Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Strazdas

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

OH Groan.....

I think I would lose the will to live if A50 is extended for a year.

Anyway if that did happen (and EU blinked first before more of the same after a year again), what happens with the MEP elections coming up for UK?

Not a chance : this would meet huge resistance from several EU states (a country who had told the EU to get stuffed and triggered A50 still being a full member three years later and still slagging them off daily)

Spanish Eyes

Strazdas wrote: »

Not a chance : this would meet huge resistance from several EU states (a country who had told the EU to get stuffed and triggered A50 still being a full member three years later and still slagging them off daily)

I hope you are right.

The EU has played a splendid diplomatic game I think. I really hope they do not give too many more concessions to (as you say) a Government that appears to treat them with contempt.

Christy42

J Mysterio wrote: »

joeysoap wrote: »

Peston is interesting. Basically the labour MPs saying Corbyn won’t talk to May unless no deal is off the table.

Fairly basic precondition and based on May's speech, one she did not accomodate.

Surely it is one out of May's power to promise though. All she can do is argue for other things buy if the UK government passes nothing Brexit related between now and the 29th March they will go put on a No deal.

More guff to claim that they are not at fault IMO. Granted the entire thing is May just trying to spread the blame a bit.

Strazdas

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I hope you are right.

The EU has played a splendid diplomatic game I think. I really hope they do not give too many more concessions to (as you say) a Government that appears to treat them with contempt.

Guy Verhofstadt thinks they would only get an extension of a few weeks at most :

https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1085458645280788482

sandbelter

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

OH Groan.....

I think I would lose the will to live if A50 is extended for a year.

I think it's a big mistake to extend A50. Listening to many reports a large number of MP's seem fixed on ensuring Brexit does happen and don't seem to think past it, I don't think they'll change focus until Brexit happens then their focus will what's the best deal around....which ironically could be when May's deal, with minor tweaks...gets past. I expect that turmoil in the markets will only expedite the need for a quick deal.

Under this scenario we're looking at no deal period of weeks, not months, but maybe necessary to break the deadlock and the inertia.

Just don;t think you'll break that inertia any other way now.

Peregrinus

bilston wrote: »

Britain to stay in the Customs Union? Even Liam Fox is hinting at that tonight.

hotmail.com wrote: »

Liam Fox has to be one of the dumbest cabinet ministers in recent times. I actually just think he's just stupid.

He's greedy. He's corrupt. And he's shameless. That combination can often look like stupidity. But, actually, he may not be stupid. And I don't think he is being stupid here.

May's tactical situation is that she clearly cannot craft a form of Brexit that will secure the assent of the Tory party; the party is too deeply split. Even the fairly hard Brexit that she has crafted does not satisfy the ultras in her own party. But move to an even harder Brexit and, even if she can get the EU to agree to it (which is most unlikely) she starts to lose more of the wets in her party. And given the parliamentary numbers, if she depends on the Tory part for parliamentary approval of her Brexit, the party has to be completely united. It's clear at this point that that ain't gonna happen.

So the only way she gets approval for a Brexit deal is by winning support from other parties. And the big point of difference between Tory and Labour on the terms of a Brexit deal is that Labour favours a permanent customs union. So that's the move the government needs to make if it's to have any chance of getting approval for a Brexit deal. And I think Fox can see this.

It's ironic, because of course it would make Fox's own position largely redundant - there'll be no Exciting New UK Trade Deals to negotiate. But his thinking may be that the best he can hope for at this stage is to get Brexit through, and treat the fight to leave the customs union as a battle for tomorrow.

wiggle16

There's a certain amount of irony in the fact that, even though the entire idea of Brexit (sans the xenophobia that spawned it) is that the UK will be free to strike its own super-amazing trade deals "across the globe" as if the East India Tea Company will be setting sail again, they barely managed to negotiate this one, after two and a half years, and they don't even want it.

I know this deal is more than just a trade deal in that it's to set out the UK's future legal relationship with the EU and the border is a fatal complication, but in this case they were negotiating with an economic power that doesn't want to hurt them or exploit them. How are they going to fare against the US or China etc when this shítshow is the best they could manage? They are seriously overestimating their own clout and paying no heed to the fact that other nations want good trade deals for themselves, not for the UK.

