Brexit
 

Due to the last Brexit threads size. I’m starting a new fresh topic and Continuation of Brexit discussion. Prior rules are still in place.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Redwood thinks the Speaker made the right decision

Re: Brexit(New).
 

interestingly, I got my tax summary this morning

my lowest contribution was £150ish which was for the EU , then there was a significant increase to the next lowest which was overseas aid at £250ush

Relative to others are contributions to the EU are teeny.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

James Cleverly (Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party) responded on the Government's behalf about the Bercow ruling (without a trace of irony).

So, MPs may have voted differently had they been aware of all the facts...

Re: Brexit(New).
 

:D

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Sky News Politics
‏
Verified account

@SkyNewsPolitics
15m
15 minutes ago


More
"My suspicion is, that this is the end of Brexit."

Tory MP @JGray tells @adamboultonSKY that John Bercow's veto of a third vote on the PM's deal means there is likely to be a "huge" extension to Article 50 and no Brexit.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

I think there were a few MPs those assumed it was coming back a third time so wanted to signal to their membership how against it they were before 'having' to vote for it. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Does that mean no Brexit ever? If so, you wouldn't need an extension.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

It was being discussed on the BBC last night that there may be ways to get around the speakers decision. One was that they might try and persuade the Queen to prorogue Parliament. A new session could then be started afresh and May could try for the third time as it would be classed as the first time in the new Parliament.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

wonder if the ERG are regretting voting it down now as looking like it gonna come back to bite them in the butt

Re: Brexit(New).
 

That’s Theresa writing to Tusk to request an extension. We will be in the European Union on the 30th of March. :)

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Nope, law hasn’t changed yet, unless your advocating the law gets broken, until that Statute gets changed, we’re still leaving. Plus, it’s not up to Donald Tusk. 27 other members have to agree, only one veto required to deny the request.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Absolutely inevitable giving the never ending omnishambles.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

It won’t and as I have already stated, they were not playing stupid games. May’s deal is not Brexit so quite right they should keep voting against it. From some of their tweets, they have no regrets.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Honest question, do you think we will actually leave on the 29th ?

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Wrong. The law has not changed. So it’s not inevitable at all.

---------- Post added at 13:15 ---------- Previous post was at 13:13 ----------

As it stands I follow the laws of the land. The Statute has that date for leaving, until another Statute appears that changes that date. We are still leaving.

There is a lot of shenanigans and stuff but in the end, it’s just noise.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

I get that, I'm asking you for your personal opinion on if you think we will leave on the 29th with or without the withdrawal agreement in place.

Not a trick question in any way, just want to understand from someone who's the opposite side of the fence so to speak. :)

Re: Brexit(New).
 

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status...88238118121472

Re: Brexit(New).
 

3 months or 2 years ? She doesn't sound very 'strong and stable' , she sounds desperate....

Re: Brexit(New).
 

She'll try and get the vote through hence the three months, if it fails again then GE and a two year extension.


Interesting times

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Wibbly wobbly l would say.....

Re: Brexit(New).
 

I think the EU want that. They don't want to have a rolling three months so it's either get it sorted now or have the time to sort something else out.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Well, I guess you could compare the entire process to an episode of Noels House Party.......

Re: Brexit(New).
 

https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken...leave-limited/ https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve...lty-notice.pdf

Re: Brexit(New).
 

It’s arguable whether the law actually facilitates leaving the EU legally if the Government asks for an extension. In any case, it can be amended by statutory instrument immediately following a vote in both Houses. No second readings, no committees. A straightforward yes or no vote.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

https://www.civilservicejobs.service...M0NDk2ODhhZA==

Closing date extended eh?

Re: Brexit(New).
 

The EU don’t sound like the “cave at the last minute” desperate type here lads.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

UK to pay health costs of retired Britons in EU if no deal agreed.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...no-deal-agreed

Re: Brexit(New).
 

I’m sticking my neck out here but on the basis of the information we now have I think we’re heading either for a 30 June extension or No Deal.

