Brexit

[denphone]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The truth as it sees it! What exactly is the point of Article 24 if it cannot be used? Of course it can be used, as you will see when Boris gets in.

The truth that obviously you find hard to stomach...

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

You are making the false assumption Parliament will stand idly by. It has consistently shown it will not. A PM being “serious“ isn’t going to change a thing.

I think you will find a change of Leader will change things considerably. For a start, a Brexiteer will have the support of the ERG and DUP. That's pretty good for a start. Refusal to rule out a 'no deal' will exercise the minds of stubborn remainers in the Conservative Party.

Labour just seem focussed on a General Election and therefore will try to wreck whatever suggestion is put forward. However, the polls that come out after the Conservatives elect their new Leader may make Corbyn less enthusiastic to have an election yet.

If the worst comes to the worst and we still cannot get a revised deal through (or the EU continues to play hardball) we simply fall out without a deal. And the sky will still be blue and there will be no cracks in it.

---------- Post added at 11:55 ---------- Previous post was at 11:48 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

The truth that obviously you find hard to stomach...

You didn't answer the question, as usual, Den? What is the point of Article 24 if it cannot be used?

I can't believe that this negative view has sucked you all in! Ask yourself - why not? The arguments I've seen to support that view are flaky in the extreme.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

You didn't answer the question, as usual, Den? What is the point of Article 24 if it cannot be used?

l am talking about the independent organisation Full Facts which states the true facts that they are independent of political interference.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I think you will find a change of Leader will change things considerably. For a start, a Brexiteer will have the support of the ERG and DUP. That's pretty good for a start. Refusal to rule out a 'no deal' will exercise the minds of stubborn remainers in the Conservative Party.

Labour just seem focussed on a General Election and therefore will try to wreck whatever suggestion is put forward. However, the polls that come out after the Conservatives elect their new Leader may make Corbyn less enthusiastic to have an election yet.

If the worst comes to the worst and we still cannot get a revised deal through (or the EU continues to play hardball) we simply fall out without a deal. And the sky will still be blue and there will be no cracks in it.

---------- Post added at 11:55 ---------- Previous post was at 11:48 ----------



You didn't answer the question, as usual, Den? What is the point of Article 24 if it cannot be used?

I can't believe that this negative view has sucked you all in! Ask yourself - why not? The arguments I've seen to support that view are flaky in the extreme.

Someone who wants no deal will get the support of the ERG and DUP, but crucially not remainers in Parliament. The situation is exactly the same for a new PM as it was for TM.

Article 24 requires the agreement of the EU. Even Liam Fox says it’s not a viable solution. If it was viable Theresa May would have delivered it and still been PM. It’s the ultimate kick of the can.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by denphone

l am talking about the independent organisation Full Facts which states the true facts that they are independent of political interference.

If Old Boy knows something they don't know, then I suggest he shares this with Liam Fox, the Full Facts team, et al so they can take his informed analysis into account.

---------- Post added at 13:31 ---------- Previous post was at 13:29 ----------

I see that Matthew Parris in The Times is suggesting "Boris Johnson is enough of a rascal to rat on Brexit"
"The frontrunner for No 10 might be the only candidate who’d get away with ripping up Article 50 and starting again"

It's behind a paywall but it's an interesting theory.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/c...exit-m86qc2ksm

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by denphone

l am talking about the independent organisation Full Facts which states the true facts that they are independent of political interference.

All too easy too miss out inconveinent facts. So many things that people are not allowed to comment on with a severe penalty, eg losing their job.


As someone once said on a 1980's talk show, "Liberalism is just Fascism by another name".

That’s a pretty stupid slogan though isn’t it?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Their successor.

? You have no choice but to cede power to your successor because they’re............your successor.

[Sephiroth]

I just want to remind people of the core issue here:

The Referendum result was LEAVE and the people who voted otherwise must accept that under democratic convention.

What kind of "leave" is much of what the argument is about here, but basically the Remainers want to use that bone of contention as a means of delaying (or indeed preventing) Brexit so that they can justify their call for a new referendum in the "light of what we know now".

We know now what a bunch of bullies the EU are when the British people vote to leave their so-called union. Remainers often say that this is to be expected because they are merely looking after their own interests. Quite so, but true colours, once exposed, don't encourage one to want to get close to them again, especially that perfidious Varadkar.

The Remainers claim that no-deal will be a disaster; they have no real idea if this will be the case; just Project Fear again. To me, sovereignty is the issue (whether or not it buys the biscuits). They can shove their Renaults, Citroens, BMWs and Mercedes where the sun don't shine. Ireland can stew in Varadkar's perfidious juices.

