Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Zubeneschamali

Shelga wrote: »

Can the UK still unilaterally revoke article 50 until April 12th?

Yes.


Or they could present a plan to the Council saying they will hold a referendum where the options are Brexit per the WA or Revoke, and the EU would extend until doomsday for that (providing they hold EU elections).

S.M.B.

Think I might join this Peoples Vote March tomorrow.

Inquitus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

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.

A lot of people thought it was a stitch up, but basically after May and Leadsom were selected for the membership vote, Leadsom having only got around 28% of the vote when 3 was whittled down to 2, noting she did not have wide support among the membership, and in the interests of speeding up the process and avoiding the 9 weeks a membership vote takes, decided to stand aside which allowed May's coronation as PM.

Zubeneschamali

Inquitus wrote: »

A lot of people thought it was a stitch up, but basically after May and Leadsom were selected for the membership vote, Leadsom having only got around 28% of the vote when 3 was whittled down to 2, noting she did not have wide support among the membership, and in the interests of speeding up the process and avoiding the 9 weeks a membership vote takes, decided to stand aside which allowed May's coronation as PM.

Hmm, this still rather conflicts with the idea that the membership will vote for a donkey if it is from the ERG (and has blond hair).

An Ciarraioch

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.

The Taoiseach and Donald Tusk dropping fairly blatant hints about the EEA option:

http://twitter.com/campaignforleo/status/1109060638796582913

Inquitus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Hmm, this still rather conflicts with the idea that the membership will vote for a donkey if it is from the ERG (and has blond hair).

Times have changed, no one in the UK wanted a No Deal Brexit at that point it was all lined up to be an acceptable Softish Brexit, not the shítshow that has now manifested itself. If an ERG candidate makes it onto the final ballot this time, they will win, that is why the bookies odds reflect the same. In fact all bar one of the main contenders, Rudd, is a leaver of varying ferocity.

Seth Brundle

Hang on, they want to debate and vote on whether to allow the new extension to Art 50? :rolleyes:

https://twitter.com/BrexitCentral/status/1109076675080400896

Professor Moriarty

Inquitus wrote: »

A lot of people thought it was a stitch up, but basically after May and Leadsom were selected for the membership vote, Leadsom having only got around 28% of the vote when 3 was whittled down to 2, noting she did not have wide support among the membership, and in the interests of speeding up the process and avoiding the 9 weeks a membership vote takes, decided to stand aside which allowed May's coronation as PM.

Leadsom withdrew having been forced to apologise to May for referring to May's childlessness as being a negative for a prime minister. Basically, she shot herself in the foot with a nasty comment. Par for the course for Leadsom.

Inquitus

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Hang on, they want to debate and vote on whether to allow the new extension to Art 50? :rolleyes:

That's guaranteed to be passed, they already voted to extend article 50 last week, if not in a legally binding manner that this SI will be.

prawnsambo

Inquitus wrote: »

Times have changed, no one in the UK wanted a No Deal Brexit at that point it was all lined up to be an acceptable Softish Brexit, not the shítshow that has now manifested itself. If an ERG candidate makes it onto the final ballot this time, they will win, that is why the bookies odds reflect the same. In fact all bar one of the main contenders, Rudd, is a leaver of varying ferocity.

Yeah, it was back in the day of "they need us more than we need them" and "easiest deal in history" and other such bon mots of the deluded. We hadn't even got to "no deal is better than a bad deal" by that stage. Halcyon days.

PokeHerKing

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.

Considering nearly 17 million brits already voted against Brexit why is this online petition getting so many reposts!?

Who cares, its a bloody online petition that you could realistically vote in as many times as you like.

robinph

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Considering nearly 17 million brits already voted against Brexit why is this online petition getting so many reposts!?

Who cares, its a bloody online petition that you could realistically vote in as many times as you like.

It's just a reminder to MPs that there are people out there who didn't vote leave despite the claims of "will of the people".

JeffKenna

robinph wrote: »

It's just a reminder to MPs that there are people out there who didn't vote leave despite the claims of "will of the people".

But it is the will of the people. How can you claim that its not?

Eod100

It's like they're starting all over again. Jaysus

https://twitter.com/KateEMcCann/status/1109077848210456576

Inquitus

JeffKenna wrote: »

But it is the will of the people. How can you claim that its not?

People change their minds, and the Brexit leave promised has completely failed to materialise, one can say it was the will of the people, but chances are it's no longer the will of the people.

joe40

I hate that phrase "the will of the people" As if "the people" are one homogenous group and everything is a binary choice

lawred2

Eod100 wrote: »

It's like they're starting all over again. Jaysus

https://twitter.com/KateEMcCann/status/1109077848210456576

I actually burst out laughing reading that tweet. Surreal.

Inquitus

lawred2 wrote: »

I actually burst out laughing reading that tweet. Surreal.

