Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

It's because you're negating the downside. For it to be a boost to our economy it needs to excede the benefit to it from the single market and the related trade deals. Not simply be a plus over no trade deals at all.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

When has the EU ever passed a directive aimed at helping businesses and reducing their costs? The single market is aimed at forcing higher costs onto the "little guys". The way the EU puts it, is a "level playing field". Nobody is allowed to have an advantage over the likes of Germany and France. The "little guys" can't really complain because billions are sent their way, eg Poland gets 9 billion Euros a year. It's called gerrymandering in any other setting.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

One of the main reasons why people voted to leave was to forge new trade deals to enable the country to be better off than if we stayed within the EU. I agree that the measure should be to exceed the benefit from the single market and it is my belief that this will indeed be the case.

I agree that there are some benefits of being in the EU, but there are many disbenefits too. Many remainers seem blind to these disadvantages.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Anyway, back to new developments.

BJ wants a vote on the new Withdrawal Bill as soon as possible, but the 541 page document was only issued on Saturday (and very few people had seen it before then).

How can there be an informed debate/decision on a huge document, with immense implications of how we go forward as a country, in such a short time?

Some more updates.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...0859498cfb1fe6 https://www.theguardian.com/politics...0898437061a91f

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

speakers rejects government plan for vote

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Speaker John Bercow says it is clear that the motions before the house are “in substance the same” and that the matter was decided as recently as 48 hours ago.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

You would have thought they would have learnt from May's experience.

---------- Post added at 15:56 ---------- Previous post was at 15:52 ----------

I was puzzled why the Government pulled the vote on Saturday, wasn't that the whole point of the Saturday sitting?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Where in any of my postings have I said MPs are delegates?

Clue - nowhere, so don't refer such nonsensical questions my way - my point still stands and I stand by my original point. MPs were instructed to leave the EU via the Democratic result of 2016 and were subsequently elected on the premise that they would implement the result of the EU referendum - they are not there to put our best interests at all, we are not children, we are entitled to a view and a right to vote a way we choose, they asked for our opinion, we gave it and now they must do as we told them.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

doesn't alter one iota what I said.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Why are we going around this yet again? There was no mandate for No Deal and our MP's have a duty to act in the best interests of the country, not to be delegates. No Deal, in the view of our Parliament (remember, the one that Leave insist should be sovereign?), is not in the best interests of the country.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

1. Parliament vote for a referendum.

2. Parliament agree to implement the result of the referendum.

3. Parliament vote to trigger Article 50.

4. Parliament Reject May's deal 3 times

5. Parliament accuse Johnson of not trying to get a deal.

6. Parliament pass the Benn Act in 1 day to ensure no deal.

7. Johnson gets a deal.

8. Parliament enforce Johnson to trigger the Benn Act even though there is a deal.

9. Parliament now want god knows how many weeks to review and debate the deal, even though they accuse it of being substantially the same as May's deal.

10. Even if deal is passed through, Parliamentarians threaten to add amendments onto any Withdrawal legislation for example (to ensure UK stays in CU, to ensure a 2nd Referendum is held etc, etc) Basically amendments to wreck the bill and stop it from happening.


This is why Parliament is not fit for purpose. A general election is required. We must have a majority Government in place.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Good thread from Sky News's Lewis Goodall explaining the situation. It begins
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/st...93330306650118

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

According to who?

we voted for Leave, no deal is a form of Leave, Mandate fulfilled.

they're not though.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Wrong... They do as they believe what is best for their country. Don't like it? elect others...

As this is going round and round, I'll not comment further on this one but politely withdraw and wish you a happy Monday

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Boris' letter didn't do any good then?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

No, you are wrong. The Conservative and Labour manifestos were based on honouring the result of the referendum. Many MPs are not fulfilling that pledge. They should be ashamed.

They will get their comeuppence at the general election, whenever they have the guts to vote for one.

It will be in the country's interests to vote for the Withdrawal Bill now, unfettered by those stupid amendments designed only to see off Brexit altogether. It will serve them right if the EU failed to grant an extension, wouldn't it?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Well Churchill agrees with me... Or, rather, I agree with Churchill.

Yes, lets vote for a deal that is significantly worse than May's..... that's the obvious thing to do

If the EU refuse to grant an extension we can always vote to revoke Article 50... but that would open up a whole new can of worms ;)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I like it!

