Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
unchanged_lineup said:
This convoy is the lead story on rte.ie, but nowhere to be seen on bbc.com...

Surprising, or perhaps not surprising depending on your view of the BBC. Is it on bbc.co.uk, anyone?
Click to expand...
The BBC is one of the world's biggest news sites so not surprising really .RTR is basically only viewed by people in ROI.
 
Striker10 said:
That's because she wants to remain? How you end up with a government where this dozy mare wants to remain and yet is leading our exit is laughable. So a deal is pushed so people forget no one voted for a deal and then people say, you know what? Let's have another vote....cause the deal is crap but thats not what the referendum was for anyway. So no, she don't want to leave and never did and if the Eu ask her to roll over, she will because she has absolutely no interest leaving the EU. It has nothing to do with being anything other then two faced.
Click to expand...

I doubt many remainers think she is pro-remain and it seems not many brexiteers see her as a brexiteer either.

So, the agreement on the table is the only one the UK could hope for which has been obvious since day one. It wouldn't matter who was in charge of the government , just that other leaders may have been more or less honest or dishonest with the public. The outcome of the proposed agreement would still be the same.

Now which of the three options available do you want to happen
1. Cancel Brexit
2. Leave with no deal
3. Leave with this agreement.

Because whether there is a general electon, new referendum or a change of leader, the same three options will still be there at the end of it. There's not much time left.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
I doubt many remainers think she is pro-remain and it seems not many brexiteers see her as a brexiteer either.

So, the agreement on the table is the only one the UK could hope for which has been obvious since day one. It wouldn't matter who was in charge of the government , just that other leaders may have been more or less honest or dishonest with the public. The outcome of the proposed agreement would still be the same.

Now which of the three options available do you want to happen
1. Cancel Brexit
2. Leave with no deal
3. Leave with this agreement.

Because whether there is a general electon, new referendum or a change of leader, the same three options will still be there at the end of it. There's not much time left.
Click to expand...
Yes, but to be picky what wasn't obvious is that May would strike a deal, I think that was touch and go, but it's there now so yeah, those are the options as it stands.

However it might still be possible to ask for an extension in order to explore a completely different agreement, Norway or whatever, but there doesn't seem be any majority in the house for doing so, or any agreement on what to go for anyway, so it doesn't seem likely.

The one thing I expect us both to agree on is that any politician that claims we can just go back to Barnier and get a better deal, without being able to give any reasons why, or that they have some sort of super-competence, previously undemonstrated, to get 'get a better deal' should be shot.
 
Buster15 said:
You are right but also to be fair she tried far too late with the obvious outcome.
Click to expand...

What exactly do you think the EU would have ceded on. Absolutely nothing, the outcome was obvious from the beginning.
The EU will never compromise the four freedoms.

The negotiating part comes later when the new relationship is discussed with the EU and also the rest of the world. Just hope the UK has enough negotiators to deal with all the countries they have to deal with.
 
Striker10 said:
That's because she wants to remain? How you end up with a government where this dozy mare wants to remain and yet is leading our exit is laughable. So a deal is pushed so people forget no one voted for a deal and then people say, you know what? Let's have another vote....cause the deal is crap but thats not what the referendum was for anyway. So no, she don't want to leave and never did and if the Eu ask her to roll over, she will because she has absolutely no interest leaving the EU. It has nothing to do with being anything other then two faced.
Click to expand...

May is fairly useless but she has done the best anyone really could with the shitshow of a parliament we have to push through some form of Brexit that will not economically ruin the UK. She may have been pro Remain at the referendum but nothing she has said since has suggested she is working as a double agent for the Remain camp and the fact that she gave the key Brexiteers the task of planning and negotiating our Brexit and to a "man" they lied, shirked their responsibility and ran for cover when the farce of their promised land was exposed shows that it was unlikely any form of Brexit was ever likely to be achievable unless we risked the complete isolation and economic ruin of the UK that is a no-deal scenario.