As Seamus has said, at this point, it's over. May does not have the time to get a new deal nor the mandate, the EU will not consider another one and the reactions from the EU over the last 24 hours has shown that they are fed up and want to be shot of the whole thing at this stage. The only realistic grounds, I believe, upon which Article 50 would be extended would be if the UK were to call a referendum for the deal vs Remain - and with the EU elections coming up there isn't time for that either (the legal minimum period between calling a referendum and voting in the UK is ten weeks, never mind organising it) in addition to the fact that the UK is historically averse to referendums in general, as they've only ever had 3 UK wide referendums and they are not legally binding on the government.

Folkstonian

J Mysterio wrote: »

Fairly basic precondition and based on May's speech, one she did not accomodate.

https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1085647444027662337?s=21


Just an absolute shambles right now

AllForIt

Folkstonian wrote: »

https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1085647444027662337?s=21


Just an absolute shambles right now

The Labour party have never felt so happy to be in opposition, especially with the leader they have now. If you could call him a leader at all.

It's quite comical to me that when Corybn was elected leader there was an atmosphere of fundamental change but he's turned out to be the weakest leader of the opposition we've ever seen. He hasn't the first clue about what is going on and because of that he has no strategy or polices to resolve it.

Can anyone tell me who this black woman is to the right of Corbyn who can be seen almost every time he's at the dispatch box? Perhaps some token politician as bereft of competence like Diane Abbot.

tuxy

Dawn Butler Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities

Rain Ascending

Rain Ascending wrote: »

Now's good time to try to guess the next few moves in Westminister.

Extrapolating from some comments by a political correspondent on BBC's Newsnight, below is my attempt. It probably has a 1 in 10 chance of being close to right. I'll come back in about 10 day's time, say around Tuesday week (22 Jan) and see how close I got. I invite others to try the same exercise and see if anybody can get close to the eventual outcome!

1 Theresa May looses the vote on the WA on Tuesday, by over 100 and possibly 200.

Reason: The dislike of the WA is well known. The BBC have been tracking the public pronouncements and presumably are using their own intel to estimate that she will loose by over 200.

There are a number of implications for losing so heavily. For starters, going back to the EU for changes to the backstop won't work -- even if the EU were willing -- and they aren't, there is no guarantee that removing the backstop would be enough to get the deal over the line. There are probably enough ERG MPs that would still vote it down because of the £39B. Therefore, ironically, the ERG and the DUP are irrelevant from now on because Theresa May has only one route left to getting a deal through...

2 Theresa May will declare that she will try to find a coalition across the floor of the Commons.

She will put herself in the driving seat of that negotiation. Don't expect her to ask for multiple votes on various options. On the EU side, she'll look for a letter of comfort regarding the backstop, but (quietly) won't demand changes to the WA. Instead, she'll seek to reopen negotiations of the political declaration. Knowing that the WA would be otherwise dead, the EU will reluctantly agree.

The reason is simple: As noted above, getting the ERG and DUP on board is pointless, so only opposition votes can get the WA + amended political declaration through.

3 Corbyn will call for a vote of no confidence.

Reason: He won't then be able to delay any further in that call. With 50 to 100 Tory MPs voting against the deal, it's his best opportunity to attract a number of them to vote against Theresa May even thought the outcome would probably be a general election.

What happens at the vote depends on whether or not May can hold the cabinet together and keep the DUP on board for the vote of no confidence.

If the cabinet support doesn't fall apart completely then it's hard to see how can anybody else dislodge her as leader of the Tory party. Tory MPs can't call for another vote of no confidence in her leadership for another 11 months and so if there is a general election they would be stuck with her. This is the best possible incentive for Tory MPs to vote for her government in a vote of no confidence!!

The DUP will support her government if they don't believe she can get the WA through. The possibility of negotiating with Labour MPs, however, will make the DUP very nervous and more likely to accept the risks of a general election.

So,

4 (option #1) She wins the vote of no confidence, she then she tries to negotiate with firstly the Labour leadership and, failing that, with a grouping around the likes of Chuka Umunna.

