Re: Brexit
 

All of these fears have been bumped up out of all proportion, Dave.

We will not see medicines not being available and we will not see planes falling out of the sky. There is a mutual desire to achieve reciprocal arrangements - Europe is heavily dependent on British holidaymakers and visitors, for example.

Trade deals are being worked on behind the scenes ready to be signed when or shortly after we leave. Once again, I would make the point that you don't have to agree a trade deal in order to trade.

We have already been assured that an application to join the trading bloc including Australia, New Zealand and Japan would be welcome.

Re: Brexit
 

If we need to adhere to common rules, managing ultimately a scare resource in the North Sea, in exchange for a trade deal surely we should consider whether it’s worthwhile rather than dismiss it simply because it’s French? I’m quite sure fish don’t recognise borders when their populations move.

---------- Post added at 18:16 ---------- Previous post was at 18:13 ----------

Can you evidence any of these imminent trade deals? If they are imminent why is Theresa May desperate to have a interim arrangement criticised on all sides instead of no deal?

An application and agreement are two different things.

Re: Brexit
 

What if you’re in Europe?

Re: Brexit
 

Why any need for common rules for fishing? We can set the rules and quotas for UK waters and the EU can set them for their own waters.

Re: Brexit
 

Because if either overfishes in their own waters then the whole sea is at risk? Fish don’t turn back at the boundary. Unregulated fishing, or where the regulations complement each other threatens the fish population of the entire sea.

It’s in both parties interests for the long term sustainability of fishing full stop.

Re: Brexit
 

Will never go there, I don't have a passport and no plans to get one.

Re: Brexit
 

I’m looking forward to seeing the deal voted down in Parliament.

As that is what will happen.

After that we’re in uncharted territory, nobody can say what will happen with any certainty.

All we know is, as things stand, is that there will be vote ( which is looking like the Gov will lose). Then in March 2019 we will leave the EU.

So we have a four month window where absolutely anything , or nothing, could happen.

Four months, including Christmas week, is not a lot of time to do anything.

A bill usually takes several months, up to a year, to be enacted.

I cannot see, in any scenario, where parliament would vote to repeal A50 without a referendum.

Therefore a whole new plan, and potentially a new law not even proposed yet would have to get agreement and go through the process in less than four months.

I don’t see it, happening.

Yet, everyone says parliament won’t allow no deal.

That is a paradox I can’t wait to see play out.

Re: Brexit
 

It's not as if we're going to be totally reckless with quotas. We might want to impose stricter limits.

Re: Brexit
 

Missing from your analysis is the possibility of an extension, which doesn’t require approval of Parliament and buys the time for the rest.

Re: Brexit
 

Would I be right in thinking this 'extension' would mean we are still in the EU, still playing by their rules, and still paying them money?

Re: Brexit
 

As mentioned before though if Parliament wants to do so it can rush a bill though. The time it will physically take to pass something isn't the problem, finding a solution is.

As you said though what that would be is unknown.

I think the final option is May's deal comes back as is or ever-so-slightly changed. Ahead of that you'll have Parliament pushing first for an election which, with the backing the DUP, might be possible. Alternatively you could have Parliament pushing for another vote, again who knows how that would go. That probably would require the EU allowing us to delay Article 50 and a quick bill to update the existing Parliamentary law to delay it should the EU have agreed. You also have the 'Norway for Now' option some Conservatives are pushing.

I think they will come to May's deal eventually unless the Tories backing 'Norway for Now' get some tractions....

Re: Brexit
 

Yes, however that’s irrelevant to whether it’s possible or not.

Treaty negotiations are an executive function, not a Parliamentary one. So the extension wouldn’t require primary legislation.

Re: Brexit
 

just the first word would have sufficed, no need for a story (I'm a simple man, yes or no is all it takes) :p:

Re: Brexit
 

The danger with short answers is that people can infer you mean one thing when you actually mean another. I prefer attention to detail myself.

Re: Brexit
 

lol it's usually when getting into details I find things start going askew :D

Re: Brexit
 

Indeed but the extension is with the gift of the EU, and therefore out of our hands.

As the EU have stated that as far as they are concerned this deal is the only deal.

They could, and probably will, let the pressure build right up until March.

If we get to March and the U.K. parliament have not agreed to the deal, there would need to be compelling reason for the EU to grant an extension.

To grant an extension would have to be on he proviso that a re-negotiation or amendment of the deal was possible, otherwise why bother?

This then weakens the EU position, possibly for the first time.

Still looking forward to seeing it play out.

---------- Post added at 19:35 ---------- Previous post was at 19:29 ----------

Only if a majority agrees?

