Brexit (Old)

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Well, 2 years didn't focus minds...

More war-war rather then jaw-jaw..

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Is it worth going with a short extension and hope that it focuses minds or a long one so we can sort everything out?

The EU is unlikely to agree to any extension unless the other 27 heads of government can see a purpose to it.

The way in which the extension motion was worded was designed to force the Commons to acknowledge that the EU may refuse to go along with it in the absence of a credible plan, and that the most credible plan is a short extension to allow the withdrawal agreement to be ratified and brought into effect.

Expect that to be rammed home when May kicks off Meaningful Vote 3 next week.

[1andrew1]

Must rank up there for the MP with the least credibility!

Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay voted against the government's motion on delaying Brexit tonight, despite having commended it to MPs less than an hour-and-a-half earlier.

At the end of the debate, preceding tonight's votes, Barclay told MPs: "It is time for this House to act in the national interest. It is time to put forward an extension that is realistic. I commend the government motion to the House."

He then voted against it.

See 19.28 at https://news.sky.com/story/live-mps-...-deal-11664834

Originally Posted by Damien

Well not until the EU agree I guess but it's now written into law that if May's deal passes then we leave on the 30th June and if it doesn't then a longer extension.

From the UK side No Deal is no longer the default. From the EU side it is.

But right now it appears we're not leaving this month at least.

If Brexit has revealed anything, it’s how little many people understand of parliamentary procedures and the difference between a motion designed to exhibit the will of the House and a Bill which must go through several distinct phases before coming into force as an Act which makes, amends or repeals law.

No new Act was passed last night. No law has changed. Even if the EU agrees to an extension, a Bill amending the EU (Withdrawal) Act will still have to be introduced and rushed through readings, committees and the Lords in super-quick time.

Yes, sorry, I recognised that above. Got ahead of myself.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Chris

If Brexit has revealed anything, it’s how little many people understand of parliamentary procedures and the difference between a motion designed to exhibit the will of the House and a Bill which must go through several distinct phases before coming into force as an Act which makes, amends or repeals law.

No new Act was passed last night. No law has changed. Even if the EU agrees to an extension, a Bill amending the EU (Withdrawal) Act will still have to be introduced and rushed through readings, committees and the Lords in super-quick time.

It would really put the cat amongst the pigeons if, after Parliament eventually sorted something out, to top it off the Queen excercised her right not to sign the bill 🤣🤣🤣

[TheDaddy]

It's all getting rather desperate, farage trying to conspire with foreign agents to agitate, mugg evoking presidents from the 1800's, that's appropriate for him, to try and get the queen to 'prorogue' parliament, anyone thinking Mrs May is doing a bad job should take a look at these clowns, the grass isn't always greener...


Just read a really good opinion piece by Andrew Pearce in yesterday's fail to btw, well worth a look if you get the chance

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

It's all getting rather desperate, farage trying to conspire with foreign agents to agitate, mugg evoking presidents from the 1800's, that's appropriate for him, to try and get the queen to 'prorogue' parliament, anyone thinking Mrs May is doing a bad job should take a look at these clowns, the grass isn't always greener...


Just read a really good opinion piece by Andrew Pearce in yesterday's fail to btw, well worth a look if you get the chance

But you have no issue, when the likes of Blair, Dominic Grieve conspire with foreign leaders and ministers to thwart and frustrate Brexit. One way to describe this.... “Double Standards”.

And what’s this evoking presidents, how does that method work, or surely you meant precedent?

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Mick

But you have no issue, when the likes of Blair, Dominic Grieve conspire with foreign leaders and ministers to thwart and frustrate Brexit. One way to describe this.... “Double Standards”.

And what’s this evoking presidents, how does that method work, or surely you meant precedent?

Don't I? Perhaps it's best to check before you blunder in and accuse someone of double standards, I've no time for bliar or anything he does, never have and I was never taken in by him either, said it many, many times on this site and in the spirit of checking things, perhaps I'll check the predictive text next time to.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

It would really put the cat amongst the pigeons if, after Parliament eventually sorted something out, to top it off the Queen excercised her right not to sign the bill 🤣🤣🤣

There are some in the ERG who, deep down, hope that something like that might happen...

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Don't I? Perhaps it's best to check before you blunder in and accuse someone of double standards, I've no time for bliar or anything he does, never have and I was never taken in by him either, said it many, many times on this site and in the spirit of checking things, perhaps I'll check the predictive text next time to.

I don’t “blunder in” for your information, actually. And I reaffirm the double standards because I see no complaints from you regarding “Remainers” meetings with foreign leaders to sabotage Brexit, so it must be ok for them but totally outrageous, that Farage is insisting one of the 27 to veto UK’s request for extension and actually let Brexit happen, which is what actually won the Democratic vote.

Originally Posted by Damien

I think the EU will now be putting a lot of pressure for Parliament to vote for May's deal tbh.

The evidence for this will be when we start hearing them talk about offering a lengthy delay. They will (rightly) point out that a short delay is useless, unless it’s to pass the existing deal. A long delay allows the possibility of ripping up the withdrawal agreement and coming up with something entirely different, which will also most likely be much softer, and more like an EFTA style arrangement.

I don’t believe the EU is keen for a long delay but I do think they’re not above helping Teresa May to get the existing withdrawal agreement over the line by scaring the ERG and the DUP into taking it, at the risk of ending up with something worse.

Originally Posted by Chris

The evidence for this will be when we start hearing them talk about offering a lengthy delay. They will (rightly) point out that a short delay is useless, unless it’s to pass the existing deal. A long delay allows the possibility of ripping up the withdrawal agreement and coming up with something entirely different, which will also most likely be much softer, and more like an EFTA style arrangement.

I don’t believe the EU is keen for a long delay but I do think they’re not above helping Teresa May to get the existing withdrawal agreement over the line by scaring the ERG and the DUP into taking it, at the risk of ending up with something worse.

I think they'll do the opposite. Scare the reminder of Parliament to voting for it by saying a lengthy delay might not be granted. I think that is also whats makes sense from their point of view, they'll have little desire to keep dragging this out.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Chris

There are some in the ERG who, deep down, hope that something like that might happen...

That surely says a lot about the ERG's distance from reality.

---------- Post added at 08:25 ---------- Previous post was at 08:21 ----------

Originally Posted by Mick

But you have no issue, when the likes of Blair, Dominic Grieve conspire with foreign leaders and ministers to thwart and frustrate Brexit. One way to describe this.... “Double Standards”.

And what’s this evoking presidents, how does that method work, or surely you meant precedent?

The point is still a valid one regardless of diversions around spelling and what a particular PM may have done or not done ten years ago - Farage looks desperate. He may well not be but he looks it.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Mick

I don’t “blunder in” for your information, actually. And I reaffirm the double standards because I see no complaints from you regarding “Remainers” meetings with foreign leaders to sabotage Brexit, so it must be ok for them but totally outrageous, that Farage is insisting one of the 27 to veto UK’s request for extension and actually let Brexit happen, which is what actually won the Democratic vote.

Actually I think I did complain about Obama and his back of the queue trade deal but in this post fact world we're now living in that probably doesn't count So you reaffirm away.