4 (option #2) She loses either the cabinet or the DUP and loses the vote of no confidence. We're probably in general election territory unless a Remainer/soft Brexiteer tries for a government of national unity. A general election will imply a negotiation with the EU for an extension to Article 50.

And you can see that by step #4, my crystal ball is already getting cloudy...

I promised I'd go back and see how I did with my prediction. With the exception of the size of the defeat for the WA, it wasn't too far out.

Next? Much trickier to predict since there are now many more players in the game. However, some general principles:

• Theresa May is unlikely to succeed with cross-party efforts. That's based on her personality -- she's not a negotiator and is unlikely to give the likes of David Lidington enough authority and freedom to do so.
• So it's down to people like Peter Boles, Dominic Grieve, Hillary Benn, etc. to pull a rabbit from a hat by working across party lines.
• I've seen speculation that Labour might allow a free vote. That would be significant in that it puts 200+ votes up for grabs in the House of Commons for an unofficial cross-party initiative. Jeremy Corbyn might like this because it leaves him free to continue with his fuzzy position on Brexit.
• If such a cross-party initiative succeeds (big "if"!) then the question becomes how Theresa May will respond if some of her red lines are breached. Remember, it must be her that takes any consensus back to Brussels for negotiation...

rusty the athlete

sandbelter wrote: »

Listening to many reports a large number of MP's seem fixed on ensuring Brexit does happen and don't seem to think past it, I don't think they'll change focus until Brexit happens then their focus will what's the best deal around

The 'large number' wanting brexit is roughly a third, not enough for a majority. Another third would like to remain or remain with close ties; not enough for a majority. Roughly a third (202 of them to be exact) want the maybot 'deal'. Again, not enough for a majority. A50 stipulates they leave Mar 29 irrespective of there being deal or no deal. Since there is no conceivable majority for anything the law of the land states they simply leave without any agreements at all, ie, hard brexit.

Peregrinus

rusty the athlete wrote: »

The 'large number' wanting brexit is roughly a third, not enough for a majority. Another third would like to remain or remain with close ties; not enough for a majority. Roughly a third (202 of them to be exact) want the maybot 'deal'. Again, not enough for a majority. A50 stipulates they leave Mar 29 irrespective of there being deal or no deal. Since there is no conceivable majority for anything the law of the land states they simply leave without any agreements at all, ie, hard brexit.

Except that the number of MPs who want to leave with no deal at all is the smallest group of all - one-sixth of the Commons, maybe one-fifth, tops. And since the remainers, and most of the supports of May's deal, would dislike no-deal even more than they dislike one another's position, rationally they should be prepared to do a deal with one another for a Remainy Brexit rather than allow no deal to happen.

I know; people are not behaving entirely rationally here. But most of the truly batsh1t ones are in the "no-deal" camp; they're not the ones who have to make some concession to common sense for this to work.

rusty the athlete

Peregrinus wrote: »

Except that the number of MPs who want to leave with no deal at all is the smallest group of all .

Correct. But again its a 'no majority' situation. There is no majority for anything in fact. And when folks talk about 'a majority' its the executive that must specifically raise a new bill, a revocation of any existing bill (A50), or an extension of A50 to have a majority over. She, as head of the executive, is totally unlikely to raise any amendment or new bill that could reconcile differences. You could even say that even if there is a 500 majority for x or y, unless x or y manifests itself in a bill of some sort, a 'majority' is meaningless. I fear the timeout 'hard' brexit is now completely inevitable.

PeadarCo

FrancieBrady wrote:

The reason the UK cannot leave the EU the way they want (with cake) is because the voice of northern Ireland is so strong and because the EU has listened and heard it. Agree to the terms, a backstop insuring the interests of Ireland and northern Ireland (laid down by SF at the very start of this, unlike FG) or leave with no deal.

SF are irrelevant in terms of Brexit they are not in power in the Dail not in power in Stormont and by not taking seats in Westminster can't influence things there. I don't have an issue per say with SF policy however I would advise you to listen to some of the debate in Westminster its scary how clueless elements are about NI. It would be nice that someone could confront it face on.
Just to clarify my comments stem from frustration with alot of MPs and how little their knowledge and attitude has changed since the vote and all that has happened.

