Brexit Discussion Thread VI

It's remarkable that every possible outcome seems so unlikely, but one of them will happen.

Harry Palmr

More Post Brexit jobs heading to Ireland with AXA pulling the plug on it's London operations with regard to servicing EU 27 risks and reinsurance, amusingly they will have to move some French located jobs as well as part of the terms and conditions set down by the regulator here.

https://www.reinsurancene.ws/axa-to-move-int-risk-reinsurance-units-to-ireland-due-to-brexit/

With such a short period left until it either happens or doesn't one wonders if there's going to be a mad splurge of business exit stories or if on the contrary it suddenly goes quiet as everyone waits to see what type of Brexit unfolds and if it's actually on schedule - I won't be surprised if Art 50 is extended.

Sam Russell

Harry Palmr wrote: »

I won't be surprised if Art 50 is extended.

- or cancelled.

The HoC can vote to cancel art 50, but they need EU27 agreement to extend.

Water John

Downing St trying to limit the Plan B debate to one amendment and 90 minutes. This takes some brass neck, having lost 2 votes and this will be after losing the Brexit vote.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/10/brexit-plan-b-debate-will-last-only-90-minutes-says-no-10

Doubt if Bercow will oblige them. The views of Parliament are too important at that point.

Zubeneschamali

Thomas_IV wrote: »

I never meant it to be a secret, but one can see the obvious that the leadership of the LP is following a contrasting or even opposing way in the case of Brexit than what the grassroots Membership and other LP representatives from Cllrs to MPs want.

Wrong, this is the official policy adopted at Conference, as I already told you:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/25/labour-delegates-back-keir-starmer-push-for-public-vote-on-brexit
The relevant quote:

In a compromise brokered by Starmer and backed by the vast majority of delegates in a show of hands on Tuesday, Labour’s formal position is now that the party will seek a public vote on Brexit if parliament rejects Theresa May’s deal and it cannot force a general election.

Corbyn is simply following Labour policy as of September.

Tell me how

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Wrong, this is the official policy adopted at Conference, as I already told you:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/25/labour-delegates-back-keir-starmer-push-for-public-vote-on-brexit
The relevant quote:

In a compromise brokered by Starmer and backed by the vast majority of delegates in a show of hands on Tuesday, Labour’s formal position is now that the party will seek a public vote on Brexit if parliament rejects Theresa May’s deal and it cannot force a general election.

Corbyn is simply following Labour policy as of September.

That's typically wishy washy by Labour.

If May loses and if they cannot force a General Election then they will not be in any position to do anything and so them seeking a public vote will not happen.

If they do get their general election (looking somewhat likely now) then all bets are off as to what will happen but I suspect Corbyn will look to campaign on a mandate of delivering the will of the people, i.e. Brexit.
It is possible that others will recognise the futility of such a position and look to remove him.

WomanSkirtFan8

Sam Russell wrote: »

- or cancelled.

The HoC can vote to cancel art 50, but they need EU27 agreement to extend.

I agree with that. Given the turmoil in the uk at the moment, it seems to me that the most logical and sensible thing to do now would either be extend A50 or cancel it altogether. My money's on the latter. :rolleyes:

mrbrianj

I cant see the EU agreeing an extension to A50 unless there is some prospect of an agreement on the WA. At the moment there is not, so there is no reason to extend A50 just to facilitate more of the same bluster we have had for the last 2 years. Any current opposing voice to TM just wants to rip up the current WA but has nothing better to offer than false promises to their own voters.

The UK really does not seem to have a clue what they actually want - how can the EU deal with that?

demfad

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, that can't be it, since any such vote would fail, leaving him safely in opposition.


He has every intention of forcing a GE when it is actually possible.

A GE would tear the Conservative party asunder. There is no way they will go there. Labour are not exactly united on their platform either.

Corbyn is talking about being in a Customs Union but with a say on future EU deals. He would negotiate a deal that would not require a backstop?

The EU will not extend A50 on this basis.


The only way out of this is a people's vote. I really don't know what he is playing at. Maybe he is waiting till there is overwhelming support for another referendum. Maybe his bubble of close advisors are still urging him to cling to Lexit.