---------- Post added at 17:02 ---------- Previous post was at 17:00 ----------

Most leavers see a massive improvement to May's Bill, which they view as being BRINO.

I thought the revocation of Article 50 had already been voted down by Parliament? Yet something else they don't want!

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Manifestos are just two bob promises that ain't worth the paper they are written on...

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I'm not sure how you can define the loss of protection of workers rights as an improvement?

That's just the tip of the iceberg.....

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Imagine 'Company X' (ahem) that ships ~250,000 orders from a warehouse in the European Union to countries across the European Union. With automated systems, 'Company X' estimates it would take around 30 seconds per order to check;

• Commercial Invoicing
• INCOTERMs specific to receiving country legislation
• Correct application of Harmonised Tariff Codes
• Correct diligence for 'dual use' products (red flags)

as a minimum.

So, 250,000 x 30 seconds = 7,500,000 seconds = 260days, assuming an 8 hour day. If 'Company X' paid minimum wage at UK rates, that would be a cost of £17,104 in salary alone. Bear in mind that salary is 30-50% of the cost of an employee...

The customs union and single market remove that cost

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Are you seriously advocating that we shouldn't pay hard working employees a minimum wage?

Wow

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

in what specific items is the deal significantly worse?

---------- Post added at 17:31 ---------- Previous post was at 17:29 ----------

Which rights have been lost? And as seen as you've read the whole thing and know it inside out compared to May's deal, don't stop at the tip. Give all reasons in detail.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

What rights? This is just stupid speculation by remainers, and particularly the Labour opposition.

The Withdrawal Bill, if eventually enacted, will transfer all EU employment legislation into UK law. You seem to forget that the UK has been ahead of the game when it comes to employment rights. Particularly under a Conservative Government.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Well apart from you're wrong again.... because...

t's all to do with something called the "level playing field" - the idea that countries keep their rules and standards close, to stop one country giving their businesses a competitive advantage - for example by having lower standards and so lower costs.

EU regulations
The extent to which the UK might diverge from EU regulations in the future and become an economic competitor has been a big issue in the Brexit debate.

EU regulations cover things like:

The working time directive, which limits the number of hours people can work
Maximum amounts of particular pollutants there can be in the air
Requirements for workers doing the same jobs to be paid equally.
They set minimum standards below which government cannot go. After Brexit, UK governments would no longer have to abide by these minimum levels.

In the new Brexit deal finalised this week, references to a level playing field were removed from the legally-binding withdrawal agreement.

Instead, they appear in the non-binding political declaration on the future relationship - as an aspiration, but not a legal commitment.




There's just on reason why it's worse

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

If we had a level playing field, we would not be able to improve conditions for workers if the EU did not do the same.

How is that worse?

Perhaps you are looking through the wrong end of your binoculars.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

High on conjecture and interpretation, low on facts and detail.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Won't work, they would send us one with european plugs :)

---------- Post added at 18:11 ---------- Previous post was at 18:09 ----------

Oh please! Nuclear Armageddon is a form of Leave but I doubt there are takers. Let's not replay 2016 all over again, we were all there and we all know what was promised.

---------- Post added at 18:15 ---------- Previous post was at 18:11 ----------

OB likes this version of the future. It means all those nice & generous business owners can invest profits in workers salaries, conditions & pensions and refuse to feed the greed of the stockholders. Oh damn .. I may have the wrong Brexit ..

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

No problem here's a back stop to cover it.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Really, seen the text have we ?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Did you write this with a straight face?

https://www.ier.org.uk/news/7-employ...-under-tory-pm

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I remember.

To leave the Single market, to Leave the Customs union, to leave the jurisdiction of the ECJ.

To leave with a deal, but if we don’t get a deal to leave on WTO terms.

That is exactly what the Prime Minister said.......exactly.

Funny how selective people’s memories are.

In any event, there is a deal on the table. So no deal can be avoided if they are sensible and vote for the deal.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

People cannot claim Parliament is sovereign, and in the same breath complain about Parliament being allowed to change any laws or rules. If people vote for a particular policy, then democracy(dirty word it seems) dictates the right for that policy to be introduced, and not be held hostage by Trade unions.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Touché, I was referring to your posts

I’m not Making any claims about the WA, as you are correct I haven’t read it, and can’t be arsed to either. But neither have you read it but seem to be passing yourself off as some kind of expert on it.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Where did I say that? I wanted to be super conservative in my numbers. In reality, your standard International Trade Compliance specialist would be paid a lot more than the minimum wage (around £30k pa or £12 per hour)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

By reducing these burdens on employers, they have decreased unemployment to extremely low levels. Many of the protections listed were being abused and employers were having to fork out huge amounts of money.