The EU will do itself no favours by agreeing a long extension and won’t do us any either. I think they will conclude its time to lance the boil, and I have a sneaking suspicion that May will actually thank them for it.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Why would they, with so many appeasers only too ready and willing to wave the white flag in their direction.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

I think the problem with the 30th June extension is what will our politicians, devoid of ideas for two years, come up with in the 'final' three months?

The EU have given us two options (and the ECJ a further one). Britain needs to sort out what type of Brexit it wants and select it, allowing everyone else in the EU to get on with it. The persistent arguments over "what type of Brexit" have to be resolved in some way.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

I have no idea. One thing I have heard is the EU will agree a max 2-year extension but one in which we can leave at any time once an agreement is secured, subject to not vetoing anything and participating in EU elections if we're still in.

I think you're right though that if there is no sign of anything being different then they will probably pull the plug. Although thinking about it a long extension will change the dynamic since May would not survive that and nor, imo, would Parliament so an election would be very likely.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

How does a 2 year extension and leaving with no deal compare with the Malthouse proposal?

Re: Brexit(New).
 

The same problem exists with the long extension. May doesn’t like Brexit but I think she correctly calculates that it would be electoral suicide not to deliver it. She isn’t about to propose a second referendum or a solution that looks like EEA membership.

“No Brexit” is a bluff to get the ERG on side. I think it’s either her deal or no deal. The problem for her is I think the ERG are willing to call her bluff because they also think it’s her deal or no deal, and they want to bring about the latter.

All these machinations aside, I think the EU27 are likely to end the uncertainty for us by refusing a long extension.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

It'll probably be a 3 month extension and a no deal. They just cannot agree on anything and three months won't change that.

---------- Post added at 19:34 ---------- Previous post was at 19:30 ----------

Easier said than done, I think, jfman. There's no majority for any course of action as things stand. They should just let no deal happen automatically and start negotiations on the trade deal. Maybe the EU will agree to a protection period to allow trade to continue on the present basis, which will be of benefit to both sides. But I wouldn't stake my life on it.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Thought you were a TM fanboy OB ? Have faith, I'm sure she's got it all under control, it's all a cunning plan I should think ;)

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Unfortunately, it’s one of Baldrick’s cunning plans...

Re: Brexit(New).
 

My criticism is of the MPs who are standing in the way of delivering the result of the referendum and failing to deliver the manifestos they signed up to. I think Theresa May is the only grown up in the House.

---------- Post added at 19:42 ---------- Previous post was at 19:40 ----------

For all the criticism of Theresa May on these forums, I'd love to hear any cunning plan that would enable the government to deliver the result of the manifesto.

Personally, I'd just let 29 March happen. They had their chance.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

I agree it’s easier said than done, but something has to give at some point and the uncertainty isn’t doing anyone any good.

No deal will be catastrophic, with illegal tariffs and no leverage in any future negotiations with anyone.

I’m not convinced letting no deal happen because of ineptitude, and essentially sabotage by the ERG, is a price the country should pay. Members of the ERG are on record saying it could be 50 years before we see the economic benefit.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

Would love to know what the Leave side are meant to have done to give a "no deal", that the Remain side haven't done and more. Both Leave and Remain voted against the Withdrawal Agreement(ie under the EUs thumb).

Re: Brexit (New).
 

As a separate post- the timescale for changing “exit day” and confirmation that failure to do so would leave the UK in breach of international treaty obligations as an EU member state if the Government extends and Parliament doesn’t.

https://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/bl...ory-instrument

---------- Post added at 20:27 ---------- Previous post was at 20:25 ----------

The ERG and DUP voted against the deal. That means they in effect voted for no deal. We know remainers want to remain, but the fact is the May deal would have passed last week with ERG and DUP backing.

They didn’t back it because they don’t want any deal.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

And that's the only thing they've done? Remain supporters ALSO voted against it in order to try(for the umpteenth time) and force a Remain situation.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

The opposition parties will always play politics. The Government should be able to trust it’s own party members to work towards a consensus. Even where it means compromise.

That’s how the game works week in week out. Why would Brexit be any different?