CelticRambler

Harry Palmr wrote: »

With such a short period left until it either happens or doesn't one wonders if there's going to be a mad splurge of business exit stories or if on the contrary it suddenly goes quiet as everyone waits to see what type of Brexit unfolds and if it's actually on schedule - I won't be surprised if Art 50 is extended.

I will. :rolleyes: The only justification for extending Art 50 would be the UK deciding what it wants. Juncker, Barnier et al have asked repeatedly for the UK to say what it wants so that their request can be considered, and in two years of "negotiations" that question has never been answered.

As or business stories; no, I don't think there'll be a mad splurge, nor will it suddenly go quiet. I suspect many businesses and private individuals - like me - have already made plans for later in the year that do not include dealing with the UK. While the Brexiteers are waiting for the EU to cave at their idea of what constitutes the "last minute" - March 29th - here in the real world, that "last minute" has already passed and orders have been placed goods and services with suppliers elsewhere who won't be affected by Brexit uncertainty.

The only benefit now for (small) British businesses of "no no-deal" is that there will be fewer bankruptcies in the short to medium term.

amacca

Nody wrote: »

She wants to remain PM for as long as possible; everything after that number one priority nothing else matters to her. Now to be crass here since there's no option on the table to deliver anything but hard brexit without losing her PM position (i.e. new GE, second referendum, recalling A50 etc.) I'd say she may not want it but if the option is that she gets to remain PM for another day she'll take it.

Thats what I think too...its the only motivation that explains her actions. Hang on as long as possible.

Strazdas

mrbrianj wrote: »

I cant see the EU agreeing an extension to A50 unless there is some prospect of an agreement on the WA. At the moment there is not, so there is no reason to extend A50 just to facilitate more of the same bluster we have had for the last 2 years. Any current opposing voice to TM just wants to rip up the current WA but has nothing better to offer than false promises to their own voters.

The UK really does not seem to have a clue what they actually want - how can the EU deal with that?

Yes, the EU need to be extremely careful here. Imagine if they extended A50 and nothing happened in that period......they'd look like chumps who had been easily conned by the Brexiteers.

20silkcut

Thomas_IV wrote: »

I'm afraid it can and we will see this happen.

Yes the ERG showed their clout in their pathetic arthritic heave against Theresa May.

Dominic grieve was on the news at one today. He is finally starting to sound like the grown up in the room.

UsedToWait

demfad wrote:

The only way out of this is a people's vote.

Of all posters, surely you would have severe reservations about this demfad?

Nothing has been done to stop outside interference in the referendum campaign.

Disinformation, blatant lies and dirty tricks will be rife, and that's only from the Tories, never mind the Russians.

Parliament needs to assert itself and genuinely take back control from the extremists on all sides, in the national interest, imo.

Call me Al

mrbrianj wrote: »

I cant see the EU agreeing an extension to A50 unless there is some prospect of an agreement on the WA. At the moment there is not, so there is no reason to extend A50 just to facilitate more of the same bluster we have had for the last 2 years. Any current opposing voice to TM just wants to rip up the current WA but has nothing better to offer than false promises to their own voters.

The UK really does not seem to have a clue what they actually want - how can the EU deal with that?

Boris said it himslf there on the 6one news. Essentially he's putting all his chips on the EU not wanting to lose access to the UK market. They want to leverage this (as they perceive it) EU need for as much cake as they can get. That's what they want.
But I think they have over-estimated this need as the ultimate cost of giving in on this would have long-term consequences for the integrity if the single-market. The EU shouldn't compromise the very things that make it as strong as it is.

Itssoeasy

I'm sure this is clear to posters here but I've seen so many comments in regards to this online from presumably British citizens that I'll put it on the record of this house(boards.ie) that referendums in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, are advisory and are not binding. The House of Commons are sovereign and not the people which is the opposite to here in Ireland.

Now the political option of not acting on it in some way would be stupid, but the House of Commons are not legally bound to act.

josip

Call me Al wrote: »

But I think they have over-estimated this need as the ultimate cost of giving in on this would have long-term consequences for the integrity if the single-market. The EU shouldn't compromise the very things that make it as strong as it is.

The British establishment don't, and never have, valued Union through mutual respect and co-operation.
They only know of Union by domination.
They just cannot comprehend that a country or group of countries would value mutual respect higher than economic reasons.

