Brexit

Looks like the conditions for the EU granting the extension are that we don't be difficult, accept the Withdrawal Agreement won't be reopened and that we don't start the next round of talks other than that which involve the Political Declaration. Whilst Tusk wants a year delay it seems Macron will insist it's the end of the year.

---------- Post added at 19:17 ---------- Previous post was at 19:13 ----------

Originally Posted by Mick

They should be very worried that a new precedent was set yesterday. Backbench MPs private members Bill, was rushed through both houses, skipping absolute proper scrutiny and then passed in to law, that can now mean serious implications in the future and that it doesn't matter who the government of the day is, when we have wannabe MPs, trying to be defacto Governments for the day. It is totally Bad for Britain.

It's a precedent with few occasions to occur against especially if a future government gets rid of the Fixed Terms Parliament act. After all in any other situation this government would have fallen by now and it's only the Brexit deadline which is holding everything together. A Parliamentary majority operating against the Government is essentially Parliament having no confidence in that government after all.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Damien

Looks like the conditions for the EU granting the extension are that we don't be difficult, accept the Withdrawal Agreement won't be reopened and that we don't start the next round of talks other than that which involve the Political Declaration. Whilst Tusk wants a year delay it seems Macron will insist it's the end of the year.

---------- Post added at 19:17 ---------- Previous post was at 19:13 ----------



It's a precedent with few occasions to occur against especially if a future government gets rid of the Fixed Terms Parliament act. After all in any other situation this government would have fallen by now and it's only the Brexit deadline which is holding everything together. A Parliamentary majority operating against the Government is essentially Parliament having no confidence in that government after all.

The votes are nonsense. The Brexit supporters vote against because it's not Brexit, and the Remain side vote against because it's not Remain enough.

Originally Posted by nomadking

The votes are nonsense. The Brexit supporters vote against because it's not Brexit, and the Remain side vote against because it's not Remain enough.

I think what they passed today was a waste of time. My point is Parliament taking control isn't a strong precedent because it's so unusual and really the government should fall before it can occur.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Damien

I think what they passed today was a waste of time. My point is Parliament taking control isn't a strong precedent because it's so unusual and really the government should fall before it can occur.

Indeed, and on other borderline matters the Government can generally play politics with the backbenchers - agreeing to support their proposals for future amendments/legislation/funding in exchange for support elsewhere. Or just quietly drop ideas they know that will not garner support and bring back slightly different proposals at a later date with a concession here or there to get it over the line.

With Brexit there's no real choice but to go full steam ahead with the legislative programme. In some cases opinions have been ingrained since the 1970s. Folk aren't going to sell out their principles in exchange for a few million here or there, or an amendment to a Bill next year on something (relatively) trivial.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Damien

Looks like the conditions for the EU granting the extension are that we don't be difficult, accept the Withdrawal Agreement won't be reopened and that we don't start the next round of talks other than that which involve the Political Declaration.

Seems a great deal to me, let's go for it


ooops sorry, slipped into Tony Blair mode for a minute there

can we tell them to get stuffed instead?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by nomadking

The votes are nonsense. The Brexit supporters vote against because it's not Brexit, and the Remain side vote against because it's not Remain enough.

I suspect that will be how the forthcoming European elections will go, with Labour and Conservatives suffering. Will be interesting to see what happens in Scotland though.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I suspect that will be how the forthcoming European elections will go, with Labour and Conservatives suffering. Will be interesting to see what happens in Scotland though.

The Brexit Party will get more votes than anyone expected. That will be the main thrust of any European election involving the UK.

That is the last thing the EU would want, so if the EU insist that to stay beyond June will involve us participating in their sham democracy, they will live to regret it.

All they need to do is to re-word the withdrawal agreement on the backstop and let us go. How hard can that be?

[denphone]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I suspect that will be how the forthcoming European elections will go, with Labour and Conservatives suffering. Will be interesting to see what happens in Scotland though.

Highly likely given the anger of some of the electorate.

[jfman]

It’d be a good laugh if the EU didn’t give us an extension. We’d almost certainly rescind.

So just how much influence will future MEPs have on Parliament and brexit?

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

So just how much influence will future MEPs have on Parliament and brexit?

Not much l would say.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

All they need to do is to re-word the withdrawal agreement on the backstop and let us go. How hard can that be?

The problem, as I understand it, is threefold..

1. The EU have to protect the border of the single market. Poltics aside, if they don't insist on alignment of customs regulations, they run the risk of the border between Northern and Southern Ireland becoming a weakpoint in the border of the Single Market. They cannot afford to allow this. The Brexiteers in charge of the government have, as I understand it, refused to offer regulatory alignment.
2. To enforce the security would require customs checks. The systems required to do this without a hard border don't currently exist, and are unlikely to do so for several years.
3. The Irish do not want a hard border, as to have one would not only potentially spark off trouble in Northern Ireland, but violate the Good Friday Agreement.

And before you say other countries are not EU members, but don't require hard borders, you'd likely be right (although Switzerland isn't apparently one of them as it does have checkpoints). They also have regulatory alignment, which we have refused.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Stuart

The problem, as I understand it, is threefold..

1. The EU have to protect the border of the single market. Poltics aside, if they don't insist on alignment of customs regulations, they run the risk of the border between Northern and Southern Ireland becoming a weakpoint in the border of the Single Market. They cannot afford to allow this. The Brexiteers in charge of the government have, as I understand it, refused to offer regulatory alignment.
2. To enforce the security would require customs checks. The systems required to do this without a hard border don't currently exist, and are unlikely to do so for several years.
3. The Irish do not want a hard border, as to have one would not only potentially spark off trouble in Northern Ireland, but violate the Good Friday Agreement.

And before you say other countries are not EU members, but don't require hard borders, you'd likely be right (although Switzerland isn't apparently one of them as it does have checkpoints). They also have regulatory alignment, which we have refused.

But isn’t it revealing that the EU is happily discussing with Ireland ways to avoid a hard border in a ‘no deal’ situation?

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

But isn’t it revealing that the EU is happily discussing with Ireland ways to avoid a hard border in a ‘no deal’ situation?

Not really. They will be looking at alternate ways of doing the same checks, but the infrastructure to allow them won't exist for several years.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

But isn’t it revealing that the EU is happily discussing with Ireland ways to avoid a hard border in a ‘no deal’ situation?

Who would have thought the European Union would engage with a member state on how to protect the border of the single market.