Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

An Ciarraioch

http://twitter.com/AlbertoNardelli/status/1108769593735168002

PokeHerKing

Fair play to the EU. Only thing that made political sense to them. Over to HoC. The deal, crash out or revoke.

Time to $hit or get off the pot lads.

MadYaker

Yeah I wasn’t thinking they’d get an extension until June and they have no hope of a long extension no matter what happens. The EU are fed up they’ve had enough.

Akrasia

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

http://twitter.com/AlbertoNardelli/status/1108769593735168002

They're basically saying to Bercow that there will be no more substantial change to the motion that May is to bring for MV3 from the EU side.

If there is to be any change to allow May to hold the vote, it must either come from May herself, or via a change in circumstances that make this vote different to the last 2.

I think Bercow would probably consider the fact that the UK are about a week away from crashing out with no hope of an extension to be a material change in circumstances, but it's down to his discretion unless May appends something to MV2 that makes it substantially different (not likely given her refusal to compromise up now)

Mr.Nice Guy

I'm still inclined to believe a long extension is the most likely outcome.

EU have stated today a longer extension is not possible given the UK does not intend to hold elections. That suggests to me if MV3 fails - which most expect - then providing May flip-flops once more and signals that she is willing to hold elections, I believe at an emergency summit they will give her probably to the end of the year, if not beyond that.

May probably won't survive that but the jig is up for her if/when MV3 loses.

Shelga

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

May probably won't survive that but the jig is up for her if/when MV3 loses.

Can’t she refuse to go, given that she survived a vote of no confidence recently? She is just that obstinate.

BluePlanet

Maybe i'm feeling a little paranoid today but it's possible that the repercussions of No Deal for Britain may be a little exaggerated.
Consider this:

-Trump makes a free trade deal with Britain on March 30 to soften No Deal.
-He (or they - the US) use Britain's precarious position to further Trumps geo policital goal of undermining a major trade rival: the EU. Britain are American lackey's after all.
-He or they also try and turn screws on the NHS for domestic political purposes of showing folks back home in USA the perils of "Socialized Medicine".

There are opportunities there.

Infini

BluePlanet wrote: »

Maybe i'm feeling a little paranoid today but it's possible that the repercussions of No Deal for Britain may be a little exaggerated.
Consider this:

-Trump makes a free trade deal with Britain on March 30 to soften No Deal.
-He (or they - the US) use Britain's precarious position to further Trumps geo policital goal of undermining a major trade rival: the EU. Britain are American lackey's after all.
-He or they also try and turn screws on the NHS for domestic political purposes of showing folks back home in USA the perils of "Socialized Medicine".

There are opportunities there.

Thats not oppertunities thats the vulture moving in to pick the carcass clean. Anything offered to Britain will be to the detriment of Britain.

Akrasia

trellheim wrote: »

Q: Assume I am Teresa May and I march into the HoC

"Mr Speaker ! I move that this House votes to Revoke Article 50".

Do I get a majority ?

I do not think so.

Does TM need to get HOC approval to revoke A50 though?

According to The Wightman case, Article 50 could be revoked by a sitting government without requiring a vote by the house of commons.

It would probably involve May resigning, but this could be her last act as PM. She has been using the threat of a No deal as blackmail to get her own deal through, but does even Theresa May really want to actually pull that trigger?

She would never admit it while there is even a glimmer of a chance that her threats might work, that would totally defeat the point of the blackmail in the first place, but when it's clear that her gambit has failed, she might fall on her sword, admit defeat and agree to revoke A50

Place your bets folks!!

Tell me how

BluePlanet wrote: »

Maybe i'm feeling a little paranoid today but it's possible that the repercussions of No Deal for Britain may be a little exaggerated.
Consider this:

-Trump makes a free trade deal with Britain on March 30 to soften No Deal.
-He (or they - the US) use Britain's precarious position to further Trumps geo policital goal of undermining a major trade rival: the EU. Britain are American lackey's after all.
-He or they also try and turn screws on the NHS for domestic political purposes of showing folks back home in USA the perils of "Socialized Medicine".

There are opportunities there.

Don't think there is enough time for these scenarios to play out. Even if he is re-elected, he has max 5 years.

I expect the UK to go in to some form of recovery position for a couple of years after this. That is assuming of course that they have some position to hold. The last 3 years have been catastrophic for their political standing and ego.

Nody

BluePlanet wrote: »

Maybe i'm feeling a little paranoid today but it's possible that the repercussions of No Deal for Britain may be a little exaggerated.
Consider this:

-Trump makes a free trade deal with Britain on March 30 to soften No Deal.

Trump and USA has already been very explicit in what they expect in the deal to be signed; lower food standards, GMO allowed, NHS contracts to be bid to private companies etc. Will it soften the blow? Sure; but it will not be a deal of equals and it will have very big consequences in the UK for decades which are not positive.

