Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

robinph

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, they haven't. From the text:


The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.

But that excludes the 22nd May extension from happening. For the WA to be passed it's next week, or never.

Shelga

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The EU will not grant that further short extension, since it leads to a situation where the UK is in the EU but not represented in the EU parliament. The UK could mess everything up by revoking A50 unilaterally at that point casting doubt on the validity of the Euro parliament.


If they go looking for any sort of extension past the elections, the only one on offer will be long, and on condition that the UK takes part in the elections, and that is only possible if they ask before April 12th.

So at the very least we will know if there is going to be a long extension, or no deal, by April 12th- because as you say, the EU will not let them stay in longer than that without fielding MEP candidates.

*Edit- basically the UK will not be allowed to extend beyond April 12th just to dither, in order to stop them revoking article 50 at some point in May, and messing up the elections for all other 27 states?

Panrich

aidyhawse wrote: »

MV3 is set to happen next week, as the result of that will depend on which extension period will be granted.

May has already stated that she would not be leading the Tories into the next General Election.

Yes that was the clever part of the extension. If May was minded to run down the clock, the need to get her deal approved by 29th means that it runs out of road and then parliament get two weeks to come up with an alternative solution before crashing out.

ancapailldorcha

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

So, if you are not a member of the ERG, why the fudge would you put one of them up for leader given the state of things?


And if only the ERG back their man, he won't be in the top two.

You wouldn't. But the party is divided so it's just another example of a loss of political control.

Enzokk

mrbrianj wrote: »

I thinks its ripe for somebody to jump in, dismantle Mays crazy red lines and put together a Brexit plan based on a EEA EFTA type membership. They get to 'leave' and have grown up relationships with neighbouring nations. It may not make the ERG or Nigel types happy - but would work for the vast majority of the UK. Whoever can do that gets the plaudits for delivering a sensible Brexit.

But sadly, there seems like there is nobody left in the HoC uninfected by the last 3 years of brexit craziness.

It is, but at the same time we could easily see someone come in and double down on those same red lines and actually be ready to let the UK fall into no-deal. I mean if the new leader is so inclined it is not like they have to do much to make it happen. The default position is still no-deal but instead of 29th March it is the 12th April now. If May resigns and a new leader takes over this could be a course that happens.

Zubeneschamali

robinph wrote: »

But that excludes the 22nd May extension from happening. For the WA to be passed it's next week, or never.

No it doesn't. Let's suppose May pulls next weeks vote. In that case the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019

So the UK gets the short extension automatically. If they then pass the WA the following week, May just writes to the Council and indicates that the way forward is Plan A, please may I have another extension, and the EU says sure.

Laois_Man

aidyhawse wrote: »

MV3 is set to happen next week, as the result of that will depend on which extension period will be granted.

May has already stated that she would not be leading the Tories into the next General Election.

She actually said she would not be leading them into the next scheduled general election in 2022 (and you wouldn't trust her on that either). She can call a snap election in 2 weeks and set a polling date of 3 weeks later with no time to replace her!

briany

Laois_Man wrote: »

I think May is going to last longer than people think

She is in no danger until MV3 fails. Then she'll try save herself in any way possible, even if it means attempting to call a second referendum - failing that, she would call a general election and get the needed extension by committing to the EU elections. The woman will do anything to save her own skin!

Simply, every Tory (and indeed Corbyn) with eyes on Number 10 is playing poker with the timing of their attempt and none of them want it before Withdrawal comes into effect

The main reason May has lasted as long as she has is because nobody else really wants the job. Her deal suffered the largest defeat of any government motion in the entire history of the HoC, and it's a long history. This would have been enough to toast any other PM to cinders. But she didn't stand down in the wake of this, probably safe in the knowledge that no other MP in her party is any more capable of uniting the Conservatives and the HoC than she is. They'd all make a similar hack of it because it's been like trying to get oil and water to form a stable solution.

joe40

I'm a bit confused as to the criteria for granting a "longer" extension after april 12th.

Is it just that the UK have to agree to contest the European elections or to they have to give other information on how exactly they intend to proceed.

Basically is agreement to contest MEP elections sufficient to trigger long extension and then see where that goes? There does not seem to be other concrete requirements

Zubeneschamali

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You wouldn't. But the party is divided so it's just another example of a loss of political control.

