Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Water John

Just catching up with events since morning. Demfad you're point is correct and key. The situation is now the HoC can amend the Proposal that TM brings forward 3 days after her Brexit vote fails.
That is the whole point of what happened yesterday and today. Parliament can take over and change any way they like, what ever TM brings to the House.
See through the fog of what's happening. The Brexiteers are shouting very loudly as they are being out manouvered.
Those votes over the last two days are tight but shows that Parliament is taking control.

prawnsambo

20silkcut wrote: »

Hard to see how any referendum is a good idea ever again.
If people can be targeted on social media what is the point?
Always found it deeply unsettling that the 2011 presidential election here was settled by a fake tweet.
If IT systems can basically decide who wins what is the point you’d wonder.
I’d rather see parliament just stop Brexit.

I'd agree with you, mostly because they haven't done anything to beef up their referendum commission so that there isn't the same tacit acceptance of campaigners lying wildly, never mind influencing on social media.

Scoondal

The fact is that the Brexit deal has already been agreed between EU and UK.
Article 50 will only extend the leave date of 29 March if a general election occours between now and then.
The UK parliament will not vote in favour of Mrs May's deal. So, 21 months work of EU in finally getting the deal will be shredded.
UK are looking like time wasters to me.

ancapailldorcha

Scoondal wrote: »

The fact is that the Brexit deal has already been agreed between EU and UK.
Article 50 will only extend the leave date of 29 March if a general election occours between now and then.
The UK parliament will not vote in favour of Mrs May's deal. So, 21 months work of EU in finally getting the deal will be shredded.
UK are looking like time wasters to me.

It hasn't been completely agreed. It needs to be ratified by Parliament as well as the governments of the EU27.

Water John

A Brexit Deal has been agreed. It is, in effect the limit of what the EU would agree to. It is not the only Deal available. Other Deals that tie the UK closer to the EU are available. If these are what the UK wanted an Ext of Art 50 would be agreed to.

prawnsambo

This feels like that moment in Jaws when Roy Scheider says "We're gonna need a bigger boat". :eek:

10000maniacs

20silkcut wrote: »

Your splitting the sane voters.
No deal loonies win. They are 40 per cent.

If they were asked to choose preference of the three options in 123 order, that would make it slightly fairer.

Scoondal

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It hasn't been completely agreed. It needs to be ratified by Parliament as well as the governments of the EU27.

The agreed deal after 21 months work must be ratified by EU parliaments.
THE DEAL must be ratified. The deal is done.
UK domestic politics is irrelavant to the final deal.

prawnsambo

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Any economists here? Will this make our Gdp jump yet again by double digit amount?

It could be the reason we had a sudden unexplained jump in corporate tax revenue. But yes, it could, depending on what those assets represent. At the very least, their management will create income.

MrMusician18

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Any economists here? Will this make our Gdp jump yet again by double digit amount?

No. GDP refers to the value of all goods and services produced per year by a country not the value of assets warehoused in a country.

rusty the athlete

Appalling to see the wrath of the brexiteers directed to Mr Bercow the speaker this afternoon. One 'point of order' was that Bercow's car was seen in the HoC car park with a remain sticker in the window. It turned out to be Bercow's wife's car. How low the debate has become in the mother of Parliaments. Still, from the brexiteer view, everyone except themselves are to blame for the mess they have dug themselves into, so I suppose Bercow would eventually be in the firing line. Came across a posting on another site quoting the following the following from T S Eliots 'Hollow Men' and, risking the wrath of the moderator, I repost as follows:

We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats' feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar

Shape without form, shade without colour,
Paralysed force, gesture without motion;

Those who have crossed
With direct eyes, to death's other Kingdom
Remember us-if at all-not as lost
Violent souls, but only
As the hollow men
The stuffed men.

prawnsambo

MrMusician18 wrote: »

No. GDP refers to the value of all goods and services produced per year by a country not the value of assets warehoused in a country.

Yeah, but it's not just warehoused. It's worked. And that generates income along with the actual input in working it. The staff that are employed etc.

unit 1

David Cameron iirc said he would trigger art 50 within days if it was a leave result.

He then scarpered after triggering a referendum with one realistic, and one unexplainable choice.

The people picked the hare brained option, so be it, thats their choice.
They have been already accomodated enormously by the eu, with a generous and reasonable offer on the wa, as well as the inexplicable delay in triggering art 50 meaning we are already way over time.

The whole sorry saga is also compounded by the fact that nobody seems to want to say the obvious

1 there is no deal that is better than what they have by staying
2 the referendum was ill judged and only advisory as parliament is soverign
3 their attitude has damaged both their reputation and standing on the world stage
4 there is no economic upside of any kind from brexit
5 if things go pear shaped and they want to rejoin then sterling will probably go and shengen may be a prerequisit to admission

Put simply TM should stand up in westminster and insist on cancelling brexit in the national interest, though this seems unlikely.

Finally there should be no more accomodations by the eu, I'm sure this affair has already had a signifigant cost that will hardly be recouped even if they end up staying.