Accept that you were conned at the referendum and then lets get on with scrapping this farce and start taking our place in Europe seriously and changing the things we don't like from the inside rather than acting like spoilt children as we always have. We're lucky that the EU haven't shut the door on us given the grief we have caused over the last 3 years.
 
711 said:
Yes, but to be picky what wasn't obvious is that May would strike a deal, I think that was touch and go, but it's there now so yeah, those are the options as it stands.

However it might still be possible to ask for an extension in order to explore a completely different agreement, Norway or whatever, but there doesn't seem be any majority in the house for doing so, or any agreement on what to go for anyway, so it doesn't seem likely.

The one thing I expect us both to agree on is that any politician that claims we can just go back to Barnier and get a better deal, without being able to give any reasons why, or that they have some sort of super-competence, previously undemonstrated, to get 'get a better deal' should be shot.
Click to expand...

Yes it was doubtful she was getting any agreement at certain times. However, I still think people are mixing up the agreement to leave and the new agreement for the future. The new agreement will not be discussed until after the UK have left. The transition period is in effect the extension but I don't see how a new agreement can be agreed within 2 or 3 years - the Uk haven't got to have agreements just with the EU but the rest of the world too.

Politicians have treated the whole affair as some kind of game for their personal enhancement. They should all be held to account when this is over.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Yes it was doubtful she was getting any agreement at certain times. However, I still think people are mixing up the agreement to leave and the new agreement for the future. The new agreement will not be discussed until after the UK have left. The transition period is in effect the extension but I don't see how a new agreement can be agreed within 2 or 3 years - the Uk haven't got to have agreements just with the EU but the rest of the world too.

Politicians have treated the whole affair as some kind of game for their personal enhancement. They should all be held to account when this is over.
Click to expand...
Certainly the likes of BJ, Farage and the ERG should be held directly accountable if we leave with no deal and one single person dies as a result of not getting their medication on time.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Yes it was doubtful she was getting any agreement at certain times. However, I still think people are mixing up the agreement to leave and the new agreement for the future. The new agreement will not be discussed until after the UK have left. The transition period is in effect the extension but I don't see how a new agreement can be agreed within 2 or 3 years - the Uk haven't got to have agreements just with the EU but the rest of the world too.

Politicians have treated the whole affair as some kind of game for their personal enhancement. They should all be held to account when this is over.
Click to expand...
I think you're right on this, and in honesty I've been guilty of it myself at times, but it's not just the common pleb like me, I've heard politicians and pundits who don't seem to know the difference, but trot out their theories nonetheless.
 
Just seen a tweet saying Downing Street have said they haven't got anything to update in time for the debate but hope to have a written statement before the vote.

It's incredible how they're allowed to just keep kicking the can down the road. They'll purposefully release some vague statement from the EU the day prior in the hope that it has less time to be debated and deemed worthless.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
What exactly do you think the EU would have ceded on. Absolutely nothing, the outcome was obvious from the beginning.
The EU will never compromise the four freedoms.

The negotiating part comes later when the new relationship is discussed with the EU and also the rest of the world. Just hope the UK has enough negotiators to deal with all the countries they have to deal with.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that the EU would have ceaded anything.
What I was saying was that we made their job much more simple than it ought to have been by not finding a point of weakness.

It is highly unlikely that all 27 would have exactly the same viewpoint.
In particular those countries with a large number of citizens living and working in the UK.

Highly skilled negotiators utilise any and every tactic to probe for a weakness even if it is not readily available.

Having made such a pathetic job I would hope that lessons would have been learnt....
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Yes it was doubtful she was getting any agreement at certain times.

Politicians have treated the whole affair as some kind of game for their personal enhancement. They should all be held to account when this is over.
Click to expand...

Of course; just like the bankers were held to account for the Global Financial Crisis?????
 
