Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

ancapailldorcha

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Have I missed something recently? Is No Deal off the table?

It remains the legal default. May has requested an extension until the 30th June from Donald Tusk today.

LeinsterDub

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

You mean this guy?

[URL=

https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1088058967572520961[/URL]

He doesn't, he's just preserving his own position as always.


Edit* I never tried to embed a tweet before.. help?

Just copy and paste the url

https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1088058967572520961

lawred2

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It remains the legal default. May has requested an extension until the 30th June from Donald Tusk today.

so participating in the elections then?

Can't really see what's in this for the EU.

Professor Moriarty

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Wow!!! An arch tory Brexiter actually GETS IT

https://twitter.com/DKShrewsbury/status/1114164365953990664

He's actually wrong. Or, more probably, he's lying as he is a hard Brexiteer who only started backing the WA this week because he saw No Deal disappearing over the horizon. People in NI don't want the WA. An opinion poll four weeks ago found that 67% of people in NI actually want to retain the single market and the customs union.

ancapailldorcha

lawred2 wrote: »

so participating in the elections then?

Can't really see what's in this for the EU.

They get to avert a hard Brexit. For now at least. They also get to keep the hope of it being cancelled alive.

I'd they want an extension, should the UK not be told that if they want it, they can revoke Article 50 and then immediately do it again?

Guarantees two years instead of potential problems in the EU parliament.

Sam Russell

Hurrache wrote: »

The "flextension" is a reasonable offer from the EU, the UK can't whinge too much about that as I'm sure some in the EU won't like it. I presume a precondition is they must partake in the EU elections.

JRM being a dick about it, obviously a tactic to try force them not to accept the offer
https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1114086264024727554

Does JRM not realise that the EU read this type of drivel and are already counteracting it.

When TM goes to the EU council, she is made sit outside the room while the EU27 decide what to offer her.

All that will happen within the EU is that while Art 50 is in force, the EUP will ask the UK reps to sit outside while they discuss the budget or anything else that they might want to disrupt. Same will go with the Commission and the Council.

What a fool JRM is to let the cat out of the bag.

Hurrache

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd they want an extension, should the UK not be told that if they want it, they can revoke Article 50 and then immediately do it again?

Guarantees two years instead of potential problems in the EU parliament.

Good jaysus no.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

They get to avert a hard Brexit. For now at least. They also get to keep the hope of it being cancelled alive.

Exactly. The current cost/benefit analysis indicates that they should continue to indulge and humour Britain. Once that analysis swings the other way, they'll throw Britain overboard.

seamus

lawred2 wrote: »

so participating in the elections then?

Can't really see what's in this for the EU.

Nothing. They won't accept 30th June. Peregrinus astutely pointed out earlier today that she's asking for this date in the expectation that it will be denied, and May can claim her hands are tied.

Headshot

Whats the story with the Cooper-Letwin bill going through the Lords, where are they with that at the moment?

Professor Moriarty

France, Germany and Holland saying this afternoon that they are unlikely to agree an extension because May has no plan that has parliament's support.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Exactly. The current cost/benefit analysis indicates that they should continue to indulge and humour Britain. Once that analysis swings the other way, they'll throw Britain overboard.

Yep.

There's a reason that the EU 27 have been so receptive to the UK revoking Article 50. Brexit is bad for them, hard Brexit moreso.

I don't think that that balance will change unless people start leaving the UK if Rees-Mogg and co get their way and the economy tanks. Fortunately, Parliament has proven quite resilient in this regard despite the repeated assaults against it. The sheer incompetence of the Brexiters helps no end in this regard.

In other news, I watched Laura Kuenssberg's Brexit Storm yesterday. It was quite good. You wouldn't learn anything new but it was a nice refresher of the goings-on of the past 9 months. She managed to get some footage behind the scenes in meetings which was nice to see though again, nothing new here.

Professor Moriarty

Headshot wrote: »

Whats the story with the Cooper-Letwin bill going through the Lords, where are they with that at the moment?

It should pass on Monday and be returned to the HoC for more shenanigans.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Yep.

There's a reason that the EU 27 have been so receptive to the UK revoking Article 50. Brexit is bad for them, hard Brexit moreso.

I don't think that that balance will change unless people start leaving the UK if Rees-Mogg and co get their way and the economy tanks. Fortunately, Parliament has proven quite resilient in this regard despite the repeated assaults against it. The sheer incompetence of the Brexiters helps no end in this regard.

