Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Russman

intellectual dosser wrote: »

I think A50 would be postponed (3 months) rather than be revoked any time soon. It would be an easier political play both in Westminster and in Brussels. There was a link to a very good Twitter thread posted here a few days ago that explained that revoking A50 would put the clock back to two years if it were to be resubmitted after the UK got its act together.

Postponing A50 would require bilateral approval but I don't think there would be much opposition from the EU27 as long as there was an objective served. It would buy time to thrash out some of the suggestions made here around second referendum, or even a general election, and finally figure out the path the UK wants to take.

I would imagine if they revoked A50 and then resubmitted within a short ish time period, any goodwill would evaporate and possibly the existing WA would be off the table and the EU might say "right so, off ye go, best of luck"

Thomas_IV

Peregrinus wrote: »

Brexitref 2 isn't an independent alternative; just a different way of choosing between the alternatives the UK already has.

In theory a Parliament opposed to no deal could (a) rule out no deal, and (b) refer the remaining choice to the people in a referendum putting the question "do you want to ratify May's deal, or would you rather stay in the EU?". In practice I think the political objections to that are enormous, and probably insurmountable. So if Parliament is going to take it on itself to rule out "no deal" I think it's going to have to step up to the plate and do the rest of what is, after all, its job and make a choice between the remaining alternatives.


I think the general expectation is that May's deal will be defeated on 15 Jan; the only question is the margin of defeat.

May's strategy then is to hope that Events will happen which will enable a second vote with a favourable outcome. The Event she wants is for the EU to cave, and offer the UK some significant variation to the WA which will be enough for the government to claim a Famous Victory for Britain, and for MPs to change their minds.

That Event is not going to happen. But, as it becomes apparent that it won't happen, a different Event may happen; currency crisis, stock market meltdown, Tory party funders and influencers beating MPs about the head and neck with broken bottles until they see sense, that kind of thing. This Event, coupled with a token move from the EU involving honeyed words and blandishments about how very, very temporary the backstop really is (which can be hailed as a Famous Victory for Britain) may then be enough to enable a successful seocond vote.

If that doesn't work, it's time to line up the ambulances at the bottom of the cliff, because the UK is coming over the top. I honestly don't see A50 being revoked.

Like I said before, it's hard to predict what the result will be. Expectations are currently also 'idle' speculations. What is certainly to come is what I have highlighted in bold in your post. We've seen it before in the wake of the BrexitRef 2016 when the £ got a bashing on the international financial markets. This lasted for a couple of days, in the event of a no-deal Brexit, things will get worse and include the other reactions you've mentioned.

MPs do have to make up their minds but they are still under the pressure of their own party whips. The opposition is still determined to vote down the deal and the ERG is with them as is the DUP. It'll depend on those MPs who vote against the line of their party and this remains to be seen.

The EU isn't about to give in and make more concessions to the UK and on the matter of the Irish border the stance is clear. The UK would had to provide the facilities for that if it would come to a hard border which is unacceptable for the EU and the govt of the Republic of Ireland. That alone makes the backstop a matter of at least a mid term run, speaking in decades, not years. With no deal, the backstop remains either in the balance or a hard border will occure.

I have been following the first round of the Brexit deal debate in the Commons in December last year, I won't be following this one which is about to start today and to run for five days. That is because I don't expect to get anything much new from it than what already has been said to it. PM May only postponed the vote to gain time for her but unless she gets a majority for her deal by a great deal of luck, it was to no avail. Afterwards she's at the end of the road but as I have learned to know her by her twists and turns, she'll not resign upon a lost vote by herself, she'll be forced to step down. This leaves the question of who's going to replace her, cos a snap GE is also not on the table, though Corbyn wants that more than anything else.

The UK govt and Parliament are running in circles and neither part has the courage to break the circle and give it back to the electorate to decide a second time on the matter. This time on the basis of the facts on what is on offer and the consequences that result from either choice.