Christy42

Hmm. I get the referendum is advisory but I feel like it is a bad precedent to ignore it.

No idea why they just didn't take the lightest Brexit available and leave it for future governments to increase/decrease separation from there depending on what mandate they get going into government.

It would have the handy benefit of forcing someone to take responsibility for the entire mess which decreases the likelihood of it happening.

EdgeCase

Strazdas wrote: »

Yes, the EU need to be extremely careful here. Imagine if they extended A50 and nothing happened in that period......they'd look like chumps who had been easily conned by the Brexiteers.

Other countries' election cycles will also play into that. For example Macron and all of the mainstream centre right / centre left parties need Brexit wrapped up this year.

Merkel and AKK are not going to want AfD being fed by an ongoing Brexit process either.

Spain's got issues with far right and all sorts of stuff bubbling away.

The Dutch have similar issues with blame-everyone-else-popularism brewing too.

There's quite a list. In fact, Ireland's probably one of the few that doesn't have big political risks around Brexit dragging on. It's very unlikely to cause much of a problem here and, actually, it would be hugely in our interests to ensure a better solution than this kludge of a deal that May is trying to ram through.

However, for most of Europe it's really a case of prolonging the agony and the side effects if they allow Brexit to roll on and on and on. I could see some kind of short extension if it was covering a general election or a new referendum on a clarified deal, but I don't think an extension to just allow more of this chaos to bubble away is very likely to be acceptable to most of the EU 27.

You also have to factor in on-going serious instability emanating from Trump and his trade wars with China and swipes at the EU and Canada and so on. Not to mention his weird proximity to Russia.

The timetable the UK set out was unrealistic and there are still people pushing the idea that they want Brexit NOW!! or ELSE! but, in the realms of reality I would have thought something like a 10 year plan to safely navigate an exit from the EU would have been sane and reasonable.

They should never have triggered Article 50 until they were 2-years away from being ready to leave and they were absolutely no where near that.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: No more insults please. Post deleted.

Seth Brundle

Christy42 wrote: »

Hmm. I get the referendum is advisory but I feel like it is a bad precedent to ignore it.

No idea why they just didn't take the lightest Brexit available and leave it for future governments to increase/decrease separation from there depending on what mandate they get going into government.

It would have the handy benefit of forcing someone to take responsibility for the entire mess which decreases the likelihood of it happening.

Its because nobody appears to be in charge of the Tory party. May is not leading the party. She has little respect from her MPs and exerts no authority over them.
So they've wasted the last two years bickering about which type of exit is the best (without explaining why) yet all the time failing to realise how good they already have it within the EU.

bilston

cryptocurrency wrote: »

The people voted to leave.

Some of the people did in a vote that took place 2 1/2 years ago. About 43 million people didn't vote to leave.

EdgeCase

The way things are going at the moment the UK will be sitting there contemplating what a Brexit is and what democracy is for so long that the clock will have ticked past 29 March and w are straight into a crisis.

There's only so much theorising and fantasising that can go on. There are hard, practical realities to be dealt with and they are simply not being touched by the UK politicians. They are still discussing fluffy and vague big picture stuff.

It increasingly reminds me of the kind of political behaviour that you see in Northern Ireland when the two sides get locked into a mutual huff pontificating about issues that have nothing to do with bread and butter economics and practical realties. The difference is that there is no mammy and daddy to jump in and save them from themselves in this case.

If this crashes, you're basically left with few tools other than maybe help from the IMF, which is a bit like having to go deal with a loan shark.

jmayo

UsedToWait wrote: »

Of all posters, surely you would have severe reservations about this demfad?

Nothing has been done to stop outside interference in the referendum campaign.

Disinformation, blatant lies and dirty tricks will be rife, and that's only from the Tories, never mind the Russians.

Parliament needs to assert itself and genuinely take back control from the extremists on all sides, in the national interest, imo.

But parliament and the main parties are now so fragmented that is impossible.
The conservatives have such a large rump of Brexiteers, some of them complete morons living in some cloud cuckoo land, all led by a remainer whose primary goal often seems to be to remain as PM as long as possible.
She has continued to box herself in when it comes to negotiations, continued to push things like her chequers plan even though nobody wanted it and was always unworkable, until finally it was spelled out to her.

