Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Mr.Nice Guy

Kate Hoey strikes again.

https://twitter.com/C4Ciaran/status/1110213902560907264

With contributions like this no wonder there's so much bravado amongst the UK public about crashing out.

Calltocall

So folks, putting a percentage on it what do you think will be the likely outcome now, it’s clear the third attempt at a vote on her deal will not go through so what then what is the likeliest outcome now?

seamus

Calltocall wrote: »

So folks, putting a percentage on it what do you think will be the likely outcome now, it’s clear the third attempt at a vote on her deal will not go through so what then what is the likeliest outcome now?

50:50 at this stage, I genuinely can't tell.

My gut feeling has been since February or so that eventually the Government will table a motion to revoke article 50 and repeal the Withdrawal Bill, and it'll be defeated, causing the UK to leave with no Deal through sheer obstinance.

And judging by today, that'll probably be 12th April.

Professor Moriarty

The Telegraph's Asa Bennett, who is a mouthpiece for Tory HQ, is having a cut off Leo here. It's paywalled, but the headline says it all. What's equally disingenuous and spiteful is the description for the picture. Blatant Tory spin. As British democracy collapses, The Telegraph gets busy spreading the blame around like a farmer spreading slurry.

Shelga

seamus wrote: »

50:50 at this stage, I genuinely can't tell.

My gut feeling has been since February or so that eventually the Government will table a motion to revoke article 50 and repeal the Withdrawal Bill, and it'll be defeated, causing the UK to leave with no Deal through sheer obstinance.

And judging by today, that'll probably be 12th April.

They’re left with either Revoke or No Deal. I think you could be right, it’ll be No Deal through sheer intransigence.

blackwhite

seamus wrote: »

50:50 at this stage, I genuinely can't tell.

My gut feeling has been since February or so that eventually the Government will table a motion to revoke article 50 and repeal the Withdrawal Bill, and it'll be defeated, causing the UK to leave with no Deal through sheer obstinance.

And judging by today, that'll probably be 12th April.

Did I not read on here previously that the PM has the power to revoke article 50 without a HOC vote?

Could it lead to a situation where Art 50 is revoked but the Withdrawal Bill is still law?

funkey_monkey

Calltocall wrote: »

So folks, putting a percentage on it what do you think will be the likely outcome now, it’s clear the third attempt at a vote on her deal will not go through so what then what is the likeliest outcome now?

Jon Worth on Twitter has the following on his new flowchart:

[B]No Deal [/B]              32%
[B]Mays Deal[/B]             6%
[B]General Election[/B]      11%
[B]Extension/Soft BREXIT[/B] 11%
[B]Peoples Vote[/B]          28%
[B]Rescind[/B]               13%

This morning it was as follows:

[B]No Deal [/B]              17%
[B]Mays Deal[/B]             2%
[B]General Election[/B]      19%
[B]Extension/Soft BREXIT[/B] 16%
[B]Peoples Vote[/B]          33%
[B]Rescind[/B]               14%

Calltocall

funkey_monkey wrote: »

Jon Worth on Twitter has the follwing on his new flowchart:

[B]No Deal [/B]              32%
[B]Mays Deal[/B]             6%
[B]General Election[/B]      11%
[B]Extension/Soft BREXIT[/B] 11%
[B]Peoples Vote[/B]          28%
[B]Rescind[/B]               13%

Thanks for that

funkey_monkey

https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/1110219555832557570

Loafing Oaf

funkey_monkey wrote: »

Jon Worth on Twitter has the following on his new flowchart:

[B]No Deal [/B]              32%
[B]Mays Deal[/B]             6%
[B]General Election[/B]      11%
[B]Extension/Soft BREXIT[/B] 11%
[B]Peoples Vote[/B]          28%
[B]Rescind[/B]               13%

This morning it was as follows:

[B]No Deal [/B]              17%
[B]Mays Deal[/B]             2%
[B]General Election[/B]      19%
[B]Extension/Soft BREXIT[/B] 16%
[B]Peoples Vote[/B]          33%
[B]Rescind[/B]               14%

But do a second referendum or a general election of themselves avert No Deal. Presumably they would have to be in tandem with some sort of extension to so so...

