Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

James Forde

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

A majority may well be reached which means the hard brexiters will be terrified of customs union membership and thus May will bring back her deal with them knowing it's the hardest Brexit possible.

That's what I think will happen.

Doesn't make a bit of difference. Without the DUP, her deal doesn't pass.

murphaph

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

If we passed a law stating that you need to spend at least two weeks in Ireland every year to keep your Irish passport we'd bring in a lot cash monies.

Eh, you're alright thanks. Anyway, you could never introduce such a rule without breaking international law by making people stateless.

First Up

Spook_ie wrote:

Doesn't really sort the Irish problem, a CU would normally still have a border, EU/Ireland/UK don't want one so still stuck with a border somewhere

Border/compliance checks yes, but not necessarily physical infrastructure.

Shelga

Could the deal still pass without DUP support if she had the numbers, or is there support crucial, seeing as they’re in a confidence and supply arrangement?

Basically, is she technically able to get it passed without the DUP.

Professor Moriarty

Shelga wrote: »

Could the deal still pass without DUP support if she had the numbers, or is there support crucial, seeing as they’re in a confidence and supply arrangement?

Basically, is she technically able to get it passed without the DUP.

All she needs is a majority, whether the DUP support her or not.

Spanish Eyes

Such a rollercoaster. As soon as one vote is taken it is voted down, on we go to the next and that too is rejected. And so on.

What the feck do they ACTUALLY want is my question. But I suppose they don't know themselves at this stage.

As these are just indicative votes, if all are rejected what's left? No Deal.... which no one wants also. I think I am becoming swivel eyed at this stage.

How many times has the clock been ticking now? Honestly farce is not the word anymore.

listermint

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Laura Ks Brexit feature the Brexit storm has just started on bbc 2

Terrible 'journalist'

Kermit.de.frog

I don't get why people like her as a political journalist.

Has she ever broken a story!? Seems to me she just engages in repeating gossip and taking info from print journalists.

I may have missed something but that's the impression I have.

Capt'n Midnight

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The Tory poll malaise continues:

twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1112501457188806659

UKIP (No MP) and Greens (1 MP) with 2% more support than the Tories ?

Just another day in Bizarro World

lawred2

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I don't get why people like her as a political journalist.

Has she ever broken a story!? Seems to me she just engages in repeating gossip and taking info from print journalists.

I may have missed something but that's the impression I have.

Just watching it here... Her interviewing is very chummy and almost coy/flirty.. she's simply too close to a lot of them. And it's clear she doesn't want to jeopardize that.

Professor Moriarty

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Such a rollercoaster. As soon as one vote is taken it is voted down, on we go to the next and that too is rejected. And so on.

What the feck do they ACTUALLY want is my question. But I suppose they don't know themselves at this stage.

As these are just indicative votes, if all are rejected what's left? No Deal.... which no one wants also. I think I am becoming swivel eyed at this stage.

How many times has the clock been ticking now? Honestly farce is not the word anymore.

75% of the Tory membership would vote for No Deal. The best of the Soft Brexit options gets 23%. Quelle surprise.

Spook_ie

First Up wrote: »

Border/compliance checks yes, but not necessarily physical infrastructure.

Oh yeah, see the revenue/customs unions agreeing to let their members work outside 24x7 You'd have infrastructure.

Harry Palmr

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Laura Ks Brexit feature the Brexit storm has just started on bbc 2

A few interesting vignettes, esp Boris Johnson as a tramp. Political correspondents are 'freinds' with everyone who'll play the game. And she is a correspondent/reporter not an investigative journalist.

Tell me how

Harry Palmr wrote: »

A few interesting vignettes, esp Boris Johnson as a tramp. Political correspondents are 'freinds' with everyone who'll play the game. And she is a correspondent/reporter not an investigative journalist.

She gets fairly short shrift in the replies to many of her tweets these days.

You'd want a thick skin to be in that game.