What Brexiteers fear most is that an uncertain amount of voters who voted Leave in 2016 (and who are still alive) already had a change of mind and would vote for Remain in a BrexitRef2 which would lead to a majority for Remain and thus making Brexit obsolete. That is what the UK govt wants to avoid at all costs but a BrexitRef2 would be the democratic way to solve that problems because the situation of today has changed in compare to 2016. That is because now the electorate would know on what they would vote in concrete terms and conditions, whereas in 2016 it was all nothing but delusions and wishful thinking (that hasn't changed in the minds of the Brexiteers at all).

A voting down of the deal is still more likely these days, but May has often faced situations that meant to be her political end but with luck and the failure of her opponents, she always survived. She might survive this one as well cos her opponents are all cowards and everybody who considers to replace her as PM is aware that he or she would had to carry the filthy Brexit bucket him- / herself to the end. That is a matter nobody seems to really call for. It is in fact all just hot air talk and theatre by them and also by Corbyn and his far-left Brexit chums. But none of them has the guts to bring this Brexit charade to a final end with as less damage as possible.

Brexiteers and among them also UK govt members are always pretending that after Brexit the whole world outside of the EU is just waiting to negotiate and strike trade deals with the UK. A couple of weeks (or even already months) back last year I noticed that some of them was mentioning that they would have a list with '40 potential countries for new trade agreements'. Which countries they are was still kept secret. Why is that? IMO it is just another Brexiter Propaganda rus like all the other crap they have spouted for years. It lacks much substance and that is because everybody in his right mind who has been following this Brexit Charade for the past 2 1/2 years can clearly presume that the way the UK govt has performed itself during the negotiations period with the EU there isn't much trust and reliability expected from these potential trade deal countries towards the UK.

Brexit has done that much damage to the international reputation of the UK like nothing else had done before. Economical strong CoN countries have already signalled to the UK that their trade bounds are with countries closer to themselves. Like Canada with the USA and now with the EU. Australia has also told that they have closer bounds with countries around the South Pacific and Asia. This Norway ++ idea was already rejected by the Norwegian govt last month, telling the UK that they don't want the Brits back in EFTA and would object such a Norway ++ solution for the UK as alternative to the deal with the EU at hand.

This was more than often in the news and for every politician to take note of it. What were they doing? Sleeping or simply ignoring the response from other countries in regards to the Brexiters ideas of a post-Brexit UK? The MPs in the Commons should consider that more carefully and get a clear view on the reality which isn't that welcoming to them as the wishful thinking of Brexiteers tells.

I think and really assume that these potential trade deal countries are more economically weaker countries than the UK of today. For the big global players like the USA, China and Russia, there is only to say that it will be them who dictate the terms and conditions to the UK and that means take it or leave it. One only has to look at the leaders of those countries to know that they would have the upper hand in any trade deal negotiations. Worst would be with Trump, but not much less worse with Putin and China.

To ignore all that is just as much a folly as Brexit is itself.

Russman

Is it purely the backstop arrangement that's the problem for opponents to May's deal ? or is there another idealogical issue with it ?

I'm just wondering, despite all the statements and declarations, if the EU might "cave" at the last minute, just as DD, IDS etc are banking on / expect to happen.
I very much doubt it myself for a multitude of reasons, but its all so off the charts mad you just never know what's next.

Imreoir2

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Brits often have long fuses but they do not like being told what to do.

I'm always mystified by the way that the Irish had the guts to stand up against the treaty of Lisbon being foisted upon them but then, a mere 16 months later, you caved in. Why?

We did not cave in, we got the changes we wanted to the treaty which is why it was passed on a bigger turn out of the electorate. It's not hard, please try a little harder to understand that we are not rabidly anti-EU in this country. Voting against the Lisbon treaty is not intended as some sort of blow against the EU, it is intended to change the treaty, which is what happened.

Enzokk

mickoneill31 wrote: »

Its common for foreigners to be mystified as the way its reported abroad its frequently said that we were made to vote twice.
During the campaign there were "exaggerations" on the no side. The Irish government went back to the EU and got some guarantees to alleviate these. Then they went back to the people. The people, being adults, have the capacity to change their minds and did so. It's something you can do when stuff is clarified or fixed for you. Most Irish people don't really ideologically stick to a position and will vote for the way that benefits them most.

