Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[The Cat]

I don't see how May stepping down makes the deal any more palatable. If you disagree with the deal, you disagree with the deal, doesn't matter who is in charge.

I'm just wondering how they are actually going to get another vote in place. At the moment I don't see any easy option.

 

[Siorac]

The 'penalty' is that EU wants to ensure there is 'no cake and eat it' scenario that can be seen to be arising for the UK in any 'deal' agreed and hence to send a warning to others who might be tempted to exit that they will not get a better deal outside the EU. It would be incredibly stupid of the EU if they did.

That's why a No deal outcome was always the only option if the UK really does want to leave the EU.

But it wasn't. The Withdrawal Agreement is still there. It is still better than no deal.

 

[Siorac]

I don't see how May stepping down makes the deal any more palatable. If you disagree with the deal, you disagree with the deal, doesn't matter who is in charge.

I asked the same thing but it seems party politics trump everything else.

 

[JPRouve]

I don't really get the small hysteria. The context has just been made clearer, by March 29th the UK has to choose between no deal, no brexit or brexit with a withdrawal agreement. If the UK choose the latter an extension is possible, the rest will happen in 9 days.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

It has to be unless Bercow allows another vote.

He could if the political declaration changed.

 

[Siorac]

If they vote against May's deal and we then crash out with no deal as a result, there is no way in hell they'll be able to blame the Tories.

The whole thing started as internal politics in the Conservative party, didn't it? Throughout the process a Tory government has been in charge. The Tories still have a majority. How are they NOT to blame for the entire mess?

 

[MadMike]

I asked the same thing but it seems party politics trump everything else.

Why would a new party leader/PM put his weight behind an already failed deal? And why would the DUP? I just don't see how that would work out.

 

[devilish]

The 'penalty' is that EU wants to ensure there is 'no cake and eat it' scenario that can be seen to be arising for the UK in any 'deal' agreed and hence to send a warning to others who might be tempted to exit that they will not get a better deal outside the EU. It would be incredibly stupid of the EU if they did.

That's why a No deal outcome was always the only option if the UK really does want to leave the EU.

A no deal outcome is the only option IF the country whose leaving expect to enjoy the same perks of being an EU member without actually being an EU member. However there's plenty of options for a country to have a good relationship with the EU. The Norway option, the Swiss option (although the EU is slowly phasing that away), the Turkish option (customs union but nothing more) and the Canada type deal.

The problem here is that the UK insist on picking a cake and eat it deal, a sort of, Canada ++++++++++++++ which stinks of EU membership but without commitments towards the union whatsoever. That wasn't given to the US and it won't be given to the UK.

 

[Adebesi]

I don't see how May stepping down makes the deal any more palatable. If you disagree with the deal, you disagree with the deal, doesn't matter who is in charge.

Its batshit crazy isnt it. MPs arent even pretending to be driven by principles anymore.

 

[MadMike]

The whole thing started as internal politics in the Conservative party, didn't it? Throughout the process a Tory government has been in charge. The Tories still have a majority. How are they NOT to blame for the entire mess?

They don't. Coalition government =/= Tories. They have to keep the DUP on side and I'm not sure why the DUP would vote for the same deal they twice rejected.

 

[caid]

Bear in mind a short extension has been rejected without the WA. And rejected on the basis that she'd put the same deal before parliament again and it would pass.
They're saying prove it, which seems pretty reasonable frankly. They might be more amenable to a long extension or a short extension for better reasons.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

I don't really get the small hysteria. The context has just been made clearer, by March 29th the UK has to choose between no deal, no brexit or brexit with a withdrawal agreement. If the UK choose the latter an extension is possible, the rest will happen in 9 days.

Making a choice, not something the UK parliament is good at.

 

[Honest John]

It has to be unless Bercow allows another vote.

Why bother with MP's at all? Have a UK Parliament of one person. Let Bercow decide everything.

 

[devilish]

How many seats in parliament does a people's vote have?

 

[Siorac]

They don't. Coalition government =/= Tories. They have to keep the DUP on side and I'm not sure why the DUP would vote for the same deal they twice rejected.

Fine but I still don't see why Labour couldn't blame the Tories. It's objectively their fault, the whole thing.

 

[JPRouve]

Making a choice, not something the UK parliament is good at.

That seems to be the reason behind that condition. No more time unless the UK take a definitive decision. And it's not even guaranteed that they accept an extension at all, Tusk wasn't all that convinced at least that's how I interpret his mention of a potential emergency meeting next week.

 

[Maticmaker]

But it wasn't. The Withdrawal Agreement is still there. It is still better than no deal.

