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.