At least they have taken Cake and Unicorns off the table!

Balanadan

The uncertainty is pain in the arse at this stage, particularly for businesses. I don't think they'll be allowed any further extension unless they have a very clearly defined, coherent plan.

PokeHerKing

robinph wrote:

It's just a reminder to MPs that there are people out there who didn't vote leave despite the claims of "will of the people".

It's still painful to see posts dramatically claiming every hour another 100k. I could sign it if I wanted too. Im not a British citizen. I could also sign it from my home pc, my office pc, my mobile, my wife's mobile, my kids (if I had any) mobile etc....

MPs alreadt know that half the people who voted in the referendum do not want Brexit. So can we stop posting it. It won't make a difference nor should it.

Joe_ Public

Eod100 wrote: »

It's like they're starting all over again. Jaysus

https://twitter.com/KateEMcCann/status/1109077848210456576

If there’s any substance in it, is it all that a bad thing? Forget the WA if it has no chance of passing and concentrate on finding something - anything - that has a chance of achieving consensus?

An Ciarraioch

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Considering nearly 17 million brits already voted against Brexit why is this online petition getting so many reposts!?

Who cares, its a bloody online petition that you could realistically vote in as many times as you like.

No, people who attempted to sign twice, in order to test the system, were automatically e-mailed to tell them they could only sign once.

Eod100

Joe_ Public wrote: »

If there’s any substance in it, is it all that a bad thing? Forget the WA if it has no chance of passing and concentrate on finding something - anything - that has a chance of achieving consensus?

Just that it's nearly 3 years since referendum and they're only doing this now. And widening the options would surely mean consensus might be harder to achieve. May was always going with her deal or no deal, she seems to have lost all her authority. Can't have long left

Inquitus

Joe_ Public wrote: »

If there’s any substance in it, is it all that a bad thing? Forget the WA if it has no chance of passing and concentrate on finding something - anything - that has a chance of achieving consensus?

It's not a bad thing, Parliament has a remain majority, so with their minds focused they should be able to come up with something less harmful to us than both No Deal and the WA.

Igotadose

Joe_ Public wrote: »

If there’s any substance in it, is it all that a bad thing? Forget the WA if it has no chance of passing and concentrate on finding something - anything - that has a chance of achieving consensus?

1000 days so far. What can they change in the next 7 (till the 29th), or the next 21 (to 12 April). They have a deal on the table. It's either that, no deal, or repeal article 50.

Shelga

JeffKenna wrote: »

But it is the will of the people. How can you claim that its not?

Because it's not a binary choice, and it should never have been framed as such. What on earth is wrong with going back to the people with a far more detailed choice between Remain and May's deal?

Would any responsible government allow No Deal to be put on a ballot paper? Is there a possibility that the ERG will support the Kyle-Wilson amendment on the condition that No Deal is listed as an option?

RobertKK

It looks like everything will be done by the UK to now avoid no deal. The EU came to a very intelligent compromise, whatever happens from here on, if a no deal was to happen through UK incompetence, the UK will fully own it.

An Ciarraioch

Joe_ Public wrote: »

If there’s any substance in it, is it all that a bad thing? Forget the WA if it has no chance of passing and concentrate on finding something - anything - that has a chance of achieving consensus?

Indeed - it's the very implication of what the EU said when they sought a road map from the House of Commons before April 12th.

robinph

PokeHerKing wrote: »

It's still painful to see posts dramatically claiming every hour another 100k. I could sign it if I wanted too. Im not a British citizen. I could also sign it from my home pc, my office pc, my mobile, my wife's mobile, my kids (if I had any) mobile etc....

The same goes for the counter petition that has been open for months and is stuck on the 300,000 mark.

PokeHerKing wrote: »

MPs alreadt know that half the people who voted in the referendum do not want Brexit. So can we stop posting it. It won't make a difference nor should it.

Not sure that they do when there is so much talk of will of the people being respected as justification for a crash out of the EU. If the will of the people were to be being followed then we'd be getting a 50% brexit with something still EU'ish and some things not.

Unless they are going to claim that annoying both extremes equally was the aim all along because of the 50/50 vote.

Joe_ Public

Eod100 wrote: »

Just that it's nearly 3 years since referendum and they're only doing this now. And widening the options would surely mean consensus might be harder to achieve. May was always going with her deal or no deal, she seems to have lost all her authority. Can't have long left

Yes true, it’s all very frustrating but if her deal has no chance of passing, which seems likely, i struggle to see any much more palatable options. I assume it would necessitate somehow getting the longer extension though. Ins and outs are still a bit perplexing.

Edit: just to say I wouldn’t be convinced no.10 is coming up with this latest strategy on its own bat. Could be pressure coming from various sources though hate to speculate which ones.