Tory MPs plus confidence and supply partners plus Labour leavers = majority.

Remainers are under no obligation to deliver Brexit. Nor should they be. On no other matter would such a ludicrous situation apply.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

So that's the sum total of Leave have done? So how are they supposed to have blocked an orderly Brexit, when the votes were so recent?


Are you saying that Labour etc are simply playing politics and putting the country at great risk, which you claim the Leave side are doing?

Re: Brexit (New).
 

The country isn’t at risk because oppositions oppose Governments. Governments put countries at risk by not governing responsibly.

Leave MPs cost Theresa May her deal. The fact it could have been voted on three times with three drastically different results shows who is playing games. It’s either a good deal or a bad deal. There’s no unicorn.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

As i posted in the old thread. Why at this point would the EU27 grant extension?

Now that parliament can’t vote on the deal, and the EU wont change the deal.

Where is there any way to go? Tell me what you think are the possible options. Given those constraints.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

The EU granting a short extension might qualify as a different deal. Allowing the government to bring it back. Even if they didn't and MPs wanted to vote on it then they themselves can vote to allow the bill to be brought back to the house.

Alternatively they could grant a longer one if there was a referendum or a general election. I think a long extension would lead to a general election anyway.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

A General Election throws everything back up as an option. It’d be loads of fun.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Sorry, John Bercow used a 415 year old precedent yesterday and the same concept cannot be voted on twice. That rules out Extending A50 for 2nd Referendum, this was Amendment H from The Independent Group that was voted heavily against.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

That's a bit "over the top"? :)

Re: Brexit (New).
 

The same deal actually, May's deal conditional on a 2nd referendum could qualify as a different deal. It's entirely up to the speaker on what qualifies as changed or even if he decides to forget the whole thing and allow it.

Or Parliament can override his decision.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

He has allowed things to be voted on twice, it’s how he defines “substantively different” that has varied. If he accepts a deal or proposal is different, then the principle should apply to putting any amendments to a new proposal.

Also only applies during a session of Parliament. The two year session ends this summer.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

How? Extending the deadline doesn’t Materially change the content of the deal. Sorry that’s a non-starter. Not sure how you reasoned that one out.

---------- Post added at 22:16 ---------- Previous post was at 22:16 ----------

No it doesn’t.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

No but it might change the politics of the deal and that's all that we're really talking about here. Parliament can force a vote on May's deal if they want it. Bercow might also lose his nerve if he thinks his ban cannot hold in which case a superficial change would likely be enough of a ladder for him to climb down. The bill becomes a vote for the extension to be short or longer for example.

In the end who knows? None of these are immutable laws of physics.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Depending on who wins, and what smaller parties may influence in a confidence and supply arrangement, of course it does.

If the arithmetic allows smaller “2nd referendum“ parties prop up old Jezza and his “jobs first Brexit” on condition he puts it to the vote vs remain then that’s what happens. That’s the sovereign power we want to wrestle from Brussels to Westminster.

Note: that’s not what I think would happen just an example.

In another hypothetical if May treats it as a referendum on her deal and returns 400 MPs then the ERG/DUP would struggle to legitimately block her.

Note: I don’t think that’ll happen either.

---------- Post added at 22:47 ---------- Previous post was at 22:35 ----------

It’s hard to know what Bercow’s precise intent was. If he’s perceiving TM as using the deadline to bully Parliament then the extension is a material change - being asked to vote on her deal in April with and end of June exit day doesn’t have the same effect.

Equally if there’s a reasonable period to a new deadline and it’s obvious that the ERG/DUP would back a deal (plus Labour leavers) he could take the view the protocols aren’t there to deny Parliament from ruling on matters it has come to an opinion on under less onerous circumstances.

As you say, without being a mind reader...

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Actually we’re not. Bercow has stated there must be a substantive change to the content of the WA. To progress it in Parliament. But the EU will not give such a change.


. Not if it isn’t before them......which bercow is preventing.