Inquitus

What does he base it on please, just his gut feels from reading the situation?

[B]No Deal [/B]              32%
[B]Mays Deal[/B]             6%
[B]General Election[/B]      11%
[B]Extension/Soft BREXIT[/B] 11%
[B]Peoples Vote[/B]          28%
[B]Rescind[/B]               13%

Well the silver lining is that GE, Extension/Soft Brexit, People's Vote and Rescind add up to 63%, you would expect as and when one of those is removed the support for it will coalesce around one of the remaining options in the list. Even May's deal is passable from our perspective, it has the Backstop, it will be harmful, but infinitely better than "No Deal".

If Labour stood in a GE on a 2nd Referendum platform that might make a GE work out for us, as hopefully it would give Remainers something they could vote for, even if they had to hold their nose for Corbyn. A 2nd Referendum is almost level with "No Deal" as well.

Podge_irl

Inquitus wrote: »

If Labour stood in a GE on a 2nd Referendum platform that might make a GE work out for us, as hopefully it would give Remainers something they could vote for, even if they had to hold their nose for Corbyn. A 2nd Referendum is almost level with "No Deal" as well.

I highly doubt they would though, and even if they did the Labour leadership can not remotely be trusted on the matter.

Inquitus

A collage of interesting Odds from Oddschecker pertaining to Brexit and UK Politics:

Seth Brundle

seamus wrote: »

50:50 at this stage, I genuinely can't tell.

My gut feeling has been since February or so that eventually the Government will table a motion to revoke article 50 and repeal the Withdrawal Bill, and it'll be defeated, causing the UK to leave with no Deal through sheer obstinance.

And judging by today, that'll probably be 12th April.

There's so mich anger and hostility on the leave side that I think a revocation would cause civil trouble

Inquitus

Seth Brundle wrote: »

There's so mich anger and hostility on the leave side that I think a revocation would cause civil trouble

To be fair the leave side don't seem that engaged, no mass protests, no petitions, all the pro-active protests etc. seem to come from the remain side, not sure these Brexiteers could be arsed with causing civil trouble, half of them would have a heart attack!

Infini

Seth Brundle wrote: »

There's so mich anger and hostility on the leave side that I think a revocation would cause civil trouble

The state of Farages little march and the minute pockets of leavers would suggest its well manageble for them to take them head on with an A50 withdrawal. Their bark is worse than their bite expecially since its farage and moggs whod be talking shìte.

Now mass riots as a result of a no deal crash are DEFINATELY much more likely as peoples rights and conditions are reduced and supply chains choke up. Theyve actually been preparing for this happening to a scary degree.

If they got any sense left better to take the A50 withdrawal route than go The Purge route.

Capt'n Midnight

prawnsambo wrote: »

They see a hard brexit as death to the GFA. Puts an end to all that cross border co-operation and puts Dublin back in its box. Allegedly.

On the other hand if their reluctance to back the WA ends up with Article 50 being revoked then they also win.

Any normal party would be fine with an outcome that meant they could keep their principles and didn't trash the economy.

Strazdas

Seth Brundle wrote: »

There's so mich anger and hostility on the leave side that I think a revocation would cause civil trouble

The prediction of riots by Leave voters has been greatly talked up by the ERG and their numerous chums in the right wing press with the sole intention of dampening down opposition to Brexit.

I'd be inclined to believe it is all a bluff. Where are the protest marches by Leave voters, mass mobilisation, signatures by millions on petitions, threats of a general strike etc?

Mr.Nice Guy

Farage's march is hardly indicative of the overall appetite for Brexit. They're a bunch of middle-aged eccentrics.

The big winners of revocation would be the far right. The likes of Tommy Robinson and UKIP. These guys are waiting for an excuse to kick off and revoking without any mandate to do so is a recipe for disaster.

