Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
I agree that’s the most likely outcome but I don’t discount a last-minute concession on the backstop in a legally-binding addendum to the withdrawal agreement. The EU has repeatedly said the agreement will not be reopened, and I don’t think they’re lying, because the main document doesn’t need to be re-written in order to resolve the problem. There simply needs to be legally binding clarification about the ways in which the backstop is terminated, if it is ever used.
|
History will not look kindly on the politicians that allow a no deal to happen.
It doesn’t matter who they point the finger at.
No deal should not be taken off the table, it is essential for the UK to have the nuclear option and it will be the ONLY reason that the EU may concede ground on the backstop.
Also If i was the UK negotiators I would also want a legally binding commitment to have a FTA in place after the Transition period.
If, May does get a legally binding concession on the backstop, then the UK Parliament has to vote in favour of May’s deal. Otherwise it will be them and not May that is taking us out without a deal.
I think May probably will have already agreed a concession on the backstop, but she and the EU will let it run down for another week or so.
This will then put enormous pressure on Parliament to vote through the deal, or risk no deal.
Apart from the backstop and the 41 billion, I have heard what else is bad about Mays deal. Has anyone else?