Far better to concentrate on practical measures to help workers live more comfortable lives, such as the minimum wage and taking the lowest paid out of tax altogether. I say again, we have been quicker off the mark than the EU with a number of employment equality measures.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

The "level playing field" has always been in the political declaration. Whilst the political declaration is not legally binding, it is meant to be a basis for any future agreement.


The only references to "level playing field" in the old WA, are in relation to "ARTICLE 6 Single customs territory, movement of goods".


If this "level playing field" wasn't one-sided, then theoretically the UK could introduced a policy that helped businesses(well the EU won't), then theoretically the EU would have to follow. Unfortunately that won't be the way it works, especially if Labour get their way. Every further burden the EU places on businesses would also have to applied in the UK, and all without the UK having a say in matters.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

No I’m not wrong. You are.

They get elected on the premise of what they promise to do to gain votes. They got elected in 2017 to honour the referendum result. Their lies and deceitful behaviour now requires a GE, which I do believe was OB’s actual point.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Nobody said when, or on what terms either.

Given we were supposed to be better off, why are we choosing between three models that make us demonstrably worse off to varying degrees? :confused:

The Boris deal actually has an excellent proposal buried in it he has to hide from the Brexit at all costs brigade. A possible two year extension to the transition period - excellent for economic stability and within the control of our sovereign Parliament. What’s not to like? Essentially giving us three years to prepare and get it done properly.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

All the talk about Johnson and accusations against him and some yank.

This however, doesn’t seem to want to be picked up by the Remain media.

https://nyebevannews.co.uk/swinson-f...uropean-union/

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Hearing that the penny is starting to drop with some leaver MPs. Having now read the details, they have belatedly woken up to fact that BoJo's deal contains some rather unsavoury ingredients. In particular, full EU law will apply to Northern Ireland, including the infamous European Court of Justice.
NI will, of course, cease to have MEPs if the UK leaves under BoJo's terms. Taxation without representation?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Maybe because 'Nye Bevan News' is a bit of a dodgy source?

'Transparency International' is not a 'family company'. It's an independent NGO on which Jo Swindon's husband is a Director of Policy - he works for them. However he is not an owner (not even a senior Director) and the money didn't go to the family but to the organisation. In other words the EU gave money to a Non-Government Organisation

The amount was clearly fully declared: https://www.transparency.org/whowear..._supports_us/2

They also received funding from the UN, The U.K Government and the U.S Government.

Also Jo Swinson was not on any committee that donated this money. She was not a senior member of the EU. She wasn't even an MEP. She has no connection to the money given to the EU to a NGO that her husband works for.

It's a completely and utter lie that his money was donated to their 'family company'.

Boris Johnson was Mayor of London when money DID go to a personal company of a woman he is accused of having an affair from City Hall. She was paid to go on trips abroad with him as part of this business.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

It’s all mud slinging because they know Boris is going to get brought down by the pole dancer.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

That story is BS. And you know that most of the UK media is in favour of Leave so would jump at a chance to run such a story were it true. Hopefully, you're not trying to distract people from Johnson's Brexit failures?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

It’s a total joke they’re trying to put this through in so little time and reduced scrutiny. :)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Fortunately, the UK's checks and balances have been effective to date.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I’m just pulling everyone’s leg. Parliament is sovereign I’m sure it’ll do something. :)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

That sounds quite pleasurable!

---------- Post added at 22:43 ---------- Previous post was at 22:42 ----------

Not sure how you come to that conclusion!

---------- Post added at 22:45 ---------- Previous post was at 22:43 ----------

Of course it will, it’s proven itself to be no better than a tinpot dictatorship, i’m Expecting troops on the streets by the weekend.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Which conclusion?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

That the U.K. media is Leave biased. I would argue the opposite.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

The best-selling broadsheet (Telegraph), best-selling tabloid, (The Sun) and most popular news website (dailymail.co.uk) and the Brexit Broadcasting Corporation suggest otherwise.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Would one do that if one was going to buy a house or business...

---------- Post added at 05:26 ---------- Previous post was at 05:20 ----------

All those are leave biased and you can add to that The Daily Express whilst there are two remain papers which are The Guardian and the red top tabloid The Daily Mirror while the other broadsheets The Times and the FT are on neither side.