Buster15 said:
I didn't say that the EU would have ceaded anything.
What I was saying was that we made their job much more simple than it ought to have been by not finding a point of weakness.

It is highly unlikely that all 27 would have exactly the same viewpoint.
In particular those countries with a large number of citizens living and working in the UK.

Highly skilled negotiators utilise any and every tactic to probe for a weakness even if it is not readily available.

Having made such a pathetic job I would hope that lessons would have been learnt....
Click to expand...

So you advocate using people as bargaining chips? Believe it or not, people from UK live in Europe too.
 
Smores said:
Just seen a tweet saying Downing Street have said they haven't got anything to update in time for the debate but hope to have a written statement before the vote.

It's incredible how they're allowed to just keep kicking the can down the road. They'll purposefully release some vague statement from the EU the day prior in the hope that it has less time to be debated and deemed worthless.
Click to expand...
might release something late Tuesday or early Wednesday to deflect a bit at PMQ's... but most logically let the Hard brexiteers and the 2nd referendum lot shout at each other for 5 days... spend the weekend trying to get the numbers so the seemingly inevitable defeat might not be totally crushing... then as you say release a joint statement with the EU - probably late Monday next week before May makes a big closing speech on Tuesday

I still expect a defeat... probably followed by a confidence motion on Wednesday from Labour - which will probably be debated (and defeated) on Thursday?

There is then a deadline of 21st Jan

(10)Subsection (11) applies if, at the end of 21 January 2019, there is no agreement in principle in negotiations under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union on the substance of—

(a), to be moved in that House by a Minister of the Crown within the period of five Commons sitting days beginning with the end of 21 January 2019, and

(a) to be moved in that House by a Minister of the Crown within the period of five Lords sitting days beginning with the end of 21 January 2019.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/16/section/13/enacted
Click to expand...

It wont let me copy section 11 - but basically if there is nothing agreed by 21st Monday which seems impossible the government will have 5 days from 21st to make a statement about what happens next.

My gut feel would be they use Friday 18th to put in place their plan for the next week which will probably be something along the lines of

Monday (21) - debate on options
Tuesday (22) - non binding votes on a series of options to try and find a majority for something (gut feel they they wont)
Wednesday(23) - PMQ's and general kerfuffle / panic
Thursday (24) - put the PM's deal back to parliament hoping the panic will get people on side to vote it through(gut feel it wont)
Friday (25) - statement from government either saying hard brexit, or that they are going to EU to ask for more time (presumably based on either a GE or 2nd ref) - but I think going down the hard brexit route will be the most likley

Monday (28) - total panic - legal action to try and stop hard brexit and beyond that I have no idea
 
Buster15 said:
I didn't say that the EU would have ceaded anything.
What I was saying was that we made their job much more simple than it ought to have been by not finding a point of weakness.

It is highly unlikely that all 27 would have exactly the same viewpoint.
In particular those countries with a large number of citizens living and working in the UK.

Highly skilled negotiators utilise any and every tactic to probe for a weakness even if it is not readily available.

Having made such a pathetic job I would hope that lessons would have been learnt....
Click to expand...

As a strategy it's logical (and they did try by all accounts) but it was pretty much a non-starter from day 1. The big issue is that those countries are going to continue to be members of the EU club after we leave, and EU membership is more vital to their interests than anything we could threaten or offer.

End of the day, the EU can threaten us with far more damaging consequences than we can to them. It won't come to that (dear god I hope not anyway) but if it came down to some hypothetical scenario where the two sides wanted to do each other damage, the EU could simply shut down the port crossings to the continent, refuse to let UK planes use their airspace, and then about a week later accept our complete and unconditional surrender on whatever terms they pleased after our country had collapsed into complete chaos.

We don't have a strong hand. We never had a strong hand. It's long past time that we fully understood that and acting accordingly.
 
Buster15 said:
I didn't say that the EU would have ceaded anything.
What I was saying was that we made their job much more simple than it ought to have been by not finding a point of weakness.