I honestly think, if the May deal is voted down, the only viable way this thing continues is a second referendum.

I think, as per my previous post, the only reason the EU would extend A50, if is there was another referendum, which in all likelihood, remain would wn.

It removes lots on issues, like Parliament having to revoke A50 without a mandate.

That is the most probable outcome, in my humble opinion.

Re: Brexit
 

Nothing weakens the EU position at any point. The EU has default positions it can interchange between regardless of what we do.

If a meaningful Bill is introduced to Parliament , then the EU would be foolish to not allow an extension to allow it to play out. The one thing we know from these negotiations is the EU are not foolish. So your assertion that Parliament will run out of time in the “chaos” is flawed. It suits the EU to allow an extension for a deal, no deal or even remain, which is all within the prerogative of our Parliament that Oliver Cromwell fought so hard against the Crown for.

Re: Brexit
 

This vote isn't going to happen. If you can't win the game, get it postponed !

Re: Brexit
 

Hence why the agreement is harder than the actual bill procedure.

I dunno, I am skeptical of a second referendum. I think it will only strengthen division and unleash nasty forces. I think Remain would just about win simply because the demographics have slightly changed since 2016 and also the young people who sat out last time would probably come out this time. But I think to have any legitimacy to close down the debate the win would need to be a blow-out for Remain, i.e 60%+, which won't happen. 52-48 the other way would be a nightmare.

I would rather the last two years were spent working out a Brexit that works with the 48% too. Ending free movement and the social charter stuff from Europe which were Brexiters biggest concern whilst keeping economically close to the EU. May only went in that direction after losing the election.

Re: Brexit
 

From what I've heard, the EU 27 wouldn't rush to grant this. What's in it for them?

Re: Brexit
 

If the U.K. parliament is intransigent to this deal, why would the EU offer an extension of A50.

To do so would imply they were willing to move their position.

Big .IF.


If such a bill failed to materialise, then my earlier analysis would be correct as no extension to A50 would be offered?

if one is on the table.

. No need for an extension in that scenario, we will have taken the gift away from the EU iand just leave.

in which case A50 would be withdrawn by us, we don’t need EU agreement for that

No, i’m afraid my interpretation is correct. If the EU offer an extension of A50 it would only be to renegotiate elements of the Withdrawal agreement. They may do it, but they have been intransigent so far, so if they did it would be the first sign of them wilting.

Or they may think that no deal is worth the display of EU unity.

Re: Brexit
 

So even though you think no the majority are now against Brexit, you think we should press ahead anyway. ? :rolleyes:

Divisive another vote maybe, but no less so than the original vote. This is going to affect generations to come, we can put up with the whining oaps for a few weeks. They may post some vitriol on the DT comments, but that will be the limit of their militant action !

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

Although indications are remain would now win, it is far from a certainty. As we found out at the last referendum and numerous elections the majority are usually the silent ones.

Re: Brexit
 

Looking forward to it, triple locked pension, free TV licence, heating allowance, free bus pass. The young of today will get all these things they are currently funding won't they ? Or will we have spent it all on the Brexit bill ??

---------- Post added at 20:28 ---------- Previous post was at 20:27 ----------

Well why all the hysteria about another vote then ? No one could argue if people vote for the deal on offer...

Re: Brexit
 

more worries for PM

Labour and DUP team up with four other parties to threaten 'contempt' over Brexit legal advice

https://news.sky.com/story/labour-an...dvice-11571059

Re: Brexit
 

I hope this isn't the 'easiest deal in history' or we could have trouble going forward.

The summary in that link simply lists the options available from the agreements to date. It's very high level and doesn't really touch on the positions of both sides so I am sorry it didn't float your boat.

Re: Brexit
 

I don't think close referendums are sufficient grounds for radical changes to the country when the majority could easily switch back the other way. I think major changes should require supermajorities so that the country is behind that change, this process is evidence of why that is important. I thought that for Scottish Independence and for Brexit.

But then I also think it's stupid for governments to hold referendums in which they don't agree with the change option. The Government implementing a policy which it thinks is a bad idea is also not ideal.

Re: Brexit
 

A great and well-considered post.

Re: Brexit
 

Well the referendum was only called by Dave to save his own job and win the 2015 election. No other reason. Unfortunately for him and the future of the country it didn't go to plan. Still he's doing ok I hear, so that's alright :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit
 

All these negotiations with the EU just illustrate that in the free market of negotiations, the UK is weaker than the EU, China, the USA and others. Despite what some leavers hope, size does matter. ;)

Re: Brexit
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46435128

Re: Brexit
 

And that is the main reason being in the EU is better than being out.

