their argument against a 2nd vote out of the water.

That's a good question and I'd like to see it being asked too.

snailsong

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

snailsong wrote: »

This raises an already entertainingly funny situation to new levels of hilarity.
There seems to be no hope that the HoC could pass any legislation related to Brexit at all right now. Thus their fate is sealed, Britain will crash out with no deal on March 29. It makes little difference who's in charge.

It's funny, but it's gallows humour. Ireland will suffer badly if they crash out.

My point. If you didn't laugh you'd cry.

McGiver

Enzokk wrote: »

Vote tonight on her leadership.

https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1072757148235558912

Vote between 6-8pm and she needs 158 votes to win.

And if she doesn't get them? Then there is a contest and she can't stand in it?

robinph

McGiver wrote: »

And if she doesn't get them? Then there is a contest and she can't stand in it?

Correct.

But she is still PM until nearly the end of January at least.

Zubeneschamali

Christy42 wrote: »

Wonder if they think if they send someone new to Brussels then the EU would be willing to go again (and delay the upcoming crash out).

Barnier: Mais oui, just withdraw Article 50 and we'll talk.

Spook_ie

Podge_irl wrote: »

They don't need to retaliate surely. They just say that the revocation was not in good faith and therefore not valid. The UK is out immediately.

75 In view of all the foregoing, the answer to the question referred is that Article 50 TEU must be interpreted as meaning that, where a Member State has notified the European Council, in accordance with that article, of its intention to withdraw from the European Union, that article allows that Member State — for as long as a withdrawal agreement concluded between that Member State and the European Union has not entered into force or, if no such agreement has been concluded, for as long as the two-year period laid down in Article 50(3) TEU, possibly extended in accordance with that paragraph, has not expired — to revoke that notification unilaterally, in an unequivocal and unconditional manner, by a notice addressed to the European Council in writing, after the Member State concerned has taken the revocation decision in accordance with its constitutional requirements. The purpose of that revocation is to confirm the EU membership of the Member State concerned under terms that are unchanged as regards its status as a Member State, and that revocation brings the withdrawal procedure to an end.

Unconditional would seem to be the key word in that ruling.

Leroy42

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It's funny, but it's gallows humour. Ireland will suffer badly if they crash out.

Very true, but we have no ability to make any difference. All we can do is try to get them to see some sense but unfortunately we are mere other road users whilst the Brexit bus makes its journey. We hope that it has passed it MOT, has working brakes and the driver isn't drunk, but there isn't really much we can do other than hope.

devnull

Mogg is clearly worried she will win tonight

https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1072784374163218432

barry181091

What are the chances of her actually losing the vote?

In one way it is good for her if she wins as it shores up her premiership a small amount as it disallows any 1922 stuff for another year.

Laois_Man

Well she's obviously not getting any votes from any of the 50 or so Tory MPs who have delivered letters, which leaves her leaving 60% out of the remaining 265 MPs who are probably broadly on her side, given that the entire mess over such a long period of time didn't tempt them to rail against her by now!

So her survival should be doable!

seamus

Leroy42 wrote: »

We hope that it has passed it MOT, has working brakes and the driver isn't drunk, but there isn't really much we can do other than hope.

Unfortunately it now seems apparent that the other driver is in fact suicidal, so other than shouting out the window at him to try and talk him down, we can only hope that he hits the minimum of other objects on his way out.

robinph

Leroy42 wrote: »

Very true, but we have no ability to make any difference. All we can do is try to get them to see some sense but unfortunately we are mere other road users whilst the Brexit bus makes its journey. We hope that it has passed it MOT, has working brakes and the driver isn't drunk, but there isn't really much we can do other than hope.

Those of us sat on the bus can't do anything to stop it either. The driver isn't watching the road and is just spending her time arguing with the kids on the back seat causing trouble. If I could get my hands on the hammer to smash the window and jump out I would.

joe40

robinph wrote: »

But what is more humiliating?

Making the uturn and throwing the decision back to the population so that they can take the blame for it. Or sticking with the WA plan that absolutely nobody wants or the no deal that only a few extremists want.

Which option is history going to give you the best write up for carrying out?

There is no positive outcome from this situation, there are ones that are less negative though.

I agree fully another vote would be the sensible thing and also the most democratic option at this stage.
However I just get the feeling that the Tory government are so entrenched and bloody minded they are willing to risk a no deal brexit, especially since the privileged Tories will be insulated from the worst affects and may even prosper.
Analogous to 100 years ago ordering thousands of their young men over the top to certain death, as a military tactic.
I just worry that sense and morality will be casualties to arrogance and entitlement.