It is highly unlikely that all 27 would have exactly the same viewpoint.
In particular those countries with a large number of citizens living and working in the UK.

Highly skilled negotiators utilise any and every tactic to probe for a weakness even if it is not readily available.

Having made such a pathetic job I would hope that lessons would have been learnt....
Click to expand...

Yes negotiators would look for any weakness but the leave agreement basically only involves citizens rights, the Irish border and the settlement amount plus the transitional period.
There is not really a lot to negotiate in reality but May has strung it out with a lot of chest thumping from the government and the ardent Brexiters.
In reality the last two years have been for show and the outcome inevitable. I don't believe any PM would have come back with anything different. I am no fan of May or Corbyn btw.

The real negotiations will start in April on the future relationship.

The country with the most citizens in the UK I believe are Poland and they are urging them to return home because their economy has improved.

Buster15 said:
Of course; just like the bankers were held to account for the Global Financial Crisis?????
Click to expand...

Agree they won't be held to account but if there was any justice they would be..
 
sun_tzu said:
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...cross-party-amendment-to-block-no-deal-brexit

First attempts to block a no deal brexit... I do wonder if this might backfire on those hoping to force a 2nd referendum as I could see Mogg and Johnson going along with mays deal for the vote to ensure we leave... then blaming the bad deal on her and turning the final deal into a canada type deal anyway
Click to expand...

I still don't see how someone blocks a no deal brexit - that means you accept May's deal or cancel Brexit.
 
Adisa said:
Anyone here know EU citizens that have left the country?
Click to expand...
Yep. Ex employee came in for a work reference. Said he was off back to Poland after being here for 10 years, as were many of his family and wider community up and down the country.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
What a bunch of pricks.

I wonder if it occurred to him that the pond life he's talking to is on the same page as uncle Jezza when it comes to the biggest issue Britain has faced for generations?
Click to expand...

They're also on the "same page as Uncle Pogue" when it comes to the economic system - capitalism.

Such a non-sequitur.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
I still don't see how someone blocks a no deal brexit - that means you accept May's deal or cancel Brexit.
Click to expand...

Technically this deal does not block a no deal brexit - but it hinders the governments ability to change tax legislation till there is an agreed deal (or no deal has been agreed by parliament)
I suspect we will see these sorts of amendments tagged on to every bit of legislation the government tries to pass until they accept they have to find a majority in parliament for something or basically their ability to govern is gone (well if it isnt already)
 
berbatrick said:
They're also on the "same page as Uncle Pogue" when it comes to the economic system - capitalism.

Such a non-sequitur.
Click to expand...

Nah, not a non-sequitur at all. Brexit is dominating British politics right now and it impact will be felt for generations. People like Corbyn (and Owen Jones) will forever be defined by the side they take on this issue. The same side as those twats in the hi-vis jackets.

Seeing as I'm not a politician, my personal politics really are a non-sequitur in this discussion...
 
Adisa said:
Shame on us.
Click to expand...
We still have 4 Polish members of staff working for us who are going to stick it out. Plus I think things have actually picked up pretty well in Poland.

But yes I think on balance many are saying that it isn't worth the risk staying here.
 
sun_tzu said:
Technically this deal does not block a no deal brexit - but it hinders the governments ability to change tax legislation till there is an agreed deal (or no deal has been agreed by parliament)
I suspect we will see these sorts of amendments tagged on to every bit of legislation the government tries to pass until they accept they have to find a majority in parliament for something or basically their ability to govern is gone (well if it isnt already)
Click to expand...

Agreed that every bit of legislation will be challenged and have amendments but all I can see is March 29th coming and going and the UK find themselves out of the EU with no deal.
Sleepwalking to disaster.

Imo both May's strategy of kicking the can down the road and Corbyn's silence will backfire on both of them spectacularly. Unless someone comes to their senses in the next 80 days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.