Peregrinus

I agree that there's an inertia factor here, stemming from the fact that no-deal is the default option and that May's government is criminally incompetent. But ultimately the government is accountable to Parliament. When people in Parliament start to work together to avert no deal, rather than to bring about the particular outcomes they variously prefer, if May is an obstacle to that they will do what they have to to get around her. I think if/when it becomes apparent that May really is not going to act to prevent a no-deal Brexit, with high-profile resignations from her cabinet over this issue. May has already lost ultra-Brexiters from cabinet; when they start to peel of on the other side as well her government is basically finished. The party can't mount a no-confidence vote in her, but there's always the men in grey suits who will have a little chat with her and then leave her alone with a revolver for 15 minutes.

DOCARCH

Only chance of this ending with any sanity is if decision making is taken from government/executive and transferred to the house/MPs, which may happen next week (if Bercow facilitates).

May is totally boxed in! It appears any which way she turns from now on will be very problematic for her (....staying in power).

DUP have stated they will not support extension and/or revocation of A50 and will not support any motion for no deal, and some of her own cabinet will walk if she starts cross house talks.

Christy42

Folkstonian wrote: »

J Mysterio wrote: »

Fairly basic precondition and based on May's speech, one she did not accomodate.

https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1085647444027662337?s=21


Just an absolute shambles right now

I believe that Corbyn should have gone to the meeting. However it shows that discussion in the UK has never understood the Irish situation when they give out to Corbyn for having terrorist sympathies. May is currently in government with the DUP and they never seem to cop that connection.

Thomas_IV

Christy42 wrote: »

I believe that Corbyn should have gone to the meeting. However it shows that discussion in the UK has never understood the Irish situation when they give out to Corbyn for having terrorist sympathies. May is currently in government with the DUP and they never seem to cop that connection.

If he would be a pragmatic leader instead of an ideological which he is to the bone, he would have gone to the meeting. But he certainly has to realise that whatever he has tried and tries to topple May, he utterly failed.

He is the wrong man at the wrong time to lead the LP and now it is overdue that he steps down and let Starmer take over. With Corbyn as leader the LP will suffer heavy losses in coming elections, with Starmer as leader of the LP the party can win. Maybe even form a govt led by Starmer, but with Corbyn, no way. He's as much politically finished as May is already. They both just drag on this Brexit deadlock. They can't solve it. But Starmer can, I am sure about that.

Enzokk

wiggle16 wrote: »

There's a certain amount of irony in the fact that, even though the entire idea of Brexit (sans the xenophobia that spawned it) is that the UK will be free to strike its own super-amazing trade deals "across the globe" as if the East India Tea Company will be setting sail again, they barely managed to negotiate this one, after two and a half years, and they don't even want it.

I know this deal is more than just a trade deal in that it's to set out the UK's future legal relationship with the EU and the border is a fatal complication, but in this case they were negotiating with an economic power that doesn't want to hurt them or exploit them. How are they going to fare against the US or China etc when this shítshow is the best they could manage? They are seriously overestimating their own clout and paying no heed to the fact that other nations want good trade deals for themselves, not for the UK.

As Seamus has said, at this point, it's over. May does not have the time to get a new deal nor the mandate, the EU will not consider another one and the reactions from the EU over the last 24 hours has shown that they are fed up and want to be shot of the whole thing at this stage. The only realistic grounds, I believe, upon which Article 50 would be extended would be if the UK were to call a referendum for the deal vs Remain - and with the EU elections coming up there isn't time for that either (the legal minimum period between calling a referendum and voting in the UK is ten weeks, never mind organising it) in addition to the fact that the UK is historically averse to referendums in general, as they've only ever had 3 UK wide referendums and they are not legally binding on the government.