Leroy42

I do find it funny that a number of reporters are saying that this move has thrown Brexit into chaos.

Yeah, cause it was all just tickity-boo until this morning.

Tropheus

Jonathan Lis had an interesting theory on Twitter. May loyalists submitted false letters to trigger the vote and get it out of the way quickly thus preventing another push for 12 months.

Leroy42

joe40 wrote: »

I agree fully another vote would be the sensible thing and also the most democratic option at this stage.
However I just get the feeling that the Tory government are so entrenched and bloody minded they are willing to risk a no deal brexit, especially since the privileged Tories will be insulated from the worst affects and may even prosper.
Analogous to 100 years ago ordering thousands of their young men over the top to certain death, as a military tactic.
I just worry that sense and morality will be casualties to arrogance and entitlement.

The problem with another Ref is that they have steadfastly stood against it from the start. They should have been laying the groundwork for the possibility of a 2nd ref ages ago. How can TM, or the Tories, possibly sell even the idea of a 2nd ref to the voters at this late stage, that is even before we get to the problem of then having to sell the idea of remain.

If you look back of Lisbon, the idea of a rerun was almost immediately raised. It was allowed to be a possibility, even if never admitted to, so when it came around it was seen as normal.

The same is not true for a 2nd Ref. There are massive parts of the population that have been told that a 2nd ref is uncalled for, undemocratic, against the will of the people etc.

Politics takes time. You can't simply turn it on and off like a switch.

robinph

Tropheus wrote: »

Jonathan Lis had an interesting theory on Twitter. May loyalists submitted false letters to trigger the vote and get it out of the way quickly thus preventing another push for 12 months.

That would be one of the few sensible things to have happened in the last few years. However rubbish May is, there isn't a better option either for the position of PM or the deal.

Podge_irl

Spook_ie wrote: »

Unconditional would seem to be the key word in that ruling.

Ah, you may be correct. I was basing that off the Advocate General opinion but the ruling seems more unequivocal. It would need to pass the HoC though which would not exactly be straightforward.

There would still be a lot of consequences for the UK in such a matter though. They would lose all faith and trust globally.

Pa8301

Tropheus wrote: »

Jonathan Lis had an interesting theory on Twitter. May loyalists submitted false letters to trigger the vote and get it out of the way quickly thus preventing another push for 12 months.

I was thinking that could be the case but then I realised I might be giving May too much credit!

McGiver

Hurrache wrote: »

Pragmatically we're all team May for today, but it's incredible entertainment all the same as to what may happen.

I think the best outcome for the opposition is if May wins but by rather narrow margin. Corbyn could then call for a no confidence motion argueing that the PM has no authority. Also, he would probably do the same if she loses. If she wins by a good margin then it's not so good, but as she can't get the WA through HoC, no confidence vote from the opposition will likely come regardless.

MrMusician18

Pa8301 wrote: »

I was thinking that could be the case but then I realised I might be giving May too much credit!

I had thought this too, and would have made sense perhaps a few months ago. However, asking the question risks getting the answer you don't want as well.

It's a high stakes gamble of she did. It also risks enraging some Tory's, enough so they may back an opposition motion of no confidence in the government.

As an aside, 24hr rolling news as entertainment and instant reactions on social media are definitely feeding this monster. Politics needs to look at how it interacts with these technologies

Tell me how

Theresa Mays odds on survival currently on Paddy Power.

Win: 2/7
Lose: 12/5

Shelga

The people who want a second referendum should drive home the point that if the UK crashes out and looks to rejoin within 5-10 years, they will have to give up sterling and join the eurozone.

Borderhopper

Alternatively, it may be that Mays supporters have also submitted letters to the 1922 committee. Flushing the game, as it were. It's as plausible as anything else that has happened in the past 3 years.

Seriously though, it is possible that this vote of no confidence is a result of a miscalculation on the part of both sides- as I understand it, unless publicised by the signatories, it is unknown how many letters have been submitted

EKRIUQ

BBC are now saying that May will win comfortable tonight unless the private ballots change everything.

But she easily has the numbers at the moment.

Tell me how

Shelga wrote: »

The people who want a second referendum should drive home the point that if the UK crashes out and looks to rejoin within 5-10 years, they will have to give up sterling and join the eurozone.

From the Donald Trump school of negotiating.

Europe wants the UK within the EU. They want them to feel welcome and not to feel like they have been taken advantage of (see Germany after treaty of Versailles for how that worked out) as that will only allow resentment to fester which cannot end well.