Brexit Discussion Thread VI

rusty the athlete

trellheim wrote: »

Paddy Power Odds

Reject Deal 1/20
Approve Deal 8/1

https://www.paddypower.com/politics/uk-brexit so put your money where your mouth is.


although theres also an 8/1 of BoJo being next PM in 2018

Any price on Trump being impeached? Could be a nice trixie.

trellheim

PP offering 9/5 for a 2019 Donnie impeachment

https://www.paddypower.com/politics?tab=trump

Bit cynical

Leroy42 wrote: »

Exactly this. The UK seem to still believe that everything and everybody is simply waiting for them. Whilst Brexit is of course massive to Ireland, to the likes of Malta, Portugal etc etc, it really is not important in the overall scheme of things.

Very true. This has been Ireland's problem all along.

Water John

Failure to reveal full legal advice is the only TM action that would constitute a contempt of Parliament. Many other actions show her disregard for it.
Gina Millar's case has altered the power of Parliament permanently. It is in effect now a part of the UK Constitution as it's a ruling.
Seems there is a good bit of homework done also in forcing the Executive to obey the wishes on Parliament. It's under wraps ATM but suspect it will be rolled out soon after Tuesday.

'Parliament takes back control
Even in the past couple of weeks, parliament and John Bercow, the speaker, have shown that they can assert themselves on the Brexit process because May’s government has no majority. Leading Tory rebels say they have a “legally copper-bottomed” plan to give parliament more control of the Brexit negotiations after Tuesday’s vote, but are keeping it close to their chests.

Cabinet ministers are openly agitating for parliament to seize further control if May’s deal is defeated. Their main aim is to hold a series of indicative votes, showing what there is and is not a majority for. From no deal to Norway plus and no Brexit, all could be tested. Some also want to show there is already a majority for delaying Brexit day by extending article 50.' Guardian

ThePanjandrum

black forest wrote: »

There seems to be still a little bit of confusion what can be prolonged and what needs or can be done. May be the following is helping.




https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/1084084399287746560?s=21

I'm afraid that the latest the meaningful vote has to be held is March 28 as confirmed by the House of Commons

UK House of Commons
✔
@HouseofCommons
· Dec 10, 2018
Replying to @DavideSands
Now the Government has made a statement that political agreement on withdrawal agreement & future framework has been reached, the requirements for the Government to make a statement to the House by 21 Jan on ‘no deal’ has been superseded. (1/2) #AskTheCommons


UK House of Commons
✔
@HouseofCommons
In practice the latest date would be 28 March as matters stand. (2/2) #askthecommons

so that part of the flowchart is wrong. May can still delay the vote again, if she wants to.

Bit cynical

Water John wrote: »

Failure to reveal full legal advice is the only TM action that would constitute a contempt of Parliament. Many other actions show her disregard for it.
Gina Millar's case has altered the power of Parliament permanently. It is in effect now a part of the UK Constitution as it's a ruling.

Problem is that Europe and, in particular Ireland, want the deal to pass. Gina Miller has made this more difficult.

lawred2

Water John wrote: »

Failure to reveal full legal advice is the only TM action that would constitute a contempt of Parliament. Many other actions show her disregard for it.
Gina Millar's case has altered the power of Parliament permanently. It is in effect now a part of the UK Constitution as it's a ruling.
Seems there is a good bit of homework done also in forcing the Executive to obey the wishes on Parliament. It's under wraps ATM but suspect it will be rolled out soon after Tuesday.

'Parliament takes back control
Even in the past couple of weeks, parliament and John Bercow, the speaker, have shown that they can assert themselves on the Brexit process because May’s government has no majority. Leading Tory rebels say they have a “legally copper-bottomed” plan to give parliament more control of the Brexit negotiations after Tuesday’s vote, but are keeping it close to their chests.

Cabinet ministers are openly agitating for parliament to seize further control if May’s deal is defeated. Their main aim is to hold a series of indicative votes, showing what there is and is not a majority for. From no deal to Norway plus and no Brexit, all could be tested. Some also want to show there is already a majority for delaying Brexit day by extending article 50.' Guardian

That's great. That's something that should have been done two years ago before negotiations with the EU.