While this negotiation is different than a trade deal, the trade deal negotiation will be harder than this. I think there is a reason why trade deals take 7 years or more to complete and that is when both sides are looking to reach a deal. The UK will have a steep learning curve if they go for a Canada trade deal instead of EEA option. Expect more stories of humiliation to come during the trade deal talks.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Except that the number of MPs who want to leave with no deal at all is the smallest group of all - one-sixth of the Commons, maybe one-fifth, tops. And since the remainers, and most of the supports of May's deal, would dislike no-deal even more than they dislike one another's position, rationally they should be prepared to do a deal with one another for a Remainy Brexit rather than allow no deal to happen.

I know; people are not behaving entirely rationally here. But most of the truly batsh1t ones are in the "no-deal" camp; they're not the ones who have to make some concession to common sense for this to work.

While the number for no-deal is the smallest in the HoC it is still a likely option because it is the default. If there is no agreement on any option before 29 March it will be no deal and that is extremely worrying. You would expect the central block in both parties along with the SNP, LibDems and the rest to go for revocation of article 50 along with a majority of Labour and some Tories. But what happens if May and Corbyn whips against that? I am at least ambivalent to May being a remainer and I know Corbyn wants to leave the EU.

That scenario is not the most likely, but that I am contemplating it makes this whole situation insane.

Edit: Let me try to make sense of my own post, I think most MPs want to avoid no deal so it doesn't have the most support, but unless there is a viable option that they can get behind it is the most likely to happen. MPs will want some security if they are going to revoke article 50 without a referendum and I don't just don't see anything that will make them do that.

DOCARCH wrote: »

Only chance of this ending with any sanity is if decision making is taken from government/executive and transferred to the house/MPs, which may happen next week (if Bercow facilitates).

May is totally boxed in! It appears any which way she turns from now on will be very problematic for her (....staying in power).

DUP have stated they will not support extension and/or revocation of A50 and will not support any motion for no deal, and some of her own cabinet will walk if she starts cross house talks.

May is boxed in, Corbyn needs to be dragged to support the Labour conference policy and even then there is not enough time for that any longer. You cannot get rid of either leader right now and parliament is in paralysis unless you have a new government of unity. But you can only do this if you have no confidence in the current government and this will fail again.

Also, from a Labour perspective, why would you work with May to get a Brexit passed? You know she will claim the all the plaudits when it passes and will pass all of the negatives to the other parties. Anyone remember the coalition?

Christy42

Surely every side in an agreement will try and do that.

This is also the future of the country on the verge of a disaster. They need to try and stop it.

devnull

Corbyn still gunning for an election whilst the car runs closer and closer to the edge of the cliff Unnoticed by him.

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1085806730020147200

Thought above tweet summed up situation very well.

Thomas_IV

DOCARCH wrote: »

Only chance of this ending with any sanity is if decision making is taken from government/executive and transferred to the house/MPs, which may happen next week (if Bercow facilitates).

May is totally boxed in! It appears any which way she turns from now on will be very problematic for her (....staying in power).

DUP have stated they will not support extension and/or revocation of A50 and will not support any motion for no deal, and some of her own cabinet will walk if she starts cross house talks.

It should be clear by now that the only sane way out of this mess is to call and give way for a BrexitRef2 and let the electorate decide on it and this time is has to be legal binding to the govt and Parliament.

A snap GE would only make sense to me when Corbyn is replaced by Starmer as leader of the LP. Corbyn has not just lost the no-confidence vote he has already lost the plot himself. He can't win a GE for the LP, he should resign for good now.

Maybe it would be best to first have a BrexitRef2 and than a snap GE to get the DUP off the leavers of power or better still reduce the number of their seats in the HoC (given that some DUP voters would vote for another Party in NI which is more pragmatic on finding a solution).

An extension of the leave date until the end of July 2019 doesn't make much sense unless one of the above said measures take place. A majority for Remain in a BrexitRef2 would make it more easy for the UK govt to withdraw the Art50 application and thus make Brexit obsolete as this can be done unilaterally by the UK govt. Such was the ruling of the European Court last month.

For the time being, I anticipate that this Circus will drag on.

FrancieBrady

PeadarCo wrote: »

SF are irrelevant in terms of Brexit they are not in power in the Dail not in power in Stormont and by not taking seats in Westminster can't influence things there. I don't have an issue per say with SF policy however I would advise you to listen to some of the debate in Westminster its scary how clueless elements are about NI. It would be nice that someone could confront it face on.
Just to clarify my comments stem from frustration with alot of MPs and how little their knowledge and attitude has changed since the vote and all that has happened.