Robert McGrath

Harry Palmr wrote: »

A few interesting vignettes, esp Boris Johnson as a tramp. Political correspondents are 'freinds' with everyone who'll play the game. And she is a correspondent/reporter not an investigative journalist.

Faisal Islam on Sky is also a corespondent/reporter and not an investigative journalist, but I think he manages to provide some context and analysis rather than the he said-she said gossip of LK

Hurrache

Harry Palmr wrote: »

A few interesting vignettes, esp Boris Johnson as a tramp. Political correspondents are 'freinds' with everyone who'll play the game. And she is a correspondent/reporter not an investigative journalist.

She has obviously been used by her sources over the months, she was pretty much regurgitating misleading info fed to her.

Edit, but nowhere near as bad as Katya Adler.

Leroy42

It is not about being an investigative reporter, simply pointing out that the PM has gone back on 100+ times promise to deliver Brexit by 29th March, that she has no plan.

She should be pointing out that things like Salzborg are as much if not more down to TM and the UK than allowing the narrative that the EU is at fault to continue.

Where is she demanding answers from the PM, Davis, JRM et al about this promised 11th hour EU climbdown? Was it always the plan to actually miss the 29th? Is the 11th hour still an option?

But she does none of that. She seems more interested in the latest tweet she received, or the latest but of gossip she has been given without apparently ever actually stopping to ask what it means or even why it is being leaked to her.

She has said on may occasions that 'I've been told by sources that such and such is a distinct possibility". First off that isn't news, second it normal takes away from the actual news and in many cases it turns out to be nothing more than a rumour or IMO a strategic leak.

I get it that reporters want/need to break stories, but on such an important issue such as this, her and many others, really need to have got serious and start treating this with the seriousness it deserves.

Harry Palmr

She seems to have a fairly jaundiced view of the lot of them.

When are the results due to be known

marno21

According to the FT the DUP have voted against the four motions tonight rather than abstaining.

PropJoe10

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Such a rollercoaster. As soon as one vote is taken it is voted down, on we go to the next and that too is rejected. And so on.

What the feck do they ACTUALLY want is my question. But I suppose they don't know themselves at this stage.

As these are just indicative votes, if all are rejected what's left? No Deal.... which no one wants also. I think I am becoming swivel eyed at this stage.

How many times has the clock been ticking now? Honestly farce is not the word anymore.

That's the crux of the problem. The only thing they've indicated so far is that they don't want a No Deal Brexit. Please GOD they'll vote for one of these indicative votes this evening. That'd put the pressure back on May to finally start listening to parliament.

Laois_Man

Ye'll never guess what

The DUP have voted NO to all 4!

Junkyard Tom

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Perhaps, but we would make an awful lot of Irish citizens living and working in other countries stateless, not everyone living in the States or Australia who holds an Irish passport can afford, or indeed get the time off work to make a trip back to the auld sod every year.

murphaph wrote: »

Eh, you're alright thanks. Anyway, you could never introduce such a rule without breaking international law by making people stateless.

Actually yeah, that was a dumb idea I had.

Harry Palmr

I'm shocked! No no no noooooo.

MikeSoys

Laois_Man wrote: »

Ye'll never guess what

The DUP have voted NO to all 4!

where did u hear that?

Professor Moriarty

Laois_Man wrote: »

Ye'll never guess what

The DUP have voted NO to all 4!

I thought they abstained?

Itssoeasy

MikeSoys wrote: »

Laois_Man wrote: »

Ye'll never guess what

The DUP have voted NO to all 4!

where did u hear that?

A DUP MP told the financial times that the ten of them voted against everything.

An Ciarraioch

Your 10 minute result warning, according to the Parly a/c on Twitter.

Laois_Man

MikeSoys wrote: »

where did u hear that?

Sorry only just noticed Marno posted it above also

marno21

Laois_Man wrote: »

Sorry only just noticed Marno posted it above also

https://twitter.com/Laura_K_Hughes/status/1112819239419822081

Confirmaton. Ulster says no.

Professor Moriarty

So the DUP lied earlier when they said they were going to abstain?