Some months back, I did hear talk that it would be only fair and democratic to let the ERG have one of the two slots. But if I was a remain/soft brexit MP, there is no way I would now let one of those lunatics near the leadership contest if I could help it.

Laois_Man

briany wrote: »

The main reason May has lasted as long as she has is because nobody else really wants the job. Her deal suffered the largest defeat of any government motion in the entire history of the HoC, and it's a long history. This would have been enough to toast any other PM to cinders. But she didn't stand down in the wake of this, probably safe in the knowledge that no other MP in her party is any more capable of uniting the Conservatives and the HoC than she is. They'd all make a similar hack of it because it's been like trying to get oil and water to form a stable solution.

That's precisely my point - all this talk about her being replaced ignores that fact that these circumstances have not changed one jot.

ArmaniJeanss

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

So, if you are not a member of the ERG, why the fudge would you put one of them up for leader given the state of things?


And if only the ERG back their man, he won't be in the top two.

Even with only ERG votes you could theoretically get into the Top 2.

Conservatives have 314 MPs so 105 mathematically guarantees you a place in the Top 2.
However the effective target is less, somewhere in the 90s is likely enough to do it as to prevent it would it would take a near-perfect vote split between the two leading non-ERG candidates. And these vote splits usually fall down as one person panics and decides he/she would rather garner a safe 130 votes than a risky 107. And lobbies accordingly.

ERG have what, around 80, so not a lot more is needed.
Whether ERG can unite their votes behind one candidate when they have 3 or 4 self-styled big cats (JRM, Boris, Raaab) is an interesting question though.

robinph

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No it doesn't. Let's suppose May pulls next weeks vote. In that case the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019


So the UK gets the short extensionautomatically. If they then pass the WA the following week, May just writes to the Council and indicates that the way forward is Plan A, please may I have another extension, and the EU says sure.

Although to do that they have to first agree to the extension to 12th April, which despite being two weeks is only actually 4 more working days of parliament. Would she survive not holding the MV3 vote next week, but asking parliament to approve an extension of 4 days and ruin their Easter Holidays instead. Think that would be a quicker way of her getting booted out by parliament than just losing the MV3 next week.

Panrich

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No it doesn't. Let's suppose May pulls next weeks vote. In that case the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019


So the UK gets the short extensionautomatically. If they then pass the WA the following week, May just writes to the Council and indicates that the way forward is Plan A, please may I have another extension, and the EU says sure.

The reason that will not fly is exactly because May has always let the clock run down and used impending deadlines to bully the HoC into 'her deal or no deal'. If she thinks that she can try to get her deal approved on 6th or 11th April, she would use the same tactics and it's essentially 29th March just two weeks later.

That is why the EU has put clear water between the deadline for her deal getting approved and the crash out date. This gives the HoC two weeks to come up with an alternative solution, not think about passing MV4 or MV5 with May still saying that there's no alternative.

prawnsambo

joe40 wrote: »

I'm a bit confused as to the criteria for granting a "longer" extension after april 12th.

Is it just that the UK have to agree to contest the European elections or to they have to give other information on how exactly they intend to proceed.

Basically is agreement to contest MEP elections sufficient to trigger long extension and then see where that goes? There does not seem to be other concrete requirements

No. The 22nd May extension is only in the case of the WA getting through parliament and is there to allow all the legislative provisions to be completed in an orderly manner. It's nothing to do with the EuroParl elections other than the fact that they want it done and dusted before them.

Inquitus

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Even with only ERG votes you could theoretically get into the Top 2.

Conservatives have 314 MPs so 105 mathematically guarantees you a place in the Top 2.
However the effective target is less, somewhere in the 90s is likely enough to do it as to prevent it would it would take a near-perfect vote split between the two leading non-ERG candidates. And these vote splits usually fall down as one person panics and decides he/she would rather garner a safe 130 votes than a risky 107. And lobbies accordingly.

ERG have what, around 80, so not a lot more is needed.
Whether ERG can unite their votes behind one candidate when they have 3 or 4 self-styled big cats (JRM, Boris, Raaab) is an interesting question though.