One might hope she is engaged in the biggest game of brinkmanship and is trying to wait for last minute, but I doubt it.

On the other hand Labour has big chunk of MPs from Brexit voting constituencies and is led by a lifelong Brexiteer who does not want to inherit the mess and only really wants to ride in when the deal is done and dusted.

It must be infuriating for EU negotiating team because they know damn well that May and her team have no real mandate, no united party behind her and nearly everytime they go home with something another minister jumps ship.

Someone asked earlier what some conservatives or ERG wants?
IMHO they want all the advantageous of being in Single Market, but yet making up their own rules, without the free movement of non British people into the UK and without contributing monetarily to the EU.

To all intents and purposes it looks like a fair chunk of Brexiteers still think they have an empire and can bully johnny foreigner into doing what they want.

Another referendum or hard Brexit are really the only options I believe.
And that referendum would not be a Yes or No, but three options of
a) no deal hard Brexit b) Take current deal on the table or c) Remain

The thing is they are running out of time and more worrying so are we.

foxyladyxx

David Lammy in the UK Parliament today

.
Mr Speaker, I have faced many challenges in the two decades I have sat in this house.

But Sunday 7th August 2011, the morning after the Tottenham riots, was by far the greatest.

Walking on broken glass, past burnt-out cars, homes and businesses, comforting men and women still in their pyjamas, I saw the place I had lived my whole life turned to ashes.

Many members of the community were urging me to say that the killing of Mark Duggan by police, which had sparked the riots, justified this rage.

That the families made homeless, the burnt out buses and houses, and the looted shops were worth it.

They told me that I had to say this wrong was right.

Mr Speaker, it was not easy. But I had to look my community in the face, and tell them this violence was a disgrace and condemn it unequivocally.

Why? Because we have a duty to tell our constituents the truth. Even when they passionately disagree.

We owe to them not only our “industry” but also our “judgement.”

We are trusted representatives, not unthinking delegates.

So why do many in this House continue to support Brexit, when they know it will wreck jobs, the NHS and our standing in the world?

--

This is the fundamental dishonesty at the heart of the Brexit debate.

Most MPs now recognise it in private, but do not say it in public.

Brexit is a con.

A trick. A swindle. A fraud.

A deception that will hurt most those people it promised to help.

A dangerous fantasy which will make every problem it claims to solve worse.

A campaign won on false promises and lies.

Vote Leave and Leave.EU both broke the law.

Russian interference is beyond reasonable doubt.

And by now every single campaign promise made in 2016 has come unstuck.

Brexit will not enrich our NHS - it will impoverish it.

A trade deal with Donald Trump will see US corporations privatise and dismantle the NHS one bed at a time.

And even those promises on immigration – which has so greatly enriched our country – are a lie.

After Brexit immigration will go up, not down.

When we enter negotiations with countries like India and China, they will ask for three things.

Visas. Visas. And more visas.

And they will get them because we will be weak.

Then there’s the myth about restoring parliamentary sovereignty.

The last two years have shown what a joke that is.

The Prime Minister has hoarded power like a deluded 21st century Henry the Eighth.

Impact assessments have been hidden. Votes resisted and blocked. Simple opponents of a government policy bullied and threatened to get into line.

Even when we forced this meaningful vote, the Prime Minister cancelled it, certain we would reject her disastrous deal.

And oh we will reject it.

Because this is a Lose-Lose compromise, which offers no certainty for our future.

All it guarantees is more years of negotiation – headed by the same clowns who guided us into this farce in the first place.

--

Mr Speaker, we are suffering from a crisis of leadership in our hour of need.

This country’s greatest moments came when we showed courage, not when we appeased.

The courage of Wilberforce to emancipate the slaves, against the anger of the British ruling class.

The courage of Winston Churchill to declare war on Hitler, against the appeasers in his cabinet and the country.

The courage of Atlee and Bevan to nationalise the health service -- against the doctors who protested it was not right.

Today we must be bold, because the challenges we face are just as extreme.

We must not be afraid to tell the truth to those who do not agree.

--

Friends on this side of the house tell me to appease Labour voters in industrial towns.

The former miners, the factory workers, those who feel they have been left behind.

I say we must not patronise them with cowardice. Let’s tell them the truth.

“You were sold a lie.