If even 1% of the 17.4m who voted Leave are pissed off to the point of wanting to vent their fury through violence then you're talking 170,000+ people. More than enough to cause mayhem.

And the bulk of their activities won't be in broad daylight. It will be in the cover of darkness against anyone with a foreign accent. Imagine living in a Vote Leave area as an EU national in a world where Article 50 was revoked without any referendum to do so. These people would be in for a torrid time. Delusional to think otherwise.

Capt'n Midnight

Seth Brundle wrote: »

There's so mich anger and hostility on the leave side that I think a revocation would cause civil trouble

So what exactly wouldn't cause civil trouble ?

Any form of Brexit would be regarded as a betrayal by those who support harder or softer options.




The section of society what would cause civil trouble will go mental when they realise that immigration from Africa and Asia is on the up and up.


I can't see how Revoking Article 50 would make things worse in the long run.


This whole mess could have been sorted out long ago if the nature of Brexit had been defined.

MrMusician18

Infini wrote: »

The state of Farages little march and the minute pockets of leavers would suggest its well manageble for them to take them head on with an A50 withdrawal. Their bark is worse than their bite expecially since its farage and moggs whod be talking shìte.

Now mass riots as a result of a no deal crash are DEFINATELY much more likely as peoples rights and conditions are reduced and supply chains choke up. Theyve actually been preparing for this happening to a scary degree.

If they got any sense left better to take the A50 withdrawal route than go The Purge route.

I think there are going to be violent demonstrations no matter what way this goes. Unlike here, there are organised right wing hooligans itching for any excuse to engage in wanton destruction.

In any case, the problem is not riots (they'd get under control quickly enough) but the fact that the Tory membership is much more hard line than than the parliamentary party. Personally, I have no problem with the destruction of the Tories, but many MPs do, not least TM.

Strazdas

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Farage's march is hardly indicative of the overall appetite for Brexit. They're a bunch of middle-aged eccentrics.

The big winners of revocation would be the far right. The likes of Tommy Robinson and UKIP. These guys are waiting for an excuse to kick off and revoking without any mandate to do so is a recipe for disaster.

If even 1% of the 17.4m who voted Leave are pissed off to the point of wanting to vent their fury through violence then you're talking 170,000+ people. More than enough to cause mayhem.

And the bulk of their activities won't be in broad daylight. It will be in the cover of darkness against anyone with a foreign accent. Imagine living in a Vote Leave area as an EU national in a world where Article 50 was revoked without any referendum to do so. These people would be in for a torrid time. Delusional to think otherwise.

Not revoking A50 in case it angers Tommy Robinson and his pals strikes me as a very good reason to revoke it. Since when are that shower running the UK and dictating government policy. If you're having to appease the far right / extreme right, your country is in a right state.

joe40

Strazdas wrote: »

Seth Brundle wrote: »

There's so mich anger and hostility on the leave side that I think a revocation would cause civil trouble

The prediction of riots by Leave voters has been greatly talked up by the ERG and their numerous chums in the right wing press with the sole intention of dampening down opposition to Brexit.

I'd be inclined to believe it is all a bluff. Where are the protest marches by Leave voters, mass mobilisation, signatures by millions on petitions, threats of a general strike etc?

I tend to agree with that. With actual talk about 2nd referendum, if there was widespread passionate support we would be seeing more protest. You certainly wouldn't have a million people marching and no counter protest.
I used to think revoking A50 would cause a violent backlash but now I'm not so sure.
Obviously you can't be sure and as the previous poster said a relatively small number of people can cause a lot of trouble. It would definitely be controversial and I can imagine police on high alert if A50 was revoked.

Mr.Nice Guy

Strazdas wrote: »

Not revoking A50 in case it angers Tommy Robinson and his pals strikes me as a very good reason to revoke it. Since when are that shower running the UK and dictating government policy. If you're having to appease the far right / extreme right, your country is in a right state.

The UK will be in an even worse state if it decides to play a game of chicken with extremists already itching for an excuse to go haywire.

Revoking Article 50 without a democratic mandate to do so would be the biggest gift possible to the extremists and play right into their hands. It's a non-starter for that very reason.