Outside the EU we are open to being flooded by cheap food, decimating our own farmers. Fishing rights are a red herring as who fishes where is dictated by 5 UK industrial fishing companies, which when they lose the ability to freely trade within the EU will tighten their grip still further.

But hey we will have control of our borders, which despite everything more people are coming here, just not from the EU so much.

No one seems to want to look at how undemocratic our governments are. They do not represent the people, just vested interest.

Re: Brexit
 

Stables and horses bolting come to mind!
https://www.ft.com/content/46aa44e6-...6-2022a0b02a6c

Re: Brexit
 

Side show and quite irrelevant to the main issue

Re: Brexit
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46435128

Re: Brexit
 

It's relevant that a cabinet minister (Geoffrey Cox or David Lidington) could now be suspended for several days and therefore potentially unable to attend the Brexit vote on 11th December.

Re: Brexit
 

I disagree. This is so relevant since, for many, Brexit is all about Parliamentary Sovereignty and if I understand things correctly, the Commons passed a resolution calling for full publication.

You cannot have selective Parliamentary Sovereignty. If you do, what on earth is this pantomime all about?

Re: Brexit
 

Looks like the EU court will rule that the UK can revoke Article 50 without the permission of the wider EU: https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status...68636368715776

Unlikely to be needed but in the event of a second referendum the fact the UK may be able to simply revoke it rather than ask permission would mean , again in theory, that the EU can't impose conditions such as losing the rebate on such a decision.

Re: Brexit
 

Indeed. The full opinion of the Advocate General is at https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/...cp180187en.pdf

Re: Brexit
 

Another domino falls.

---------- Post added at 08:46 ---------- Previous post was at 08:40 ----------

Your interpretation is just that, an interpretation. It’s based on inherently flawed understandings of our constitution and the motivations of the parties involved. Then again, that’s not stopped our three Brexit secretaries getting the job.

The EU has motivation to allow an extension for any multitude of reasons. If there’s any chance of a ballot with Remain on the table a three month delay is nothing to the EU.

It doesn’t change the underlying facts for other member states. You can crash out with no deal, a poorly negotiated deal or remain in the EU. None of that materially changes with a short extension.

Indeed, potentially we can now unilaterally withdraw and manufacture a two year extension of our own.

Re: Brexit
 

BTW it's not a final decision. The EU take the Advocate General's opinion 80% of the time it seems.

Re: Brexit
 

Post above amended to reflect this. The headlines don’t exactly reflect the current position.

Re: Brexit
 

It also means we could revoke it then issue it again and get another two years...:spin:

Re: Brexit
 

Watch as the UK succumbs to the total corruption of the EU and that it cannot really cope with the loss of one of its largest contributing members and we lose true democracy by selfish cowards trying undo the first referendum. This is not fecking freedom!!!

Some Remainers ought to be totally ashamed of themselves for selfishly abusing democracy and pissing on the graves of those who fought and died for freedom and democracy.

As I have said before. I do not recognise my EU citizenship and utterly revoke it no matter if we end up becoming a dictatorship country and Remaining. I do not want our country in the cancer ridden corrupted EU.

Re: Brexit
 

Some would contest that it’s the UK succumbing to the pressure it put itself under by having a referendum few wanted (at the time) under the belief the result was a foregone conclusion. (Note: I’m not using this to undermine the result- simply stating the Cameron position).

Cameron didn’t plan for Brexit, even those who campaigned for it abandoned their government posts when they saw how difficult it was.

To put the blame for any of this at the door of the EU is ignoring that it is us who are reliant on EU trade, migration, etc. yet made no contingencies for the alternative.

Re: Brexit
 

No we are not reliant on EU Migration - we have citizens HERE in this country who can do the jobs - we cannot sustain 100,000's coming here every year - there is not enough housing for our citizens, so why should someone outside be able to come in - get a house and over step those already on the list and were actually born here?

We do not need massive migration like we have now - people forget we are a tiny Island with limited resources and housing and as it stands right now - we have massive influx of unskilled workers, just claiming off the State.

Re: Brexit
 

If we end up remaining in the EU by whatever means, then stuff the EU, stuff the Government, stuff politicians, and stuff all those corrupt greedy members of officialdom that decide what they want and not what the country voted for.

Seems to me that a lot of people have no worries about being led by the nose like cattle

:mad:

Re: Brexit
 

Seems to me some people have no worries about being derogatory to those who have different views to them.

---------- Post added at 10:10 ---------- Previous post was at 10:09 ----------

Nothing to do with the EU - the number of non-EU migrants has been steadily rising for the last few years, so leaving the EU won’t change that.