Not for millions who voted leave in the UK. A £39B leaving fee, no guarantee of a Trade deal, you must be joking.

The only possible way out, other than a no deal, is the cancelling of A50 and this despite, all the bluff and counterbluff, has been the true situation since day 1 after the referendum.

Will our MP's 'seize the day'?

 

[VP89]

Not for millions who voted leave in the UK. A £39B leaving fee, no guarantee of a Trade deal, you must be joking.

The only possible way out, other than a no deal, is the cancelling of A50 and this despite, all the bluff and counterbluff, has been the true situation since day 1 after the referendum.

Will our MP's 'seize the day'?

No

 

[Honest John]

How many seats in parliament does a people's vote have?

Depends which version of a peoples vote, further subdivided by which questions. There are roughly 650 different opinions of Brexit in the UK Parliament all of which have the backing of one MP.

 

[The Firestarter]

If they vote against May's deal and we then crash out with no deal as a result, there is no way in hell they'll be able to blame the Tories.

Of course there is. It was Tory government with a Tory PM. That's fairly sufficient, do you expect a sudden in-depth understanding of the issues by the public ?

 

[CA_vampire]

There are European elections on May 23, 2019. This date was set many years ago. Either UK gets out of the EU by then, or it stays and people should vote for representatives on May, like all other Europeans.

Isn't this obvious?

Why is May asking for an extension till June 30? Did I misunderstand something?

 

[EwanI Ted]

The whole thing started as internal politics in the Conservative party, didn't it? Throughout the process a Tory government has been in charge. The Tories still have a majority. How are they NOT to blame for the entire mess?

The overall shitshow, sure, that’s on the tories, but it doesn’t give Labour a free hit. We are where we are in this moment, and if it were Labour votes that forced us to leave without a deal, they couldnt absolve themselves of the consequences.

 

[EwanI Ted]

Of course there is. It was Tory government with a Tory PM. That's fairly sufficient, do you expect a sudden in-depth understanding of the issues by the public ?

“The Conservatives voted for a deal, Labour voted for No Deal” is not a complex take.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

That seems to be the reason behind that condition. No more time unless the UK take a definitive decision. And it's not even guaranteed that they accept an extension at all, Tusk wasn't all that convinced at least that's how I interpret his mention of a potential emergency meeting next week.

Agreed.

 

[unchanged_lineup]

Fair play to these folks: https://www.facebook.com/ledbydonkeys/posts/410410336442762

 

[Fridge chutney]

Looks like we'll exit with no deal.

What a bunch of morons and clowns we have running the UK.

 

[MadMike]

There are European elections on May 23, 2019. This date was set many years ago. Either UK gets out of the EU by then, or it stays and people should vote for representatives on May, like all other Europeans.

Isn't this obvious?

Why is May asking for an extension till June 30? Did I misunderstand something?

I assume a short extension will come with the proviso that UK doesn't take part in the elections. Something that's hard to argue for if it's a 2 year extension for example.

However rightfully the EU is asking for guarantees that the deal will pass this time, or this is just simply kicking the can in the most messy way.

 

[devilish]

Depends which version of a peoples vote, further subdivided by which questions. There are roughly 650 different opinions of Brexit in the UK Parliament all of which have the backing of one MP.

The only way the UK can get an orderly Brexit which include a long transitional period is for the UK to accept the withdrawal agreement. This is what most remainers should want in case Brexit does happen. So I was wondering if this could work

A- She should ask the EU for a decent extension to Article 50 IF Westminster accepts the withdrawal agreement in parliament AND go for a people's vote. The EU had made it clear that it would accept either option as a decent justification to extend article 50. Surely they would accept to extend article 50 if both options (and only those options) are on the table

B- She should offer Remainers a people's vote which also include a remain in the EU option IF they back the withdrawal agreement

Thus the referendum questions would be as follows

A- Remain in the EU
B- A no deal Brexit
C- The UK negotiate with the EU for a deal

 

[Maticmaker]

A no deal outcome is the only option IF the country whose leaving expect to enjoy the same perks of being an EU member without actually being an EU member. However there's plenty of options for a country to have a good relationship with the EU. The Norway option, the Swiss option (although the EU is slowly phasing that away), the Turkish option (customs union but nothing more) and the Canada type deal.

The problem here is that the UK insist on picking a cake and eat it deal, a sort of, Canada ++++++++++++++ which stinks of EU membership but without commitments towards the union whatsoever. That wasn't given to the US and it won't be given to the UK.