Even leaving aside the more militant extremists, it would be a spectacular boost to the popularity of the likes of Farage, the DUP, the ERG et. al as they would be able to spend the next decade dining off of a betrayal myth that it was all going to work out had it not been for the remainers overriding democracy. Can't believe anyone could wish for this.

I'd consider this scenario almost as bad as No Deal. Perhaps moreso in the long run.

10000maniacs

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Kate Hoey strikes again.

https://twitter.com/C4Ciaran/status/1110213902560907264

With contributions like this no wonder there's so much bravado amongst the UK public about crashing out.

People stopped listening to her when she said that we will build a wall and the Republic will pay for it. She is only in Labour because the Tories wouldn't take her.
I handed the barman nothing when he asked for money. I told him it was a different kind of money. He threw me out.

Inquitus

10000maniacs wrote: »

People stopped listening to her when she said that we will build a wall and the Republic will pay for it. She is only in Labour because the Tories wouldn't take her.
I handed the barman nothing when he asked for money. I told him it was a different kind of money. He threw me out.

Aye she's particularly despicable, she rightly belongs in the DUP with her attitude of late, certainly not in Labour.

woohoo!!!

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Strazdas wrote: »

Not revoking A50 in case it angers Tommy Robinson and his pals strikes me as a very good reason to revoke it. Since when are that shower running the UK and dictating government policy. If you're having to appease the far right / extreme right, your country is in a right state.

The UK will be in an even worse state if it decides to play a game of chicken with extremists already itching for an excuse to go haywire.

Revoking Article 50 without a democratic mandate to do so would be the biggest gift possible to the extremists and play right into their hands. It's a non-starter for that very reason.

Even leaving aside the more militant extremists, it would be a spectacular boost to the popularity of the likes of Farage, the DUP, the ERG et. al as they would be able to spend the next decade dining off of a betrayal myth that it was all going to work out had it not been for the remainers overriding democracy. Can't believe anyone could wish for this.

I'd consider this scenario almost as bad as No Deal. Perhaps moreso in the long run.

Yep, "the stab in the back" would grow legs and open up all sort of unpleasant possibilities.

Sam Russell

There is more talk of revoking Art 50. Ken Clarke this evening in the HoC said that if No-Deal is of the table, and MV3 is being withdrawn due to lack of support, that only leaves revoking Art 50, which he supports.

It is being more openly being spoken of in political circles - either with a second referendum, or just revoking.

devnull

Seems that some of the civil servants from the past and a few people are now saying what we already know in relation to the fact that this is all about Party first and country second, not too dissimilar as we've seen here with Fianna Fail during the banking crisis where they were preoccupied with their own interests.

Following statements were given to Peoples Vote campaign.


Lord Kerr, the former head of HM Diplomatic Service:

They do what their political masters tell them but morale is low because most people fear that what they are doing is going to be hostile to the economic wellbeing of the country.The prime minister looks as if trying to hold the party together is her primary concern.

Lord Kerslake, the former Head of the Home Civil Service:

The civil service have a loyalty to the government of the day but they are also servants of the crown and the country. Normally there isn’t a conflict because you expect the government to act on behalf of the country but in the situation we are now in, where the interests of the Conservative Party are not necessarily the same as the interests of the country and the consequences are so grave, I do feel that their responsibility to crown and country needs to play in.

Nothing we don't already know but it's very sad that it's coming to this, but typical of the Tory party, they're mostly likely to be in very good financial shape and will be insulated from the worst of the suffering under a no deal.

Inquitus

Very tight on the Letwin Amendment, Ministerial resignations required to tip it over the edge apparently, will May allow them a free vote, or a get out of jail free absention like last time when ruling out no deal?

On the Benn amendment the Gov whipped hard against it and the remain ministered stepped into line allowing it to fail by just 2 votes!

In a very close division, 310 votes might not be enough. Two weeks ago the Hilary Benn amendment, also calling for an indicative votes process, was defeated by 314 votes to 312.

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1110251349420195840