In other news, I watched Laura Kuenssberg's Brexit Storm yesterday. It was quite good. You wouldn't learn anything new but it was a nice refresher of the goings-on of the past 9 months. She managed to get some footage behind the scenes in meetings which was nice to see though again, nothing new here.

I don't think it's the incompetence of the Brexiteers, though the likes of Davis, Boris and Jacob would hardly inspire confidence, more that their 'argument' is the emperor's new clothes.

Sam Russell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It should pass on Monday and be returned to the HoC for more shenanigans.

There is the committee stage in the lords on Monday followed by the third reading which is a formality. When it goes back to the commons, they have to accept any amendments, and the third reading is a nod through, as is royal assent.

Incidentally, if there is a tied vote in the commons, Bercow votes to pass the third reading.

[Normally - but this is not normal times].

Laois_Man

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Thanks for sharing that.

The man of principle that we're told he is has proven to be nothing more than a myth. This just adds to the evidence for that.

Corbyn is not a man of principle, just because he campaigned against the Lisbon treaty??

Professor Moriarty

Sam Russell wrote: »

There is the committee stage in the lords on Monday followed by the third reading which is a formality. When it goes back to the commons, they have to accept any amendments, and the third reading is a nod through, as is royal assent.

Incidentally, if there is a tied vote in the commons, Bercow votes to pass the third reading.

[Normally - but this is not normal times].

No, these are interesting times as the Chinese curse goes.

robindch

An Claidheamh wrote: »

Anyway, I stand by my point made months ago. Britain should be given an ultimatum.

Tempting as it is, that will backfire immediately by providing Brexit Ultras with a reason to hate the EU which others can support - it would be similar in noise, if perhaps not in scale or consequences, to what happened after WWI, when Germans were stumped with enormous war reparations, providing Hitler and friends a convincing justification for their "us versus them" mentality.

Much better for the EU to do what they've done - provide the UK with dates and indicative consequences, but also providing the UK with executive power over what actually happens.

That way, they'll avoid being blamed for at least some of the inevitable backlash which will occur following a no-deal exit.

There's also a school of thought which suggests that the EU should help the UK out the door without a deal, for the sole reason that the consequences will discredit Brexit. I haven't noticed the EU being that cynical, though certain members of UKGov have suggested it.

robindch

ShooterSF wrote: »

I've really liked tusk up to now but if this is true he's totally caved. The uk do not have a concrete plan for a long extension. The rumour is they're not going to even ask for one. Hopefully the council have a bit more backbone.

Tusk hasn't caved at all - the UK can request an extension, but it's up to the EU to provide one and I'm going to stick my head out here and suggest that they're going to provide a long extension, possibly subject to some simple criteria, either a GE or more likely, a people's vote. With no qualifying criteria, the extension is probably going to be too short for TM to command any majority.

ShooterSF

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd they want an extension, should the UK not be told that if they want it, they can revoke Article 50 and then immediately do it again?

Guarantees two years instead of potential problems in the EU parliament.

There is rules in place I believe that if you cancel it ti has to be in good faith. If they invoke straight away again the countdown would start from the original date. Plus who the hell would negotiate with someone if they pulled that kinda trick?

Laois_Man

ShooterSF wrote: »

There is rules in place I believe that if you cancel it ti has to be in good faith. If they invoke straight away again the countdown would start from the original date. Plus who the hell would negotiate with someone if they pulled that kinda trick?

Not to mention the fact that giving them another 2 years effectively gives them all the benefits of the 2-year transition period, but without them having to either sign up to a backstop or pay the £39 billion, which I believe to be the motivation for delay in some people's minds on the UK side. They can't be allowed to do that.

Tell May straight, announce next week that you are going for a general election, or a second referendum, our you're out next Friday. End of discussion!

ShooterSF

robindch wrote: »

Tusk hasn't caved at all - the UK can request an extension, but it's up to the EU to provide one and I'm going to stick my head out here and suggest that they're going to provide a long extension, possibly subject to some simple criteria, either a GE or more likely, a people's vote. With no qualifying criteria, the extension is probably going to be too short for TM to command any majority.