Despite to the contrary of what some think the BBC is on neither side and is only doing its job.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

So which media are you reading?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

There's enough evidence presented by multiple parts of the media outlets who have had varying levels of access to form an opinion.

Funny how the pro Brexit papers have kept this part of the deal very quiet.

Unless of course you're suggesting that the media are lying?

I've not tried to try to pass myself of as any expert, merely someone who takes time to read and research BOTH sides of the argument. Feel sorry for you resorting to digs like that when you're intelligence is somewhat higher

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

That is a good point, where do people on here go to find their news and other info? I can kick off;

News websites
BBC News
Sky News as a backup to compare with the BBC
Politics.co.uk

Newspaper websites
Independent and Guardian for a 'remainy' point of view
FT is good for analysis but paywalled
Daily Mail for a 'leave' point of view and to read the fury 'below the line'
Irish Independent, Deutsche Welle and Die Welt for an EU view

Twitter
Mainly sketch writers, namely Michael Deacon (Telegraph) Marina Hyde (Guardian) Tom Peck (Independent - funny but super biased)
Lewis Goodall, Sky News is good
David Allen Green has been useful for legal analysis recently
David Gauke is my MP

General fact checking
Full fact is great!
Reality Check on the BBC website is good too
UK Parliament Library
EU websites including EUDRALEX for getting EU Directives and Treaties
Trading Economics for financial figures

There are many more but those are my basic 'go to' sources of info

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Excellent list! I agree with with most of these. I would add some others:

Listening to Nick Ferrari for a honest Leave perspective and Maajid Nawaz for good analysis of both sides of arguments on LBC radio.

Google & Apple news aggregators are good for presenting headlines/views of the same event side by side.

I would also recommend visiting Europe itself and talking to people to get a view from outside our Brexit bubble.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Link

And that's an example of why full and proper scrutiny should apply each and every bill, eg the Benn bill. Not cobbled together in private with hidden agendas. Will EU companies have to do the same when shipping goods to NI from Ireland, or is it yet another in the very long list of one-sided arrangements.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Does that also include the current 100+ page WAB that the government wants reviewed, debated, amended, and passed in three days?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Does the term "each and every" have any other meaning?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Parliament will vote for the programme motion, b------ise the deal so it's gets voted down, then vote of no confidence their way to a GE. Why do things the quick way?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Watching and listening

---------- Post added at 17:04 ---------- Previous post was at 17:00 ----------

Extension would need to be granted in amongst that, but for a GE, EU have already said they would.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Withdawal agreement bill passes in Commons.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

By 52 / 48 % lol

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

MPs reject Johnson's Brexit timetable.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...e-eu-live-news

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

A 1-1 score draw then. Extra time EU? ;)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

The timetable seems caviller to be honest. Would any Brexiter care that much about October 31st if Brexit is 100% about to happen? Literally just a few weeks more for legislation to pass?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Being a person of European stock I would like to ask the EU if I can have a dual passport and to be able to travel between member states without any red tape being involved.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

NF isn’t happy with BJ

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

It’s symbolic isn’t it. I think you’re right if Brexit is to happen I don’t think anyone cares about a week or two. But the deadline focused the mind.

The extension letter asks for three months, which gives the remainer Parliament 3 more months to bugger about and if someone puts in a wrecking amendment or other spanner you can guarantee a Benn Act Mk2 demanding a further extension beyond Jan 31st ad infinitum.

If there was an amendment requiring parliament to conclude the passage of the bill by Nov 7th or something then no problem.

It looks like the will is there to get this bill through and done. The only obstacle would be an amendment from remainers for a second ref, Customs Union or similar.

If any of them get through and wreck this bill, then a General Election has to follow and i’ll Order the popcorn.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

It's contradictory to claim there is a will to pass this Bill. If such a will existed there would be no wrecking amendments - each and every one would be voted down.

There's no will for this Parliament to deliver Brexit. If there was we'd be spending the next two days debating this Bill. If it survived intact, or broadly intact, Johnson would have gone down the minor technical extension approach.

It won't survive.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Unfortunately for Nige, he won’t do as nearly as well as he thinks he may in a GE. Certainly not in Tory seats.

Most sensible Tory voters know that a vote for the Brexit party is a wasted vote ( unless you live in a labour stronghold)

And it is evident that Boris has tried his best to get the deal through, if it fails he will squarely blame Labour.