10% of our NHS doctors and 7% of NHS nurses are from the EU, and as it takes 4 years to train a nurse and 10 years for a doctor, not sure where we are going to get 11,000 doctors and 20,000 nurses, fully trained, at short notice from our native population.

Re: Brexit
 

I think any revocation of Article 50, assuming it isn't a plot to extend the delay, would have to be done by a public vote.

Re: Brexit
 

I know we disagree on much of this, but at present the economy does rely on migrants because of the time that would be taken to upskill the unemployed in this country. That requires preparation, and funding, to change.

Many of whom who have been on the scrapheap for years, or even since birth in some of our abandoned communities.

I’m loathed to cite phone ins, but yesterday a business owner “leave voter” on Radio 5 said we need free trade deals with third countries to allow migration from there.

Re: Brexit
 

You're right Hugh, apologies for that post, I really must count to 10 sometimes . .

Re: Brexit
 

Are you blind ?

I have NO problem with skilled migrants coming here - I have always said this - I have said unskilled are the issue, you get the difference yeah ? :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit
 

And many companies need to change their mentality around training up people as instead of seeing it as a easy way of cheaply exploiting them to their own ends with poor training they need to improve very much the standard of the training and that require more investment at the end of the day and too many companies are unwilling to do that IMO.

Re: Brexit
 

Mick it the UK government choice it didn't act on rules to control migrants the non EU one have total control choose not to and 3 month rule on EU ones and choose not too

Re: Brexit
 

I don’t disagree with you on this. That and tax avoidance.

Re: Brexit
 

No, it doesn’t...

Part of the opinion states

In other words, the UK must want to cancel Brexit, not just improve its negotiation position.

Also, the UK cannot just re-start the clock - if the revocation is not sincere then it is not valid. If EU27 are not convinced that UK is acting in good faith, and this view is upheld by the ECJ, then the UK does not have the right to unilaterally revoke.

Re: Brexit
 

Correct - however I would like to ask when has the EU ever acted in good faith ???

Answers to be revealed on the 12th of never! :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit
 

Divorce is a 2 way thing. Can you imagine if I divorced the wife (my choice) so I get to come up with a plan of what's mine. There would be outrage.

The EU hasn't offered anything themselves other than the UK chose to leave so you sort the mess out but then everytime we have gone back with a plan they have down voted it.

Until this mess we are in now. They have made this as difficult as possible because nothing has ever really been setup in the EU for a country leaving especially a big one like the UK. They have had to put a brave face on because they don't like it and rather than try and make a smooth transaction they have made it as difficult as possible to show other nations that might be thinking about it that really it's impossible.

We really need to put our foot down the EU want us to turn around they are probably having a laugh over it. I want to keep going forward I don't really think they have countered for everything or they wouldn't have made it this difficult.

Onwards and upwards

Re: Brexit
 

Divorce is a two way thing but leaving the EU isn’t. It’s a decision by the UK on the basis of reclaiming “sovereignty”.

As a sovereign country surely we should be able to plan on standing on our own two feet?

Your comparison would be like the wife leaving you to **** the milkman, but wanting you to support their lovely life together because on his wages they can’t afford the mortgage on your old house.

(Only because it looks worse than it is the four letter word rhymes with bag, not duck.)

Re: Brexit
 

Article 50: Law officer says UK can cancel Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...itics-46428579
We knew that anyway really.

Re: Brexit
 

Link to full piece by Mervyn King (Ex Governor of BoE) above.

Re: Brexit
 

If it isn't fully set out on paper, then yet again it's just OPINION and not fact. "should be able to" is not the same as "can".

Re: Brexit
 

Just like the referendum itself was to gain public OPINION and NOT that the Government HAD to go ahead with leaving the EU.

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

But it has a manifesto and a government funded leaflet that said it would enact the referendum result.

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

It’s not within the competence of a Prime Minister to bind a future Parliament.

Re: Brexit
 

While this is true, there is nothing to state that a referendum result HAS to be carried out. They can be used to gather the opinion of the public/voters about certain laws or suggested changes that could be implemented.

Re: Brexit
 

Aha! You've found one of the many advantages of Brexit! More training and better opportunities for our own people.

Incidentally, we should be seeing more of our own trained doctors coming through the system soon, following the increased training this and the last government made happen.

---------- Post added at 15:31 ---------- Previous post was at 15:27 ----------

To be honest, Dave, we don't have a problem with migrants from outside of the EU because we have the ability to choose who we take on the basis of skills and whatever criteria we specify.