How novel that people would vote for their interests rather than the emblem the person stands behind.


Just a quick post on why we are where we are, lets have a look and see how Tory MPs think no-deal will shake out for the UK.

https://twitter.com/UKandEU/status/1082940253650993155

seamus

Russman wrote: »

I'm just wondering, despite all the statements and declarations, if the EU might "cave" at the last minute, just as DD, IDS etc are banking on / expect to happen.

Not a chance.

The only thing worse from an EU perspective than a no-deal Brexit, is caving in to UK demands.

That would be the end of the EU and the beginning of decades of economic turmoil and civil and military conflict in Europe.

Just a quick post on why we are where we are, lets have a look and see how Tory MPs think no-deal will shake out for the UK.

One thing to consider is that house prices in the UK may not actually be affected that badly. A devalued pound doesn't necessarily follow that the price of property drops.

The UK will still be a largely westernised, civilised, stable-ish nation. A cheap pound could see an influx of foreign money buying up houses and propping up house prices.

It does go to show though why house prices are not a measure of the health of an economy.

Water John

Parliament are about to force TM to act within 3 days if she loses the vote next week, no drifting.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/09/brexit-pm-may-be-forced-to-come-up-with-new-deal-three-days-after-commons-defeat

She has to return to HoC with a Plan, forcing her hand.

Enzokk

Water John wrote: »

Parliament are about to force TM to act within 3 days if she loses the vote next week, no drifting.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/09/brexit-pm-may-be-forced-to-come-up-with-new-deal-three-days-after-commons-defeat

She has to return to HoC with a Plan, forcing her hand.

Seems that the amendment has been selected by the speaker and it will be voted on. This will cause more arguments as the government thought the timetable motion was unamendable. There will be accusations that Bercow is trying to frustrate Brexit, then again maybe the government should have followed procedure themselves and not been found in contempt of parliament or delayed the vote in the first instance.

https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1082954410983153664

lawred2

Water John wrote: »

Parliament are about to force TM to act within 3 days if she loses the vote next week, no drifting.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/09/brexit-pm-may-be-forced-to-come-up-with-new-deal-three-days-after-commons-defeat

She has to return to HoC with a Plan, forcing her hand.

a plan for what?

all that's left at that stage is cancellation or extension right?

If the plan is going back to Brussels for another mass then I give up

Professor Moriarty

seamus wrote: »

Not a chance.

The only thing worse from an EU perspective than a no-deal Brexit, is caving in to UK demands.

That would be the end of the EU and the beginning of decades of economic turmoil and civil and military conflict in Europe.

One thing to consider is that house prices in the UK may not actually be affected that badly. A devalued pound doesn't necessarily follow that the price of property drops.

The UK will still be a largely westernised, civilised, stable-ish nation. A cheap pound could see an influx of foreign money buying up houses and propping up house prices.

It does go to show though why house prices are not a measure of the health of an economy.

Further exacerbating a pre-existing housing crisis. And so it goes.

seamus

Water John wrote: »

Parliament are about to force TM to act within 3 days if she loses the vote next week, no drifting.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/09/brexit-pm-may-be-forced-to-come-up-with-new-deal-three-days-after-commons-defeat

She has to return to HoC with a Plan, forcing her hand.

More bluster and posturing. "If we don't like your plan, you have to go back and get a new one in 3 days without any direction on what we want".

I'm not sure what hand is being forced; she has no other hands to play. After 3 days, she'll come back with exactly the same plan, maybe with some assurances from the EU that are meaningless in reality (i.e. are already in the agreement), but are enough to call it "different".

Enzokk

lawred2 wrote: »

a plan for what?

all that's left at that stage is cancellation or extension right?

If the plan is going back to Brussels for another mass then I give up

Seems to me that there is a chess game happening now. They are trying to prevent Theresa May from delaying the next vote on her deal for long enough that she scares MPs into voting for it. I believe the intention of those who will vote for this is to get a second referendum but you can only get that if May is out of options and they are trying to prevent one of her options being to run down the clock to 28 March 2019.