Die hard Labour voters that voted Leave but cannot bring themselves to vote Tory will vote for the Brexit party.

Tory leave voters will vote Tory. Tory remain voters will not vote Labour, some may vote LibDems but I doubt any great numbers.

I would expect Labour to be spanked in a GE, which is why they don’t want one. But if they continue to vote against a GE and against a Brexit deal, they are just compounding the swell of frustration from many of their voters in their Northern heartlands so much so that there will never be a good time for them to fight an election.

---------- Post added at 21:04 ---------- Previous post was at 20:55 ----------

I take your point, but I have been watching Parliament for most of the day today. And I have heard several MPs advise ( from all three parties) hat they will vote for the bill if it has a referendum attached to it.

That scenario is entirely plausible

GE then, look forward to it.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Plenty said they would with a second referendum because they know Johnson would do everything to prevent it. Others will have backed the deal, but not the programme motion, for the benefit of their electorate in any future election. "Look - I voted for the deal I just wanted more time".

It'd kill his 'do or die' image, and worse there'd be a genuine risk we would vote to remain. The Tories would collapse in the polls as a result, if they even continued to exist as a single party.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Won’t happen, if anyone tables a wrecking amendment, and it gets voted in, Boris will just pull the Bill. Cancel it and call for a GE.

With no deal off the table ( assuming an extension has been applied). Labour have no grounds to object to it. Indeed that is the scenario in which they have said they want.

Then, i’m Afraid, Corbyn will have his arse handed to him by Boris. Thing is Jezza knows this so it will be massively entertaining to see him try and weasel his way out of a GE.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

https://twitter.com/eucopresident/st...37952313004032

Donald Tusk will recommend the EU accepts the UK's request for an extension until January 31st.

One overlooked thing here is the EU are probably happy with where they are now. They did one deal and then did another one, each time extending the deadline when requested. If we crash out there will be few people blaming them for it. They'll probably sit back, accept extension requests until such a time we finally do something.

---------- Post added at 21:32 ---------- Previous post was at 21:30 ----------

Remember the Liberal Democrats and the SNP also stopped an election and they stood to gain from one. There was genuine concern about Boris Johnson using the election to push though No Deal in the absence of a Parliament. As soon as the extension is confirmed those two parties will likely go for an election (although the Libs will likely try a referendum first).

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Odd that you omitted to quote my first sentence:

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Old Boy, do you still feel this way? You do have a right to change your mind. ;)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Not odd, it’s the point I was making from the start, RE a wrecking amendment.

The 2nd reading of the Bill went through, the timetable for it didn’t. But it will still be read. The numbers that voted to progress the bill may include those that would pass the bill only with an amendment such as a referendum e.g a wrecking amendment.

So we may end up with a week or two debate on the bill, which had a decent majority to get that point, but then only to have it wrecked by an amendment for a 2nd Ref or CU or other. Only then to have Boris pull it because of that and call for a GE, that Labour would find it very hard to weasel out of.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

It is, because you ignored a pertinent point, indeed one that agreed with you.

I doubt Labour are worried about an election to be honest. Boris will be comparable to May on the campaign, lose votes to the Brexit Party and who knows what the pole dancer has up her skirt/sleeve.

---------- Post added at 21:56 ---------- Previous post was at 21:56 ----------

:D

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Unusually naive of you.

May made a monumental mistake by thinking the 2017 election was about Brexit, which in the mind of the nation then, it wasn’t. Back then Brexit had been sorted, we voted Leave and people turned their attention to other things. Also poor May had as much personality as nasal hair.

No, there is no doubt, that this election - should it happen - will be a surrogate referendum. No body cares a flying duck about education, welfare, nhs, climate change - non of that is on the agenda until Brexit is sorted.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I like getting called naive in this thread. It usually means I’m on the right track. 29th March... 31st October...

A surrogate referendum is hugely risky if Farage comes to the table. The Tories will lose seats in Scotland - that’s 13 they need to find elsewhere to be a minority Government again.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

They will lose seats, as will Labour. Scotland will be almost entirely SNP again ( fuelling wee Jimmy Krankys 2nd Indy Ref demands)

Labour will suffer much more than Tory, I see Brexit party impacting Labour more than Tory.

I don’t see Brexit party winning any seats, but diluting Labour letting Tory in.