Parts of the media used your fears to sell papers and boost viewing figures.

Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson exploited the same prejudice to win votes.

Shame on them.

Immigrants have not taken your jobs. Our schools and colleges failed to give you skills.

Hospitals are not crumbling because of health tourists, but because a decade of austerity ground them down to the bone.

You cannot afford a house because both parties failed to build -- not because Mohammed down the road who moved in.

And wealth was hoarded in London - when it should have been shared across the country.

Blame us, blame Westminster. Do not blame Brussels for our own country’s mistakes.

And do not be angry at us for telling you the truth.

Be angry at the chancers who sold you a lie.

--

As Martin Luther King said long ago “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.”

So just as I speak plainly to the government this time around, let me also speak to the opposition about some home truths.

There is no left-wing justification for Brexit.

Ditching workers’ rights, social protections, and ending environmental cooperation is not progressive.

This is a project about neoliberal deregulation.

It is Thatcherism on steroids, pushed by her modern day disciples.

Leaving the EU will not free us from the injustices of global capitalism, it will make us subordinate to Trump’s US.

Socialism confined to one country will not work.

Whether you like it or not, the world we live in is global.

We can only fix the rigged system if we cooperate across border-lines.

The party of Keir Hardie has always been International.

We must not let down our young supporters by failing to stand with them on the biggest issue of our lives.

If we remain in the EU, we can reform it from the top table.

Share the load of mass migration, address excesses of the bureaucracy, and fix the inequalities between creditor and debtors.

We can recharge the economy.

We can re-fuel the NHS.

We can build the houses we need, after years of hurt.

Hope is what we need.

Remain in the EU.

Give Britain a second opportunity to decide.

Water John

He speaks the truth as Edmund Burke did over 200 years ago. From my Wiki friend

In 1774, Burke's Speech to the Electors at Bristol at the Conclusion of the Poll was noted for its defence of the principles of representative government against the notion that elected officials should merely be delegates:

... it ought to be the happiness and glory of a representative to live in the strictest union, the closest correspondence, and the most unreserved communication with his constituents. Their wishes ought to have great weight with him; their opinion, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiased opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure; no, nor from the law and the constitution. They are a trust from Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.[7

Would love a link to the Lammy speech.

CelticRambler

Christy42 wrote: »

Hmm. I get the referendum is advisory but I feel like it is a bad precedent to ignore it.

No idea why they just didn't take the lightest Brexit available and leave it for future governments to increase/decrease separation from there depending on what mandate they get going into government.

It would have the handy benefit of forcing someone to take responsibility for the entire mess which decreases the likelihood of it happening.

Better still would have been for David Cameron, while he was still in No.10, to say "OK, I hear you; now let's set up a cross-party group to figure out the best Brexit for Britain". Theresa May could also have done that instead of triggering Article 50, telling Boris & Jacob & Nigel & whoever Jeremy appointed to lock themselves in a room and not to come out until they had a detailed written proposal to take to the EU. That would have both "respected the will of the people" and confined all the unicornist elements in a safe place while the rest of the country got on with sorting out problems such as the NHS, zero-hours contracts and benefit fraud.

But they didn't, so here we are marvelling at the incompetence on display in the Mother of Parliaments.

prawnsambo

Powerful and courageous speech by Lammy.

Capt'n Midnight

demfad wrote: »

Corbyn is talking about being in a Customs Union but with a say on future EU deals. He would negotiate a deal that would not require a backstop?

Corbyn wants to be in the Customs Union but not the Common Market. Which kinda is the opposite of the Tories.

Both are willing to make huge sacrifices in either exporting and/or services to keep the current deal for some subset.


But like thee Tories he wants to block freedom of movement while offering nothing. And pay nothing and still enjoy all the other benefits of EU membership.

Their "six tests" are impossible - more cakeism.
And stuff like a demand for joint say in the Customs Union are just not on offer from the EU and if they were Turkey would be very upset.


There is no benefit in the EU swapping from the Devil they know.

FrancieBrady

prawnsambo wrote: »

Powerful and courageous speech by Lammy.

Preaching to the converted I think.

Brexiteers in their wonderful fantasy empire world will just claim they are the Churchills, the Atlee's and the Bevan's. And they won't be convinced otherwise.