Winters

Enzokk wrote: »

Seems to me that there is a chess game happening now. They are trying to prevent Theresa May from delaying the next vote on her deal for long enough that she scares MPs into voting for it. I believe the intention of those who will vote for this is to get a second referendum but you can only get that if May is out of options and they are trying to prevent one of her options being to run down the clock to 28 March 2019.

First Chequers now Chess? I give up..

Thomas_IV

seamus wrote: »

More bluster and posturing. "If we don't like your plan, you have to go back and get a new one in 3 days without any direction on what we want".

I'm not sure what hand is being forced; she has no other hands to play. After 3 days, she'll come back with exactly the same plan, maybe with some assurances from the EU that are meaningless in reality (i.e. are already in the agreement), but are enough to call it "different".

Quite so but the Circus has already entered its last performance.

Thomas_IV

Enzokk wrote: »

Seems to me that there is a chess game happening now. They are trying to prevent Theresa May from delaying the next vote on her deal for long enough that she scares MPs into voting for it. I believe the intention of those who will vote for this is to get a second referendum but you can only get that if May is out of options and they are trying to prevent one of her options being to run down the clock to 28 March 2019.

Just another term to describe this Brexit Charade. A chess game it was all along to me, but I always chose to see it like a third rate play in a shabby theatre.

Tell me how

seamus wrote: »

More bluster and posturing. "If we don't like your plan, you have to go back and get a new one in 3 days without any direction on what we want".

I'm not sure what hand is being forced; she has no other hands to play. After 3 days, she'll come back with exactly the same plan, maybe with some assurances from the EU that are meaningless in reality (i.e. are already in the agreement), but are enough to call it "different".

They know that. They know Europe is going to give her the don't call us, we'll call you.

They will want her to resign. Many in her party already do. The opposition do if it means a GE.

Thomas_IV

Tell me how wrote: »

They know that. They know Europe is going to give her the don't call us, we'll call you.

They will want her to resign. Many in her party already do. The opposition do if it means a GE.

That's what Corbyn is after.

Enzokk

Thomas_IV wrote: »

Just another term to describe this Brexit Charade. A chess game it was all along to me, but I always chose to see it like a third rate play in a shabby theatre.

Undoubtedly, but when has politicians ever really as a whole been in touch with their voters? They don't go through the same struggles and fears that their voters do day to day and in most cases they are much better off than their voters ever will be as well. For them politics is a game that is played, but for us voters it is our livelihoods.

seamus

Tell me how wrote: »

They know that. They know Europe is going to give her the don't call us, we'll call you.

They will want her to resign. Many in her party already do. The opposition do if it means a GE.

If it goes this way, then I'm just going to give up trying to guess what happens next.

Not that I've been right even once through this whole farce, but if they vote down the WA and send May back for "more", then anything could happen next. The collapse of Great Britain as a sovereign state? You know, it's not impossible.

Thomas_IV

Enzokk wrote: »

Undoubtedly, but when has politicians ever really as a whole been in touch with their voters? They don't go through the same struggles and fears that their voters do day to day and in most cases they are much better off than their voters ever will be as well. For them politics is a game that is played, but for us voters it is our livelihoods.

In the times of Clement Attlee.

Thomas_IV

seamus wrote: »

If it goes this way, then I'm just going to give up trying to guess what happens next.

Not that I've been right even once through this whole farce, but if they vote down the WA and send May back for "more", then anything could happen next. The collapse of Great Britain as a sovereign state? You know, it's not impossible.

I am reckoning with that.

Tell me how

seamus wrote: »

If it goes this way, then I'm just going to give up trying to guess what happens next.

Not that I've been right even once through this whole farce, but if they vote down the WA and send May back for "more", then anything could happen next. The collapse of Great Britain as a sovereign state? You know, it's not impossible.

Yes but can we really see the EU giving a preferable deal just to prevent a No Deal exit and whatever outcome may emerge from that.

If they do, surely they weaken their standing and will be held to some form of ransom in future negotiations.

Nody

lawred2 wrote: »

a plan for what?

all that's left at that stage is cancellation or extension right?