I may have mixed Tusk up with other EU voices but the talk coming out when the previous extension was granted was that the UK would need to come forward with such a plan if they wanted to be granted a long extension which is very different to what Tusk is talking about now. May looks to be coming looking for a short extension with none of the above on the table yet he wants to offer a long extension and what? make the UK's plan for them? It's crazy to even think about accepting a request for a long term extension given the result of the past few weeks since getting the short extension but to offer one without request would be even more absurd imo and feed into the narrative that the EU fear a no deal more than the UK.

ShooterSF

ShooterSF wrote: »

There is rules in place I believe that if you cancel it ti has to be in good faith. If they invoke straight away again the countdown would start from the original date. Plus who the hell would negotiate with someone if they pulled that kinda trick?

I understand that in relation to the idea that countries could abuse it. But in this scenario, a definite two years is a security the EU would desire instead of these less enforceable? extensions.

Are the extensions as legally binding as Article 50? I don't know.

josip

Sam Russell wrote: »

Does JRM not realise that the EU read this type of drivel and are already counteracting it.

When TM goes to the EU council, she is made sit outside the room while the EU27 decide what to offer her.

All that will happen within the EU is that while Art 50 is in force, the EUP will ask the UK reps to sit outside while they discuss the budget or anything else that they might want to disrupt. Same will go with the Commission and the Council.

What a fool JRM is to let the cat out of the bag.

Whatever we would like to think of JRM, he is not a fool.
Almost certainly the reasoning behind his tweet is that he wants the EU to NOT grant any extension.
They are more likely to reject a request if they think the UK will be obstructive in the European parliament.

josip

josip wrote: »

Whatever we would like to think of JRM, he is not a fool.
Almost certainly the reasoning behind his tweet is that he wants the EU to NOT grant any extension.
They are more likely to reject a request if they think the UK will be obstructive in the European parliament.

The oft-trotted line in reverse.

"Don't attribute to stupidity what you can attribute to malice."


For what it's worth, I agree.

Laois_Man

josip wrote: »

Whatever we would like to think of JRM, he is not a fool.
Almost certainly the reasoning behind his tweet is that he wants the EU to NOT grant any extension.
They are more likely to reject a request if they think the UK will be obstructive in the European parliament.

Firstly, JRM has contradicted his own long held argument that the UK do not have to power to dictate anything within the EU for themselves.

Secondly, JRM doesn't get to decide who the UK MEPs are, or their motivations!

Ironically, the whole Brexit movement has lead to a more visible pro-EU faction emerge within the UK than was seen before - SOME people have bothered to educate themselves on it now. This might just MIGHT actually lead to the UK electing more pro-EU MEPs whereas it was the anti EU population segment that were far more motivated to vote before now.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I don't think it's the incompetence of the Brexiteers, though the likes of Davis, Boris and Jacob would hardly inspire confidence, more that their 'argument' is the emperor's new clothes.

I don’t know. Look at Boris’ disastrous attempt to become PM in the aftermath of the referendum, Davis turning up without any paperwork, Rees-Mogg’s bungled attempt to oust May.

Laois_Man wrote: »

Corbyn is not a man of principle, just because he campaigned against the Lisbon treaty??

He’s a career Eurosceptic who’s voted against the EU since before it was the EU. He came out in favour of remain and then his office actively sabotaged the Labour Remain campaign led by Alan Johnson. If he wanted to leave, I’d have much preferred he campaigned for it instead of pretending to be moderate to shore up his support base. The Labour party has a history of Euroscepticism from the days of Callaghan and Wilson.

ShooterSF

Deleted User wrote: »

I understand that in relation to the idea that countries could abuse it. But in this scenario, a definite two years is a security the EU would desire instead of these less enforceable? extensions.

Are the extensions as legally binding as Article 50? I don't know.

I don't think so. The current situation as I read it is the UK are likely to ask for an extension but need unanimous agreement from the rest of the EU and some countries have seemed sceptical about giving one. If they cancel and invoke straight away I think it'd be rightly seen as trying to just bypass that decision.

Larbre34

Sky Data poll on the state of play:

Happy to participate OR don't mind European elections - 51%

Angry at the prospect - 43%

(within that, 47% would cast a vote, 26% boycott, 17% wouldn't be voting anyway)

Current Preference:

No deal departure: 41%
Long delay +EU elections: 35%
May deal exit: 16%

No sign of anything breaking the tie for a long time yet so.....