As it is a process of elimination even running 3 candidates does not impact the ERG's chances of success, as each one is eliminated their votes can move onto the next best ERG option and so on and so forth.

Infini

joe40 wrote: »

I'm a bit confused as to the criteria for granting a "longer" extension after april 12th.

Is it just that the UK have to agree to contest the European elections or to they have to give other information on how exactly they intend to proceed.

Basically is agreement to contest MEP elections sufficient to trigger long extension and then see where that goes? There does not seem to be other concrete requirements

Basically the 2 weeks of extra time is to allow the HoC to decide alternative arrangements wether that be stay in the EU until after the EU election cycles and contest the EU parlimentary elections or crash out by their own choice. It could even mean an A50 withdrawal pending a 2nd referendum or a GE but those 2 weeks are for the UK to decide what its plan B is. If they crash out april 12th then its purely on the UK because the EU did everything it could to avoid the situation.

kunst nugget

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/no-deal-brexit-would-cost-irish-people-720-each-annually-says-german-study-1.3833806

With an uncharacteristic flash of Churchillian passion, German chancellor Angela Merkel has promised to push for an orderly UK departure from the EU “to the last day, to the last hour”.

Her promise follows a new German study suggesting the Republic of Ireland would be the second-biggest economic loser from a hard Brexit, with an annual loss off economic power equivalent to €720 per head of population.

The study by the Bertelsmann Foundation found that a no-deal Brexit would cost Germany about €10 billion annually, or €115 per head of population. Britons have the most to fear: an economic slump of €57 billion annually or €900 per head of population.

A Hard brexit will cost the average British person €900 annually but will cost the average Irish person €720? A softer Brexit is working out at a loss of €500 for average Brit but €400 for the average Irish person. So we're going to suffer majorly either way... Seriously, fook Brexit and fook anyone that voted for it and doesn't care what effect it has on the countries around them.

Zubeneschamali

joe40 wrote: »

I'm a bit confused as to the criteria for granting a "longer" extension after april 12th.

Is it just that the UK have to agree to contest the European elections or to they have to give other information on how exactly they intend to proceed

The EU haven't said, probably to avoid bad-faith efforts to game the request later.

May was explicitly told that she could request either a short extension or a long one if she agreed to hold the EU elections in the UK, and deliberately asked for neither - she asked for a medium length extension with no elections.

She knew the EU must say no, but asked anyhow just to make them say No.

If the EU attach very specific conditions now to the long extension later, there is a risk that May will deliberately run down the clock (again) and then ask for an extension she knows they won't give, so that she can blame them for saying no AND have one last chance to play her My Deal or No Deal card in Westminster. It seems to be the only card in her hand that she understands.

ArmaniJeanss

Inquitus wrote: »

As it is a process of elimination even running 3 candidates does not impact the ERG's chances of success, as each one is eliminated their votes can move onto the next best ERG option and so on and so forth.

I agree, though it would give the opposition a couple of trial runs at getting a perfect 107+ v 107+ split organised.

I think it's far better for the ERG if there's just one MPs ballot with 1 ERG and 2 Non-ERG on it. They imo get a top 2 spot this way, then win the contest amongst the wider membership.

prawnsambo

kunst nugget wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/no-deal-brexit-would-cost-irish-people-720-each-annually-says-german-study-1.3833806



A Hard brexit will cost the average British person €900 annually but will cost the average Irish person €720? A softer Brexit is working out at a loss of €500 for average Brit but €400 for the average Irish person. So we're going to suffer majorly either way... Seriously, fook Brexit and fook anyone that voted for it and doesn't care what effect it has on the countries around them.

It's not quite as simple as that. There's an economic hit to Ireland in that ballpark alright, but that's against a still rising GDP. So people will not be worse off by that amount, the projected 'better off' amount will be reduced by that.

TL,DR: We won't be as well off as expected due to brexit, but we'll still be better off. The UK on the other hand will have negative growth, which will be a lot worse than that.

Inquitus

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I agree, though it would give the opposition a couple of trial runs at getting a perfect 107+ v 107+ split organised.