If the plan is going back to Brussels for another mass then I give up

Of course it will be to go back to Brussels as a plan; it's the only "plan" that she can do without having to actually do anything in practice and let the clock run down for a second vote.

Tell me how

Nody wrote: »

Of course it will be to go back to Brussels as a plan; it's the only "plan" that she can do without having to actually do anything in practice and let the clock run down for a second vote.

Labour have said today that they will forward a motion of No Confidence if she loses the Brexit vote. I'm not holding my breath that his will happen until they actually do so but if it does proceed, could we see enough conservatives vote for Theresa May's government just to retain power?

If not, then GE it is.

I imagine the DUP haggling will be immense between the declaration of the motion and the actual vote if it goes this way.

Leroy42

I still do not see how a second vote is going to happen. There is simply not the numbers, or the will, to do it.

The risk to the HoC legitimacy if they resort to asking the people again will, IMO, be very real. And no political party is going to want to start that kind of crisis.

I still think the options are limited to TM Deal or No Deal. And No Deal, by default, wins due to the clock running out. MPs can have votes saying they will vote against it, but it isn't solely in the hands of the HoC. IDS rightly said yesterday that No Deal was inherent in the passing of the Art 50 legislation. Whilst many took that to mean it would be used as a bargaining chip, it is now very much a live reality.

So the only thing that can now stop No Deal is either HoC vote at the last minute (I believe this will go all the way into March) for TM Deal or the EU will cave. I cannot see either of this happening at the present time.

Leroy42

Tell me how wrote: »

Labour have said today that they will forward a motion of No Confidence if she loses the Brexit vote. I'm not holding my breath that his will happen until they actually do so but if it does proceed, could we see enough conservatives vote for Theresa May's government just to retain power?

If not, then GE it is.

I imagine the DUP haggling will be immense between the declaration of the motion and the actual vote if it goes this way.

No way any Tory or DUP will vote in favour of a Labour No confidence motion. It would quite likely see them out of power for the next 10 years. Better to be in power making a mess of things than out of power.

Nody

Leroy42 wrote: »

I still do not see how a second vote is going to happen. There is simply not the numbers, or the will, to do it.

To clarify when I say second vote I mean a second vote on May's deal and not a second ref vote It's the only plan I can see May play at this stage which is a second vote on her deal when they are panicking as a last way out of it all.

Tell me how

Leroy42 wrote: »

No way any Tory or DUP will vote in favour of a Labour No confidence motion. It would quite likely see them out of power for the next 10 years. Better to be in power making a mess of things than out of power.

Yes but the numbers are so small as it is, a few errant conservatives just might make the difference.

I wouldn't rule out there being some just to break the impasse.

I actually suspect that some conservatives would actually rather be in opposition now (if they were sure of their seat).

FreudianSlippers

Leroy42 wrote: »

I would agree Seamus, except for the extension of A50. I think the EU would be open to such an idea based on a 2nd ref (which I don't see happening, at least not with a remain option) or a GE.

If the 2nd ref is purely on the basis of Mays Deal or No deal I don't see the EU agreeing to an extension as that has been available for a few months now and extending A50 actually creates quite a few issues for the EU and they probably won't see it as worth it. In terms of the EU seeing an extension as allowing them more time to prepare for No Deal themselves, they have already issues their No Deal planning for items such as airtravel etc so there really isn't a need for a few weeks extension.

I think I might actually be arguing with my own point at this stage, that is the effect all this is having on me!

The only reason the EU should agree to extend Art 50 is to facilitate a second referendum.

Seth Brundle

Brendan O'Neill (he of Irish peasant descent) was interviewed on Newstalk this morning (~08:50).
The bones of it were how the EU is a big bad bully and undemocratic and not being fair on the UK when compared to how much the UK has compromised whereas the EU hasn't compromised at all.
Worst of all was that they were treated badly and called names by the nasty establishment. :rolleyes:

https://www.newstalk.com/listen_back/5/50477/09th_January_2019_-_Newstalk_Breakfast_Part_2/ (last 20% of show)