Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35971224)

I don't know why you and others continue to clutch at straws like this.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35971227)

Whatever Alistair Burt may think, TM is not obliged to do anything on Brexit if Parliament reject the deal (except prepare for the no-deal Brexit).

As for the Daily Mail, I still say that was insignificant, given that they were using TM's own words. And she only even mentioned that to make the hard line Brexiteers think before they voted. However, despite that, she has said on numerous occasions that we are leaving in 2019.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35971230)

It's not clutching it straws to accept that politicians can/do change their minds when circumstances change or they view it as electorally convenient.

It's very unlikely there is a Parliamentary mandate for Theresa May's deal. When staring down the barrel, and knowing we haven't adequately prepared for the consequences of No Deal, the can will be kicked down the road.

The alternative is to take the blame for lower GDP, food shortages, queues at ports and all the effects of the lack of contingency planning in the last two years.

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35971235)

Remain was rejected three times: Once by referendum, second by parliament passing article 50 and thirdly by 80% of the electorate voting for parties that had that in their manifesto.

Remain lost each time. Leave is happening. Stop posting remain crap.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35971233)

Not on this. There is a political mandate to leave the EU and I simply cannot envisage such a turnaround. There would be blood on the streets!

When TM makes clear that it's this deal or Brexit with no deal, MPs will realise that voting against the proposed deal would give them exactly what they don't want.

That realisation will ensure that Brexiteers vote against, but most MPs will vote for it, giving Theresa May the majority she needs.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35971238)

Ah, clarity is sweet!

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35971239)

(quote)The European Communities Act 1972 is repealed on exit day.(/quote)

https://publications.parliament.uk/p...0005/18005.pdf

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35971230)

It's not clutching it straws to accept that politicians can/do change their minds when circumstances change or they view it as electorally convenient.
It's very unlikely there is a Parliamentary mandate for Theresa May's deal. When staring down the barrel, and knowing we haven't adequately prepared for the consequences of No Deal, the can will be kicked down the road.
The alternative is to take the blame for lower GDP, food shortages, queues at ports and all the effects of the lack of contingency planning in the last two years.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35971230)

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7688471.html
You are living in an absolute fantasy land if you think you can take any of these people at their word.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35971243)

I think that she will win Parliament but your arguments are good.


Exactly. Politicians, like voters, do have the right to change their minds though. We saw that with Boris Johnson when he signed up to Chequers then had a second vote on Chequers by resigning.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35971240)

Just because you lack the ability to see it happening doesn't mean it will not. Blood on the streets? That's quite dramatic.

This is why the Daily Mail and the Telegraph are important in the coming months. People need to know this is the absolute best deal we are going to get. And that it's a bad deal.

The deal isn't what 17.4 million people voted for. Farage, Johnson, Davis, Fox, etc. all lied to the public. The easiest free trade deal ever? Not quite. We can't accept no deal either.

A solemn Theresa May addresses the nation in March. We haven't adequately prepared for No Deal and proposes an extension, or that we have a further referendum because leaving is a bad idea anyway. What does she care? She's a remainer, and she's toast anyway.[COLOR="Silver"]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35971252)

You see, that's where you are completely wrong. This is not a trade deal, it is the withdrawal agreement. As such, it's a half way house. There's only two things to really bitch about. One is our inability to influence legislation in that 21 month period and the other is the backstop. Both only require tweaks to the withdrawal agreement, and it may be possible to correct these two issues.

However, the trade deal should ultimately give voters what they wanted.

I'm afraid that we have to accept this delay to avoid major disruption (some say) to business.

Of course, blood on the streets was overstated, but people would be very angry indeed and democracy in this country would be damaged if we ended up remaining in the EU.. TM would not allow this to happen, no matter how much some remainers might dream otherwise.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35971253)

I know this isn’t a trade deal. That’s exactly my point.

My point is this half way house allows the EU to permanently leave us in limbo by not agreeing a future trade deal with solutions to the UK partition of the island of Ireland problem. [SEPH]: Yes.

You have said a trade deal should give people what they wanted, and it may be possible to solve the underlying issues. It may not, and it’ll entirely be at the discretion of Brussels if it does. [SEPH]: Yes.


I’d hope before sacrificing a chunk of GDP that a Government would consider the likelihood of both. [SEPH]: Yes - but our guvmin isn't good enough and Labour would be worse.


Democracy isn’t damaged if you give people a second vote. It’s reinforced. We elect Governments every five years to go back to the country with more information about leaving the EU is entirely democratic. [SEPH]: I don't mind a second referendum although I prefer not. If you've read my previous posts, I'd like to leave this nasty EU run for the benefit of Germany and France. On the other hand if we remain, it'll be fun sticking it to them as we can do from outside the Euro tent and outside the 'ever-closer-union' chains.



I understand people will be upset when their dream of leaving sinks for good. An almost equal number will have been upset if we left. That’s unavoidable anyway.

That’s why in the coming weeks and months the PR on the road to remain is carefully being managed. There has to be a growing acceptance that there is no favourable deal, and it’ll cost £39bn to implement it.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35971240)

The easiest free trade deal ever? Not quite. We can't accept no deal either.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35971244)

The one thing for certain is that the glorious future of free trade agreements with the rest of the world is dead in the water.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35971253)

My point is this half way house allows the EU to permanently leave us in limbo by not agreeing a future trade deal with solutions to the UK partition of the island of Ireland problem.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35971279)

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35971275)

This is a withdrawal agreement not a trade deal.

Negotiations on a trade deal will start after we leave.

At least get that “minor” fact correct in your rant.[COLOR="Silver"]

You have said a trade deal should give people what they wanted, and it may be possible to solve the underlying issues. It may not, and it’ll entirely be at the discretion of Brussels if it does.

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35971280)

I’ve always said N.I. Would be the alter on which Brexit is sacrificed. No N.I. Issue no problem for a hard border, no need for a CU backstop to avoid it.


I think this agreement is a good place to “start” negotiations not finish them.

It would be interesting to see if we went back to the EU, with some amendments that would definitely see the agreement passed, if they would change, with the alternative being no deal. Make some changes bat it back over to them see what they do.