-He (or they - the US) use Britain's precarious position to further Trumps geo policital goal of undermining a major trade rival: the EU. Britain are American lackey's after all.

That's already happened once UK crashed out; no need to sweeten the deal esp. when UK is desperate.

-He or they also try and turn screws on the NHS for domestic political purposes of showing folks back home in USA the perils of "Socialized Medicine".

There is no try; it's already clearly stated that they expect for any FTA to be signed all NHS contracts should be up for tender with private corporations.

There are opportunities there.

Yes for disaster capital and people who want to buy farmland as farmers go bankrupt etc. The exact same people who're supporting the ERG group etc. because they will make a killing on it; for the great majority though things are going to get worse.

Quin_Dub

BluePlanet wrote: »

Maybe i'm feeling a little paranoid today but it's possible that the repercussions of No Deal for Britain may be a little exaggerated.
Consider this:

-Trump makes a free trade deal with Britain on March 30 to soften No Deal.
-He (or they - the US) use Britain's precarious position to further Trumps geo policital goal of undermining a major trade rival: the EU. Britain are American lackey's after all.
-He or they also try and turn screws on the NHS for domestic political purposes of showing folks back home in USA the perils of "Socialized Medicine".

There are opportunities there.

The trouble is , any deal with the US under Trump likely torpedoes any chance of a deal with the rest of the EU.

Trump will demand that the UK lower their food standards to allow US Agri-Products in , thereby instantly trashing any deal with the EU as the EU will demand that they hold to the current EU standards.

At least with a deal in place for the EU under the WA etc. they could hold the line on food standards with the US and do a deal , but under No deal they basically have to choose one or the other..

Christy42

Quin_Dub wrote: »

BluePlanet wrote: »

Maybe i'm feeling a little paranoid today but it's possible that the repercussions of No Deal for Britain may be a little exaggerated.
Consider this:

-Trump makes a free trade deal with Britain on March 30 to soften No Deal.
-He (or they - the US) use Britain's precarious position to further Trumps geo policital goal of undermining a major trade rival: the EU. Britain are American lackey's after all.
-He or they also try and turn screws on the NHS for domestic political purposes of showing folks back home in USA the perils of "Socialized Medicine".

There are opportunities there.

The trouble is , any deal with the US under Trump likely torpedoes any chance of a deal with the rest of the EU.

Trump will demand that the UK lower their food standards to allow US Agri-Products in , thereby instantly trashing any deal with the EU as the EU will demand that they hold to the current EU standards.

At least with a deal in place for the EU under the WA etc. they could hold the line on food standards with the US and do a deal , but under No deal they basically have to choose one or the other..

The US has already published its requirements.

Main demands for an FTA is that the UK would be barred from making a similar deal with China and that the US essentially manages food standards in the UK (OK the UK would have their own bodies but they would be toothless).

Larbre34

BluePlanet wrote: »

Maybe i'm feeling a little paranoid today but it's possible that the repercussions of No Deal for Britain may be a little exaggerated.
Consider this:

-Trump makes a free trade deal with Britain on March 30 to soften No Deal.
-He (or they - the US) use Britain's precarious position to further Trumps geo policital goal of undermining a major trade rival: the EU. Britain are American lackey's after all.
-He or they also try and turn screws on the NHS for domestic political purposes of showing folks back home in USA the perils of "Socialized Medicine".

There are opportunities there.

I don't know why you'd feel paranoid, none of the interested parties are out to get you.

America alone cannot possibly compensate for the breadth and depth of UK trade with the EU, particularly in agri-food and services. And as mentioned above, the UK will be at a massive disadvantage in such an arrangement because they are under immense pressure. Special relationship or nay, the Trump administration is not known for giving a sucker an even break.

Itssoeasy

Andrea leadsom the leader of the house is just so bloody petty and she despises John Bercow. I've just seen seen a clip from I presume today where Bercow tells a Tory MP to grow up as they were heckling a labour MP. Instead of the leader of the house answering the labour MPs question she decided to take a shot at John Bercow to which he shot back at her.

joe40

So as it stands does a rejection of mv3, mean no deal exit.
Can anything else happen. Is there any other ammunition left for remain or soft brexit supporters.
So why not approve the WA even if you disagree, as the lesser of 2 evils.
Maybe I'm missing something.

Itssoeasy

joe40 wrote: »

So as it stands does a rejection of mv3, mean no deal exit.
Can anything else happen. Is there any other ammunition left for remain or soft brexit supporters.
So why not approve the WA even if you disagree, as the lesser of 2 evils.
Maybe I'm missing something.

Going by the proposed statement from the EU, then Yes. The extension from the EU is conditional of the HoC passing the WA next week. The extension is to give Theresa May time to get the agreement through the commons and the Lords. So, if it's not passed there won't be an extension so at 11pm next Friday week baring something else happening, the UK will leave the EU without a deal and then it's anyone's guess what will happen.