As it is, the UK has run out of road with the EU and there's one deal on the table.

It's a bit late in the day for Parliament to realise that it needs to establish the type of Brexit that it supports.

Capt'n Midnight

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Like a lot of output from UK minds - it kind of ignores Brussels. So much of the thinking in the UK seems fixated on their own political divisions and incentives. There’s no decision points worked in there from the EU side and how they may affect the paths. As such, in trying to map out the UK options and political paths it falls victim to the traps that created the mess!

Middle right the "UK requests EU extends Art 50"

With an 80% chance the "EU accepts request with criteria" followed by a 100% chance of "route ahead unclear"


More like 100% "Request denied by EU" PDQ if the UK try to extend Art 50.

I can't think of a reason for the EU to extend Article 50 unless the WA is most of the way across the line and practically irrevocable.

Besides even if the WA is done all it means for the EU is dealing with the same sack of fighting ferrets for the next 18 months over the trade deals and or extensions to the WA and attempts to wiggle out of the backstop.


The WA isn't a destination. It's drop kicking the can way down the road.
It doesn't rule out a Hard Brexit in 2020 either.

To keep on extending the WA would be pointless because it so much worse than full membership.

A Dub in Glasgo

Bit cynical wrote: »

Gina Miller has made this more difficult.

Explain this bit please as Miller did not make any new laws or write / find anything that did not exist already

ancapailldorcha

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Explain this bit please as Miller did not make any new laws or write / find anything that did not exist already

She didn't. However, she did take a case to court whose verdict was that Parliament vote on the withdrawal agreement. Currently, there is no such majority evinced by Theresa May's postponing of the vote.

A Dub in Glasgo

So she took a case that confirmed the legal position which means that the original intention of the UK Government was not legal

hotmail.com

If May had any guts, she'd call an election on Wednesday.

Bit cynical

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Explain this bit please as Miller did not make any new laws or write / find anything that did not exist already

Where did I say that she made new laws?

Charles Babbage

hotmail.com wrote: »

If May had any guts, she'd call an election on Wednesday.

Can her party agree on a manifesto? Say they go for the withdrawal deal will all candidates agree to support it or be deselected? And if they do, they why don't they just vote for it on Tuesday?

An Ciarraioch

Guardian report that Brussels is prepared to grant an extension, if asked, until at least July - presumably the UK would still have to take part in the European elections, unless MEP mandates were extended due to exceptional circumstances?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/13/eu-preparing-to-delay-brexit-until-at-least-july

tuxy

It's going to be awkward to see May soldier on and pretend everything is ok after her vote gets almost no backing.

Nody

tuxy wrote: »

It's going to be awkward to see May soldier on and pretend everything is ok after her vote gets almost no backing.

That would summarize most of her duration as a PM to be honest. Her own cabinet let alone party has pretty much ignored her the whole time running their own scheme and screaming loudly and leaking things to the press.

Evd-Burner

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Guardian report that Brussels is prepared to grant an extension, if asked, until at least July - presumably the UK would still have to take part in the European elections, unless MEP mandates were extended due to exceptional circumstances?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/13/eu-preparing-to-delay-brexit-until-at-least-july

Reading that article just seems like it's pure fantasy. The EU to offer the UK an extension, as if to say that the EU is pleading with the UK not to leave that we will do anything to stop it!

Bit cynical

Evd-Burner wrote: »

Reading that article just seems like it's pure fantasy. The EU to offer the UK an extension, as if to say that the EU is pleading with the UK not to leave that we will do anything to stop it!

Unfortunately the EU offering an extension makes the WA even less likely to pass in the HoC. Leinster House will be angry at this.

Sam Russell

Bit cynical wrote: »

Unfortunately the EU offering an extension makes the WA even less likely to pass in the HoC. Leinster House will be angry at this.

If the info is not coming from Brian Connolly in Brussels, then it is probably fake.

He has been on the button all the time, while the Telegraph, Express, DM, etc are all fantasy land stuff.

EdgeCase

hotmail.com wrote: »

If May had any guts, she'd call an election on Wednesday.