---------- Post added at 22:52 ---------- Previous post was at 22:47 ----------

Ramblings of a madman! Have some cheese.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

I’m unsure ramblings of a madman fits the respectful discussion we’ve been asked for on multiple occasions so I’ll not respond to that. Already had three holidays thanks to others.

Nobody can predict the next General Election if it happens pre-Brexit. Both main parties would be at risk of imploding from their divisions and everyone treating it as a leadership contest. The two biggest parties will still be the two biggest parties, but who is the next PM in waiting after JC/TM is disposed of, and if it requires smaller parties to cobble over the finish line could see plenty of unexpected outcomes.

Parliament can vote to waive the standing orders used by Bercow. In essence a vote to permit a vote. You seem to let your opinion of your desired outcome cloud objectivity.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Yes they can. Parliament can vote to override the speaker’s decision. And in the end the speaker is only likely to block it so long as Parliament largely consents otherwise it erodes his strength.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

No long delay.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47636011

I think this is a play for Labour votes. The implication is that she knows the ERG won’t come around in sufficient numbers but that the genuine prospect of No Deal in June will scare enough opposition MPs into backing her.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

A long delay would be impractical. I cannot see the EU granting any delay beyond the European elections. Maybe that, at last, will focus minds. It means we have to get either deal or no deal through before then, leaving sufficient time to pass the necessary legislation.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Depends what options the EU put in front of her. Long delay or no delay and she’s already tied to the former.

What we have learned from this process is that “strong and stable” Government is the “coalition of chaos” and we are going to get whatever the 27 EU leaders agree upon.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

I think you’re grasping. Everything we have heard from the EU says they won’t grant any extension without a concrete plan. If she’s not even going to ask for a long extension, why exactly are they going to give her one, with or without options?

No, it’s chicken time. May’s deal or no deal. It will be interesting to see what that prospect shakes out of the tree.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

I think we know what it shakes. May’s deal.

The variable is that it’s the leaders of the EU27 by unanimous agreement on any extension. Until now everything has been delegated to Barnier/Juncker/Tusk.

The EU benefits from the uncertainty in the UK. A nine month or longer extension brings May’s government down and potentially resets any negotiations. What better way to demonstrate to other countries that leaving is a bad idea?

I think you are potentially right and they’re bored of it now. The EU stood firm and we blinked.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

I think they will give her a short extension to give TM the time to put the legislation in place, but that is all.

It will be Theresa May's deal if she can get it through by 29 March. Otherwise no deal, here we come.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

The one certainty is that it’s not going to be no deal. We’ve shown ourselves as completely unprepared. There will be a General Election before that.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

But her MV would need to be substantially changed to pass the Bercow test. Does adding a short extension qualify?

Re: Brexit (New).
 

There is no alternative to no deal if there is no deal

Re: Brexit (New).
 

The next session of Parliament is expected to start in May after which his ruling doesn’t apply.

On top of that MPs can vote to bypass the rule.

That’s if he implemented the rule. Thus far he’s just spoke from the Chair, acknowledging it’s unlikely to be his last word on the matter.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Again, you’re grasping. Did you read May’s statement this morning? She’s appealing to public frustration as justification for just getting Brexit done. These aren’t the words of someone angling for time to hold an election.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

The one thing I give no weight to is the words of a Prime Minister of a government in paralysis. She will do what the EU wants, paying whatever price they ask us to pay. We’ve no cards left to play.

“No deal is better than a bad deal”, until we didn’t pass the necessary legislation anyway despite having two years.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

A new session would require a Queen's Speech to be passed (I think) which could be a new obstacle to overcome.

I get the MP vote to overrule but how can that pass when the ERG want No Deal?

Re: Brexit (New).
 

l thought this was a good tweet this morning from Nick Robinson.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

What are Theresa's May's choices if the EU say yes to her extension request?
- Keep on plugging away at something akin to her current deal but with a slight modification so it can be voted on again.
- Come up with a softer deal that will around some of the opposition.
- Preside over a disastrous no-deal.
- Resign and ask for another extension.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Now you're grasping. Historically May has shown she is capable of saying one thing and reversing that decision in the next breath.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

What no one seems to be talking about is that May's deal is only buying time to get us a proper deal so whose going to be doing that? I don't see the Government surviving for too long so it's unlikely to be May doing it. Corbyn? A new Tory leader?