An Ciarraioch

The Government decides to accept an amendment allowing the Commons to veto the backstop and time-limit it to 12 months:

https://mobile.twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1083031865735430146?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1083031865735430146&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.onetouchfootball.com%2Fforum%2Fone-touch-football%2Fworld%2F39005-the-brexit-thread%2Fpage471

Nody

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The Gives decided to accept an amendment allowing the Commons to veto the backstop and time-limit it to 12 months:

https://mobile.twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1083031865735430146?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1083031865735430146&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.onetouchfootball.com%2Fforum%2Fone-touch-football%2Fworld%2F39005-the-brexit-thread%2Fpage471

Well they might as well add a clause that EU should pay them 39 billion EUR while they are at it; might as well aim for the stars after all.

Leroy42

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The Government decides to accept an amendment allowing the Commons to veto the backstop and time-limit it to 12 months:

https://mobile.twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1083031865735430146?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1083031865735430146&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.onetouchfootball.com%2Fforum%2Fone-touch-football%2Fworld%2F39005-the-brexit-thread%2Fpage471

So let me get this straight. The HoC can veto it, Stormont can veto it and it is also to be time limited. They also want a guarantee that the FTA will be completed by a certain date.

All seems totally reasonable to me.

Water John

Leroy, you must have been to see Mary Poppins Returns last night, the only explanation.

hotmail.com

Leroy42 wrote:

So let me get this straight. The HoC can veto it, Stormont can veto it and it is also to be time limited. They also want a guarantee that the FTA will be completed by a certain date.

Apparently it contradicts the agreement so it's nonsense.

Scoondal

Leroy42 wrote: »

So let me get this straight. The HoC can veto it, Stormont can veto it and it is also to be time limited. They also want a guarantee that the FTA will be completed by a certain date.

All seems totally reasonable to me.

They can and will veto / vote down Mrs. Mays's agreement with the EU.
21 months of wasting EU's time and resources.
I think that is discraceful behaviour by a much respected country.

lawred2

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The Government decides to accept an amendment allowing the Commons to veto the backstop and time-limit it to 12 months:

https://mobile.twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1083031865735430146?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1083031865735430146&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.onetouchfootball.com%2Fforum%2Fone-touch-football%2Fworld%2F39005-the-brexit-thread%2Fpage471

Ah ffs... So this is in direct contradiction of a withdrawal agreement that they are voting on next week!?

Are these lads right in the head?

cryptocurrency

Scoondal wrote: »

They can and will veto / vote down Mrs. Mays's agreement with the EU.
21 months of wasting EU's time and resources.
I think that is discraceful behaviour by a much respected country.

EU has wasted everyones time for much longer. Delighted to see Trump downgrade them.

The agreement needs to be voted down. Go for no deal and call a GE in April.

prawnsambo

lawred2 wrote: »

Ah ffs... So this is in direct contradiction of a withdrawal agreement that they are voting on next week!?

Are these lads right in the head?

This is pure smoke and mirrors to try and get the deal through. Normally I'd say that you'd have to be as dumb as a bucket of hair to fall for it, but as I look around Westminster, I can't stop seeing all those buckets of hair.

lawred2

cryptocurrency wrote: »

EU has wasted everyones time for much longer. Delighted to see Trump downgrade them.

The agreement needs to be voted down. Go for no deal and call a GE in April.

Trump downgraded what now?

cryptocurrency

lawred2 wrote: »

Trump downgraded what now?

The US downgraded the "ambassador" diplomatic status and stopped inviting them to events. They never bothered to inform them which is very telling.

Hurrache

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The Government decides to accept an amendment allowing the Commons to veto the backstop and time-limit it to 12 months:

Well no Withdrawal Agreement so.

Bit cynical

lawred2 wrote: »

Three options would require two referendums

In the first referendum it would be:


1. Accept the deal.
2. Reject the deal.


If option 2 wins, then the second referendum would I suppose be:
1. Exit the EU with no deal.
2. Apply to extend Article 50 (Ireland has said it would not object).

lawred2

Bit cynical wrote: »

In the first referendum it would be:


1. Accept the deal.
2. Reject the deal.


If option 2 wins, then the second referendum would I suppose be:
1. Exit the EU with no deal.
2. Apply to extend Article 50 (Ireland has said it would not object).

I don't get those options.

Why would extending article 50 be voted on? It's not in the UK's gift to demand such a thing. They can ask but can't see why the 27 would agree to it when the only deal in town had already been rejected..

prawnsambo

cryptocurrency wrote: »

The US downgraded the "ambassador" diplomatic status and stopped inviting them to events. They never bothered to inform them which is very telling.

You seriously think this is noteworthy?

Bit cynical

lawred2 wrote: »

I don't get those options.

Why would extending article 50 be voted on?

Because the previous referendum the UK voted to leave the EU and the specified mechanism for that is Article 50 which has a period of two years negotiation. When that is up, the UK leaves according to the outcome of the first referendum. The UK government can't extend article 50 without violating the first referendum unless they call a second one.

Hurrache

cryptocurrency wrote: »

EU has wasted everyones time for much longer. Delighted to see Trump downgrade them.

The agreement needs to be voted down. Go for no deal and call a GE in April.

You're early this evening.

I guess the only explanation is that you may actually have some facts to share with us and you can't wait?

Otherwise don't waste our time having to scroll past your posts.