I think it's 1,000 days since the Referendum was held and leave won and here the UK are just a few hours over 8 days away and they are potentially going to leave without a deal. And the UK can blame the EU, and Ireland and the man in the moon if they like, but the HoC sits in London, and nowhere else. They decided to leave, so it was up to them in the main to chart their way out of the EU in an orderly way. But, through arrogance and red lines and utter lies, the UK are in a mess.

Strazdas

joe40 wrote: »

So as it stands does a rejection of mv3, mean no deal exit.
Can anything else happen. Is there any other ammunition left for remain or soft brexit supporters.
So why not approve the WA even if you disagree, as the lesser of 2 evils.
Maybe I'm missing something.

It's possible that Parliament and Bercow might seize control of the situation before MV3 and force through legislation on Brexit in complete defiance of May.

RickBlaine

Is there a place online to legally watch the EU press conference?

Tell me how

Strazdas wrote: »

It's possible that Parliament and Bercow might seize control of the situation before MV3 and force through legislation on Brexit in complete defiance of May.

There is nothing that Parliament could put together itself which could be expected to be accepted by a majority.

To be fair to May, that was her point last night.

Itssoeasy

RickBlaine wrote: »

Is there a place online to legally watch the EU press conference?

sky news ? You'd think they'd be showing it given the seriousness of the matter at hand.

marno21

Any UK-US "trade deal" post no deal is effectively the UK giving the US the right to pillage them. Charlatan of International Trade Liam Fox may use whatever language he wants to talk it up to the British people but there is absolutely no incentive for the US to give the UK any inch whatsoever in the event of a no deal

Such a deal would be catastrophic for the UK and also for Ireland, especially our agriculture sector

Such a deal flooding the UK with imported food like products would also require a fairly hard border to protect the EU single market and it's food standards

Tell me how

Petition to revoke is close to 1.25M votes in less than 24 hours.

Is there any chance that given May was speaking to the people last night saying "I am with you" that she could use this rapid signing rate (14 signatures/second) as evidence that the brakes need to be applied?

MrMusician18

Itssoeasy wrote: »

sky news ? You'd think they'd be showing it given the seriousness of the matter at hand.

https://audiovisual.ec.europa.eu/en/

It's not started yet.

ancapailldorcha

Tell me how wrote: »

Petition to revoke is close to 1.25M votes in less than 24 hours.

Is there any chance that given May was speaking to the people last night saying "I am with you" that she could use this rapid signing rate (14 signatures/second) as evidence that the brakes need to be applied?

I honestly can't imagine her ever doing that no matter how many signatures she gets.

Remember, she just had a go at Parliament in a live press conference. She is the head of the government acting on the pretense of fulfilling the will of the people. She then proceeds to run down our only nationally democratic institution for doing what we want it to do.

She's a right wing authoritarian who is more than happy to proceed with Brexit. She's trying to shove her dreadful deal on us no matter the cost.

jasper100

joe40 wrote: »

So as it stands does a rejection of mv3, mean no deal exit.
Can anything else happen. Is there any other ammunition left for remain or soft brexit supporters.
So why not approve the WA even if you disagree, as the lesser of 2 evils.
Maybe I'm missing something.

This is what SKy corresondant Lewis Goodall thinks might happen


MV3 doesn’t pass (or is never even brought)
-PM takes us towards no deal.
-confidence vote, Tory remainers abstain or vote against
-govt falls, Queen calls for Corbyn
-Corbyn becomes PM. This all happens with so little time to spare he revokes A50.



Its quite a plausible outcome right now. Seems to be no deal crash out or this.

Doesn't seem likely her deal will pass given she has been told she can't bring it to another vote and its not even looking good for her to have the numbers to get the vote passed.

c.p.w.g.w

I think the only sensible thing to be done for the welfare of the UK is revoke A50. But it's sad that it won't be done

jasper100

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

I think the only sensible thing to be done for the welfare of the UK is revoke A50. But it's sad that it won't be done

How so, seeing as parliament have voted against no deal?

The only options are either accept the deal or revoke?

Frank Bullitt

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1108800898027929602

Loafing Oaf

Tell me how wrote: »

Petition to revoke is close to 1.25M votes in less than 24 hours.

Is there any chance that given May was speaking to the people last night saying "I am with you" that she could use this rapid signing rate (14 signatures/second) as evidence that the brakes need to be applied?

How many people marched against the Iraq War and what difference did they make? No doubt the Tories would dismiss these signatories as lefties of various hues who would be very unlikely to vote for them under any circumstances. Plus TM may be in a 'screw you all' frame of mind, seeing as her time as PM is almost certainly almost up, and might be actively pushing for No Deal if her one is finally shot down.