Yes, I can see that, but a lot of our leavers believe that we're not the US, and we will have to trade with the EU and them with us, so let's 'clear the decks' with a 'no deal' if necessary and then come at it a fresh! In my experience, which I admit is limited, this view is getting stronger, not weaker, as a way to move past Brexit!

 

[Adebesi]

The only way the UK can get an orderly Brexit which include a long transitional period is for the UK to accept the withdrawal agreement. This is what most remainers should want in case Brexit does happen. So I was wondering if this could work

A- She should ask the EU for a decent extension to Article 50 IF Westminster accepts the withdrawal agreement in parliament AND go for a people's vote. The EU had made it clear that it would accept either option as a decent justification to extend article 50. Surely they would accept to extend article 50 if both options (and only those options) are on the table

B- She should offer Remainers a people's vote which also include a remain in the EU option IF they back the withdrawal agreement

Thus the referendum questions would be as follows

A- Remain in the EU
B- A no deal Brexit
C- The UK negotiate with the EU for a deal

I dont understand this. If MPs vote for May's deal there is no need for a referendum. And even if there was a referendum, why would we negotiate another deal with the EU (option C) if MPs backed May's deal?

 

[Smores]

To be honest not that much has changed the short extension was always for Mays deal anyway.

We're still in flux until Mays deal comes before the house and it can be voted on. Once rejected or amendments made then it'll be long extension

 

[Adebesi]

Surely therell be time to squeeze in one more vote? You know what they say, four times a charm.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

To be honest not that much has changed the short extension was always for Mays deal anyway.

We're still in flux until Mays deal comes before the house and it can be voted on. Once rejected or amendments made then it'll be long extension

Why do you think there could be amendments or a long extension?

 

[11101]

Of course there is. It was Tory government with a Tory PM. That's fairly sufficient, do you expect a sudden in-depth understanding of the issues by the public ?

The Tories could hold a vote on whether the big bright thing in the sky is the sun and half of Labour would disagree. The Tories led us into this mess but Labour are more interested in playing party politics than trying to salvage anything positive from it. Neither side are going to come out looking good once this is all over.

 

[dogrob]

The EU should say enough is enough and simply throw the UK out of Europe then maybe finally I will know where I stand and what I need to continue to live and work in Germany.

 

[Maticmaker]

No

I'm not sure, I think after two years of letting Mrs May make a fool of herself trying to get 'a deal' with the EU, which could never be in the way she envisaged (red lines and all) they may now decide enough time has elapsed that without testing the public again (another referendum) they could risk voting they way the majority seem to feel and then blaming May, or the EU, or VAR.

The alternative is to 'suck up' a No deal and hope the leavers in their constituencies will still vote for them at the next GE!

 

[711]

I've been in the hills all day but if I've understood it right and the EU have refused an extension then I have a different take on it from most people. I think May will be quite happy, she's been steadily closing off all avenues and arguments until her final vote on her deal at the last minute when the only options left will be her deal or no deal. And I think she'll get it.

Yeah, I'm aware of Bercow's opinion, but I think she'll get round that, with an act if necessary.

 

[esmufc07]

I've been in the hills all day but if I've understood it right and the EU have refused an extension then I have a different take on it from most people. I think May will be quite happy, she's been steadily closing off all avenues and arguments until her final vote on her deal at the last minute when the only options left will be her deal or no deal. And I think she'll get it.

Yeah, I'm aware of Bercow's opinion, but I think she'll get round that, with an act if necessary.

Yeah, I just don't see how if it comes back to Parliament and it's clear it's the WA or no deal that they vote Mays deal down and opt for no deal.

Unless I'm missing something?

 

[Paul the Wolf]

I've been in the hills all day but if I've understood it right and the EU have refused an extension then I have a different take on it from most people. I think May will be quite happy, she's been steadily closing off all avenues and arguments until her final vote on her deal at the last minute when the only options left will be her deal or no deal. And I think she'll get it.

Yeah, I'm aware of Bercow's opinion, but I think she'll get round that, with an act if necessary.

They'll probably give a short extension if the UK agree the deal.
The vote will probably happen for the third time , somehow or other.
But, guess what, it'll be voted down again and ERG will get what they want , probably with Labour's help.

 

[horsechoker]

Yeah, I just don't see how if it comes back to Parliament and it's clear it's the WA or no deal that they vote Mays deal down and opt for no deal.

Unless I'm missing something?

It would show them to be massive hypocrites and incompetent, they rejected leaving without a deal, have refused the only deal and refused other measures like indicative votes. You can't even point the finger at a specific party as it was both the major parties who engaged in this. I hope that the politicians that put us into this crisis are voted out at the next election, I'd rather people target their local MP than voting against the current party in power.