Depending on arithmetic, don’t rule out DUP propping up Tories again, if that gives them a proper majority with no Tory rebels. With that they could force through no deal, or at least properly threaten it. Potentially getting the EU to give even more ground over N.I.

It's all Up for grabs

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

If half the labour MP's actually stayed awake they would have had time to read the documents instead of voting it down for no reason

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I demand more time before I answer that question! :D

Jfman was putting forward a suggestion that Boris goes voluntarily for an extension, but I said he wouldn't do that because he pledged not to.

Being forced into it is a different thing over which, frankly, he has no control.

A small, technical extension to give a little extra time (another day or so) I can live with, but I accept that if amendments are put forward that the PM cannot agree, he will need to pull the Bill and go for an election. Given that an extension is likely to be in place, there is no reason why the opposition parties shouldn't agree that now.

Then, with a working majority, BJ will be much better placed to push the Bill through. The opposition had better hope that he doesn't go for a no-deal Brexit when he has the votes to do so. Serve 'em right if he does.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

no chance OB another hung parliament in the making Brexit party gonna split tory votes as we still be in EU in Novemeber as I said we would when liar Johnson promised that

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Good thing about an election is that the parties have now clarified their positions.
So we have:
Brexit Party: No deal
Conservatives: Boris's withdrawal agreement
Labour: Second referendum
LibDems/Greens/Plaid Cmyru: Revoke Article 50

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

SNP: Free woad and broadswords for all

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Yes, because it’s easy to review, annotate, and put together questions on a huge complex document in less than 24 hours...

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

According to a ex cabinet minister it needs far more then 24 hours to go through it with a fine tooth comb.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

The real fun in all this is the blame game which of course means accusing everyone else of being perfidious traitors to the voters/country whilst punching themselves in the eye..;)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

It really really has become something of a borefest now :(

We all know that the EU, understandably, won't budge very far from the two deals already tabled. We also know they will not willingly let a 'no deal' happen, and obviously do not want us to leave.

We should all also be aware that, given the fragmentation of brexit desires (as shown in Andrews post), parties are going to fight tooth and nail (and Scottish courts) to block what they don't want.

52% of the electorate that voted in the 2016 referendum, voted to leave, around 85% of the politicians want to remain . . . make of that what you will . . .

Another extension looks set to happen, which IMO will solve nothing. Eventually someone in the EU will be frustrated enough to say NO . . and that's how we've wasted 4 years.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I doubt that, Dave. Corbyn has lost a lot of credibility since the last election and Boris is more popular than you give him credit for. The Lib Dems have been very clever with their 'no Brexit' stance and they will increase their share of the vote without doubt. However, much of that will be at the expense of Labour. If they split the Labour vote, this will enable the Conservatives to take a good proportion of their seats. That will more than make up for the loss of Scottish seats, if that comes about as predicted.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

And there is the essential truth of this surreal journey. They don't care now but when things change, as they will, then, and only then, will they care. Too late ...

So many previously sensible and rational people have been bewitched by the false prophets. Part of this entrapment is the perversion of the mainstream media. Peter Obourn, a notable conservative commentator, has the honesty to call this out:

British journalists have become part of Johnson’s fake news machine

So reminds me of the Child Catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang:



"Sweeties and lollipops children, all free today, come and get them .."

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

People ask "why don't you trust Boris Johnson?"

Here's why - things he said yesterday in Parliament that weren't true.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

That child catcher was creepy, gave me nightmares as a kid... Roald Dahl - he hated kids ;).

Day by day Boris's chances of an election win become less as his lies get exposed. Labour know this, so does he, hence his failed attempt to rush things through.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Michael Heseltine has some thoughts on the forthcoming general election.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...0859498cfb29f0

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Corbyn and Johnson meeting to discuss a new programme motion. Pointless. Just means when it gets voted down in a couple of weeks we still need a GE but it'll be too close to Christmas.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Nothing was agreed apparently. They couldn't even agree on tea or coffee....

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

One sugar for me old chap.;)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

If there are changes to employment law in the future, so what. It's called democracy(check your dictionaries:rolleyes:, but not the Remainer version).


It has always been the case that if the EU and the UK came to an agreement, it might affect the backstop. After all isn't that what the backstop is all about? Something that is in place "unless and until" the EU says otherwise.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I've always said Brexit will have to win a mandate at a GE or a another referendum. Let's get on with it.