Re: Brexit (New).
 

A proper deal? Are the EU suddenly prepared to change their minds and reopen negotiations despite them standing resolute for the past couple of years?

The EU has a whole will find no deal whilst painful easier to accommodate than the UK

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Well after this becomes 'what is the future arrangement going to be'?

Re: Brexit (New).
 

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...vPcQOnSjbAG5TQ

Interesting article.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

You think the EU are going to have a change of heart because of the UK"s complete and utter incompetence?

Re: Brexit (New).
 

What? May's deal is the terms on which we exit but not the future arrangement, that was always to come later.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

The withdrawal agreement is highly unlikely to be passed in it's current form, the EU have said it's not open to renegotiation.


You're now focusing on swimming when we currently can't even inflate the armbands

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Not really. What nobody seems to be willing to consider here is that the UK, Teresa May and our dysfunctional parliament are not the beginning and the end of the show here. There is the small matter of 27 other heads of government and the European Union, none of whom have inexhaustible patience and all of whom have had their own energies sapped by May’s indecision and Parliament’s intransigence.

They have absolutely no reason to agree to a long extension unless the UK justifies it with a concrete plan to clear the impasse. The opportunity to present that plan is now - and she’s not done it. The EU has absolutely no incentive at all to grant an extension beyond June.

What May says and what May does are now only a small part of the equation.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

The entertainment value? Financial flight to then EU amid ongoing uncertainty? To shore up their own no deal contingency plans? To topple May’s government?

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Making assumptions about what people are or are not considering is dangerous...

May & Parliament are the beginning and of the show right now, right now they are the biggest part of the equation. that focus will obviously shift


The EU is more than capable however of looking to the future and I think would love nothing more than the UK to rescind A50 as it can be used to show other nations should they in the future contemplate leaving

Re: Brexit (New).
 

With the Tories wanting a short delay the EU should insist on a long one or no deal on March 29th. The panic in Government would be priceless. I’d say the odds of riscinding would hit 50-50.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status...01413376053248

Re: Brexit (New).
 

I wonder if she gave it to Grayling to send, and he has sent it 2nd Class Post?

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Or didn't put a stamp on....

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Perhaps he is letting the train take the strain although he has to reply on it turning up in the first place.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Or it's on one of the ferries (that didn't exist) he was going to hire?

Re: Brexit (New).
 

It will focus minds. The remainers will finally have to acknowledge that if they vote down the deal now, with so little time left, no deal will be inevitable.

There will be no soft Brexit. The Customs Union idea means we don't leave, and it has already been voted down.

A no-deal will not be disastrous. It will be an opportunity.

There will be no resignation, and I think the EU will only grant this small extension. So it really is TM's way or the highway, like it or lump it.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Old Boy you are following the flawed narrative that no deal is inevitable without this deal. That is simply not the case.

I do agree though it’s a huge opportunity for disaster capitalists and American companies who want further privatisation of the NHS etc.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Is that your business suit your wearing in the photo.

---------- Post added at 10:55 ---------- Previous post was at 10:53 ----------

It's delaying tactic she knows it'll take the Eu 12 years to work out who pays for the postage.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Don't judge me by your dress standards... ;)

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Very. The conclusion is telling:

Written by a former Vote Leave staffer ..

---------- Post added at 12:05 ---------- Previous post was at 12:01 ----------

This has always been the case. The ERG, led by a certain Mr Mogg, seek to achieve a UK where they and their friends in business can maximise their profits at the expense of the general population.

Let's be very clear here: the ERG do not give a monkeys about the unemployed Leave voters in the North East of England.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Do you have any proof of this allegation ?

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Breaking per FT: EU pushing back against 30th June Brexit extension; offering 23rd May.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

At least you didn’t oppose the other point:

Let's be very clear here: the ERG do not give a monkeys about the unemployed Leave voters in the North East of England.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Good.

The shorter the better.