With EU migrants, anyone can come in and take jobs our own people could have had and at a cheaper wage. That is really the big issue people had with free movement.

---------- Post added at 15:39 ---------- Previous post was at 15:31 ----------

Maybe not, but it is what he said and in a democracy you would expect the government to implement Brexit if that was the situation.

Incidentally, it may be a different Parliament, but it is the same political party leading it.

Re: Brexit
 

Strangely enough that is exactly what the EU does. One Prime Minister eg Tony Blair, can enact something nobody else can overturn or even object to.

Re: Brexit
 

Yes, very good point. We keep forgetting that the EU is democratic in name only.

Re: Brexit
 

What does power have to do with it? It is a matter of coming to an agreement with mutual benefits. The problem here is that May was always going to roll over for the EU, like she does with so many other things.

Re: Brexit
 

isn't up to government to inforce the law of minimum wage and free movement worked both ways OB and it aint fault of EU if UK government choice not to use rule that can control EU movement 3 month rule

---------- Post added at 16:09 ---------- Previous post was at 15:55 ----------

BBC drop Brexit tv debate between TM and JC proposal breaking news on sky news

Re: Brexit
 

Pretty inevitable given both want a debate that suits their own agenda's.

Re: Brexit
 

exactly was never really gonna happen Den

Re: Brexit
 

This BBC decision suits Corbyn's agenda. Is there any valid reason for not having it on the BBC, other than Corbyn doesn't want it?

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

mps reject delay to contempt decision

Re: Brexit
 

Not exactly a valid reason.

Re: Brexit
 

It does not surprise me that such a lame reason was given.

Re: Brexit
 

BREAKING - MPs VOTE TO FIND GOVERNMENT IN CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT.

Re: Brexit
 

mps vote Government in contempt of Parliament

Government to publish full Brexit legal advice

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

The Government cannot govern....

Re: Brexit
 

Good it's not exactly undesirable to want to have the full facts on such a momentous decision making process, May is an idiot.

Re: Brexit
 

That was palpably clear after we had the results of the General Election last year and nothing since has changed that..

Re: Brexit
 

First of all, the presence of EU migrants in our country is forcing remuneration down to the minimum wage. If they weren't here, employers would have to pay more to recruit people for those jobs. It's simple supply and demand principles.

Secondly, free movement may work both ways, but surely, the electorate appreciated that when they voted to leave. The electorate don't want freedom of movement - it is that simple.

Re: Brexit
 

Shameful.

A Government in contempt of our sovereign Parliament. No mandate to deliver anything now. A vote of no confidence not just desirable, it is a must.

Re: Brexit
 

Don't be ridiculous. That was always the convention.

The problem with revealing the full legal advice is that you give an advantage to the other side, in this case, the EU.

Not at all shameful for the government to take that position. But those who forced that vote through can rightly be described as treacherous.

---------- Post added at 17:28 ---------- Previous post was at 17:25 ----------

That's what happens when a government is in a minority. Nothing new here.

Re: Brexit
 

Big vote coming now. Grieve put down a amendment which would allow Parliament to help set the terms of what happens if May loses next week. Meaning no deal would be less likely since Parliament has a mechanism to take control.

Re: Brexit
 

Whatever happened to the "sovereignty of Parliament"?

Re: Brexit
 

interest sky just showed graph of pound going up after advice about article 50 being able to be revoked earlier today gone back down after parliament votes

---------- Post added at 17:46 ---------- Previous post was at 17:42 ----------

mps vote for Grieve amendment by 22 majority

Re: Brexit
 

Absolute nonsense. The convention is to not publish legal advice to Ministers, not to ignore the will of Parliament. Especially on a matter of national importance where as you all claim it should define our country for years, possibly generations to come.

Government cannot simply ignore Parliament. That’s not how it works in this country. It will find itself skating on very thin ice if it continues to do so.

Only one body is entitled to ignore the will of Parliament today. Parliament tomorrow.

Re: Brexit
 

Indeed Dave.

Re: Brexit
 

no deal just about dead now thankfully

Re: Brexit
 

The amendment passes! Parliament can instruct what happens after May’s deal fails!

Re: Brexit
 

From ITV’s Robert Peston.

Theresa May's first words now the debate has started.

Re: Brexit
 

All the pieces falling into place as predicted.

Someone get Carney on the telly again to wish everyone a miserable Christmas. Our MPs need to be able to stand and “hand on heart” say they had no choice. When in reality they are engineering it. It’s amazing to watch.

Re: Brexit
 

And we gave an instruction to parliament to withdraw the UK from the corrupted EU via the EU Referendum!