She's constrained by the Fixed Term Parliament Act.

There's a banana skin placed at every turn.

First Up

Evd-Burner wrote:

Reading that article just seems like it's pure fantasy. The EU to offer the UK an extension, as if to say that the EU is pleading with the UK not to leave that we will do anything to stop it!

More like that the EU sees that a no deal Brexit is becoming the most likely situation and is being pragmatic about giving countries more time to prepare systems and infrastructure.

Bit cynical

First Up wrote: »

More like that the EU sees that a no deal Brexit is becoming the most likely situation and is being pragmatic about giving countries more time to prepare systems and infrastructure.

Timing somewhat unfortunate from Ireland's perspective.

judeboy101

Bit cynical wrote: »

Timing somewhat unfortunate.

It's like keeping a dying relative on life support just so you have time to clean the house for the funeral.

EdgeCase

It'll be interesting to see whether this is fact or speculation. It's possibly someone flying a kite too.

Bit cynical

judeboy101 wrote: »

It's like keeping a dying relative on life support just so you have time to clean the house for the funeral.

The dying relative being the deal. The problem is that Ireland is still holding out that the deal will ultimately succeed.

Akrasia

Bit cynical wrote: »

Problem is that Europe and, in particular Ireland, want the deal to pass. Gina Miller has made this more difficult.

Ireland wants Britain to cancel brexit.

This is a giant game of chicken. May wants to get parliament to vote for her deal because the other options are no deal or no brexit.

Nobody wants No deal (apart from a tiny number of lunatics) lots of people want no brexit.

The options are really either Mays Deal or No Brexit, and if Ireland had to choose between these two, No Brexit is by far the better option

Call the whole thing off, and lets never speak of it ever again. Brexit should become the Armin Tamzarian of global politics.

RobMc59

Bit cynical wrote: »

The dying relative being the deal. The problem is that Ireland is still holding out that the deal will ultimately succeed.

I can understand you saying you hope the proposed deal succeeds but from a British point of view the deal is`nt good-I understand it would end uncertainty for Ireland but it is inferior to what we(the UK) already have so even remainers hope this deal fails which will ultimately result in the cancelling of brexit.

ArmaniJeanss

Bit cynical wrote: »

The dying relative being the deal. The problem is that Ireland is still holding out that the deal will ultimately succeed.

Bit cynical wrote: »

Timing somewhat unfortunate from Ireland's perspective.

Bit cynical wrote: »

Unfortunately the EU offering an extension makes the WA even less likely to pass in the HoC. Leinster House will be angry at this.

Bit cynical wrote: »

Problem is that Europe and, in particular Ireland, want the deal to pass. Gina Miller has made this more difficult.

Saying the same thing 4 times in an hour doesn't make it true.
Irelands primary wish would be that Brexit is rescinded. The deal being accepted would end this hope.
Obviously the deal being rejected has the potential downside of bringing No Deal Brexit into the equation as well which would be our biggest fear.
But I'm sure many in Leinster House will be quietly OK with the deal being rejected.

Infini

Akrasia wrote: »

Ireland wants Britain to cancel brexit.

This is a giant game of chicken. May wants to get parliament to vote for her deal because the other options are no deal or no brexit.

Nobody wants No deal (apart from a tiny number of lunatics) lots of people want no brexit.

The options are really either Mays Deal or No Brexit, and if Ireland had to choose between these two, No Brexit is by far the better option

Call the whole thing off, and lets never speak of it ever again. Brexit should become the Armin Tamzarian of global politics.

Pretty much this. Regardless of the political fallout in the UK the truth is they cant leave without their whole country disintegrating around them as the various political forces repelling one another shatter things around them.

If they don't want to accept the WA that's fine but unless they want to drive themselves off a cliff the ONLY rational option is simply to admit Brexit simply cannot be delivered without causing untold harm to their country, that all the promises the leave campaign made were outright lies and that the only thing that is less damaging to their country is by remaining.

After that they seriously need to look at getting their own house in order, people having opinions is fine but if they cant back their policies up with verifiable FACTS not ficticious shíte and have no interest in bettering their own people then they have no business making decisions for their country.