It's a secret ballot and most Tory MP's are SNIP. who don't trust each other, remember the debacle over the May No Confidence vote? there were a ton of MP's claiming to have sent letters, more than required to trigger the vote, but the vote wasn't held for a number of weeks, due to the fact half of them were fibbing!

joe40

prawnsambo wrote: »

No. The 22nd May extension is only in the case of the WA getting through parliament and is there to allow all the legislative provisions to be completed in an orderly manner. It's nothing to do with the EuroParl elections other than the fact that they want it done and dusted before them.

I understand that, I'm talking about criteria for much a longer extension. To avail of that the UK would have to contest the European elections, I'm just wondering what other precise criteria, if any has been laid down.
Obviously it is to enable something like a GE, 2nd referendum, softer Brexit etc I'm just wondering is any specified criteria that needs to be met

prawnsambo

joe40 wrote: »

I understand that, I'm talking about criteria for much a longer extension. To avail of that the UK would have to contest the European elections, I'm just wondering what other precise criteria, if any has been laid down.
Obviously it is to enable something like a GE, 2nd referendum, softer Brexit etc I'm just wondering is any specified criteria that needs to be met

There's no criteria set down for a longer extension. It's a possibility that could come from a changed approach from the HoC, but it's completely in the hands of the EU to give it and of course has to be requested by the UK.

Zubeneschamali

Inquitus wrote: »

there were a ton of MP's claiming to have sent letters, more than required to trigger the vote, but the vote wasn't held for a number of weeks, due to the fact half of them were fibbing!

There was a suggestion that the letters that pushed it over the edge came from people who then went and backed May in the confidence vote, thus preventing another such heave now when she is more vulnerable.

So yes, trying to organize a Remain/Soft Brexit shutout of the ERG would be like herding cats, but given the risk that the ERG candidate will accelerate the Bus of State over the cliffs of Dover on purpose, it would be worth trying.

And last time, Leadsom (the Leave candidate) was losing badly to May (continuity Remain candidate) when she withdrew, so perhaps the Tory party members are not quite as nutty as they say they are in those polls.

Panrich

joe40 wrote: »

I understand that, I'm talking about criteria for much a longer extension. To avail of that the UK would have to contest the European elections, I'm just wondering what other precise criteria, if any has been laid down.
Obviously it is to enable something like a GE, 2nd referendum, softer Brexit etc I'm just wondering is any specified criteria that needs to be met

There are only two options once Mays deal has been rejected (and the EU has effectively killed off it's own deal by decoupling it from the crash out) and that is to crash out on the 12th or to have some form of agreement of parliament that requires an extension and participation in EU elections.

It's inconceivable that any such agreement (given the EU election part) would be harder than May's deal and would be much more like a Norway + request so is very unlikely to meet resistence from the EU.

Inquitus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

There was a suggestion that the letters that pushed it over the edge came from people who then went and backed May in the confidence vote, thus preventing another such heave now when she is more vulnerable.

So yes, trying to organize a Remain/Soft Brexit shutout of the ERG would be like herding cats, but given the risk that the ERG candidate will accelerate the Bus of State over the cliffs of Dover on purpose, it would be worth trying.

And last time, Leadsom (the Leave candidate) was losing badly to May (continuity Remain candidate) when she withdrew, so perhaps the Tory party members are not quite as nutty as they say they are in those polls.

It never went to a vote of the membership, Leadsom pulled out after the Parliamentary selection, installing May as leader and PM by default without a membership vote.

Shelga

Can the UK still unilaterally revoke article 50 until April 12th? Just trying to picture what would happen in the (very unlikely) scenario that the petition to revoke was at 10-15 million signatures by then.

Zubeneschamali

Inquitus wrote: »

It never went to a vote of the membership, Leadsom pulled out after the Parliamentary selection.

Do you mean that she pulled out because she thought she would win, and that this would be totally awks since the Parliamentary Party wanted May?


Can't imagine May doing that if the positions were reversed.

robinph

Shelga wrote: »

Can the UK still unilaterally revoke article 50 until April 12th? Just trying to picture what would happen in the (very unlikely) scenario that the petition to revoke was at 10-15 million signatures by then.

It will still be ignored by May.

If there are 17 million people standing on the streets outside No 10 on Saturday, and the counter protest of attempting to shut down the motorway network consists of one farmer and a bale of hay on the M25 then it will still be ignored by May.

It needs the rest of parliament to take notice of those protests and do something, May will not though.