The shennanigans in Westminster are entertaining but largely irrelevant.
The simple fact here is the UK cannot have the Brexit they want ( one that hurts northern Ireland) because the EU have listened. I have shown in the links posted above that SF were standing up for the people long before FG were and even the EU.

It is just factually wrong to say they have no influence. The DUP have been complaining from before the GFA about the influence they have.

FrancieBrady

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Yeh the same EU that sinn fein campaigned repeatedly against in every referendum and election for as far back as I can remember.

Same SF who for years used same arguments brexiters make.

The same sinn fein refusing to represent the people who elected them at a time the voices of Irish people both sides of border need to be heard in a parliament that repeatedly shown contempt for this island and its people.

Enlighten us. When have they campaigned to leave the EU?

Like many in Ireland they were against joining (you might educate yourself by researching who all were against it) and like many they may be Euro sceptic at times but I am not aware of them behaving like Brexiteers.
Nobody has suggested the EU is a perfect entity in all this btw.

FrancieBrady

devnull wrote: »

Corbyn still gunning for an election whilst the car runs closer and closer to the edge of the cliff Unnoticed by him.

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1085806730020147200

Thought above tweet summed up situation very well.

He safe in the knowledge that there won't be a No Deal. Despite all the bluster and bravado the fear of going it alone is now palable in the UK political class i

kuro68k

Blair was on Radio 4 this morning. Not a fan but he is often insightful. Nailed the basic problem - May won't commit to any particular brexit because it would upset half her party, and is just trying to get past March 29th when they can't do much about it any more.

Peregrinus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Enlighten us. When have they campaigned to leave the EU?

We've never had a referendum on leaving the EU, so the question of who campaigned to leave doesn't really come up. CHBS's claim was not that they had campaigned to leave the EU but that they had campaigned against the EU - an important distinction.

And i don't know about "eurosceptic at times"; I'm old enough to remember that Sinn Fein was soligly eurosceptic for decades. As you point out they opposed Ireland's accession to the EU. They opposed the Single European Act in 1987, which they saw as a "surrender of power" to "the NATO-dominated EEC". They opposed the Amsterdam Treaty. They opposed the Maastricht Treaty. They opposed the Nice Treaty (both times).

For a long time this was just a visceral attitude, based on a traditional nationalist conception of what European integration would mean. I think it was really only in the 2000s, as a result of their pivot towards electoral politics and with the dawning realisation of the signficance of EU institutions and EU elections as all-Ireland political realities, that SF really began to reconsider this and engage more constructively but, even with that, they campaigned against the Lisbon Treaty in 2009 and the European Fiscal Compact in 2012. They've never had an affiliation with any European political party.

In fact, I'm happy to be corrected here, but I struggle to think of any campaign in which Sinn Fein has taken a pro-European or pro-EU stance.

Thomas_IV

kuro68k wrote: »

Blair was on Radio 4 this morning. Not a fan but he is often insightful. Nailed the basic problem - May won't commit to any particular brexit because it would upset half her party, and is just trying to get past March 29th when they can't do much about it any more.

That's the whole point and therefore all talks are just another waste of time and hot air.

Russman

DOCARCH wrote: »

DUP have stated they will not support extension and/or revocation of A50 and will not support any motion for no deal, and some of her own cabinet will walk if she starts cross house talks.

Does there even have to be a motion for a no-deal, given its the default ? Could they simply just run out of time and find a no-deal has happened on the morning of 30th, while still bleating on about how Europe has to step up to the plate ?

Thomas_IV wrote: »

Maybe it would be best to first have a BrexitRef2 and than a snap GE to get the DUP off the leavers of power or better still reduce the number of their seats in the HoC (given that some DUP voters would vote for another Party in NI which is more pragmatic on finding a solution).

I agree a second Ref is what's needed to clear the logjam somewhat. If MPs can be asked to vote again, why not the people who put them there ?
I'm not convinced the DUP voters will vote for another party though. Up there its pretty much a sectarian headcount regardless of policies.