We have the opportunity of tearing up the WA, soundly rejected by Parliament and either starting again on a time limited programme or else leaving on 31-October.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

Someone who wants no deal will get the support of the ERG and DUP, but crucially not remainers in Parliament.

I don’t think anyone wants no deal, but crucially you have to prepared to expect it and accept it if necessary. This will happen on 31/10 if we do not ask for an extension or if the EU don’t grant one. Parliament can object all they want they are powerless to stop it in those scenarios.

The situation is exactly the same for a new PM as it was for TM.

Yes and No, May could have taken us out with no deal but chose not to. Don’t know what the new PM would do.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Someone who wants no deal will get the support of the ERG and DUP, but crucially not remainers in Parliament. The situation is exactly the same for a new PM as it was for TM.

Article 24 requires the agreement of the EU. Even Liam Fox says it’s not a viable solution. If it was viable Theresa May would have delivered it and still been PM. It’s the ultimate kick of the can.

I believe it is a viable solution. For some reason, non-Brexiteers don't want to use it.

---------- Post added at 17:13 ---------- Previous post was at 17:12 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

If Old Boy knows something they don't know, then I suggest he shares this with Liam Fox, the Full Facts team, et al so they can take his informed analysis into account.

---------- Post added at 13:31 ---------- Previous post was at 13:29 ----------

I see that Matthew Parris in The Times is suggesting "Boris Johnson is enough of a rascal to rat on Brexit"
"The frontrunner for No 10 might be the only candidate who’d get away with ripping up Article 50 and starting again"

It's behind a paywall but it's an interesting theory.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/c...exit-m86qc2ksm

A reporter's fantasy.

---------- Post added at 17:14 ---------- Previous post was at 17:13 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

l am talking about the independent organisation Full Facts which states the true facts that they are independent of political interference.

That's different from being neutral.

I used to think The Independent newspaper was neutral. How daft was I?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I believe it is a viable solution. For some reason, non-Brexiteers don't want to use it.

---------- Post added at 17:13 ---------- Previous post was at 17:12 ----------



A reporter's fantasy.

---------- Post added at 17:14 ---------- Previous post was at 17:13 ----------



That's different from being neutral.

I used to think The Independent newspaper was neutral. How daft was I?

Can you explain why the EU will agree to it? It's a threat to Single Market integrity to enter into such an arrangement.

---------- Post added at 17:16 ---------- Previous post was at 17:15 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

I don’t think anyone wants no deal, but crucially you have to prepared to expect it and accept it if necessary. This will happen on 31/10 if we do not ask for an extension or if the EU don’t grant one. Parliament can object all they want they are powerless to stop it in those scenarios. Yes and No, May could have taken us out with no deal but chose not to. Don’t know what the new PM would do.

It's a long time between now and October. Parliament has plenty of time.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Pierre

I don’t think anyone wants no deal, but crucially you have to prepared to expect it and accept it if necessary. This will happen on 31/10 if we do not ask for an extension or if the EU don’t grant one. Parliament can object all they want they are powerless to stop it in those scenarios. Yes and No, May could have taken us out with no deal but chose not to. Don’t know what the new PM would do.

There's nothing wrong with a no deal Brexit. Don't fall for the Remainers' hysteria.

Originally Posted by Pierre

? You have no choice but to cede power to your successor because they’re............your successor.

Obviously but my point is Prime Ministers are reluctant to give up power easily.

May = Forced Out
Cameron = Kind of had to go
Brown = Lost election
Blair = The writing was on the wall
Mayor = Lost election
Thatcher = Forced out

It would be very unlikely a Prime Minister would embrace a path that would detonate their own leadership so soon after winning it. Especially someone like Boris whose wanted the job forever.

And that would all be to try and leave with No Deal which they could well be stopped by their own party or Parliament anyway.

I happened to listen to a good podcast today which covered this and explained just why a PM trying to hunker down and await no deal would be unlikely to do it: https://www.conservativehome.com/vid...d-no-deal.html

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

It's a long time between now and October. Parliament has plenty of time.

Agreed, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Be seen to frustrate Brexit and you alienate at least 50% of the electorate. Mr Corbyn is so desperate for a GE, but he is on fantasy land if he thinks he’ll walk it and anything he does that blatantly frustrates Brexit will hurt him and he knows it.

So if the new PM refuses a GE until after Brexit Is concluded don’t be so sure on what Parliament May do.