Brexit (Old)

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Oh, so you said:



This is saying if the Remainers keep quiet and wait they might have a change of mind, correct? So, by inference (and I am not showing my working), Remainers will only "change their minds" if things are indeed fine. If they are not fine, they will not change their minds .. i.e. the obvious.

So, you really did say "don't worry, things will be fine you will see" ...

.. or are you now saying that things will not be fine?

Firstly I was responding to Denphone's statement.

the public will be able to be the judge and jury of it themselves when it has all played out.

Secondly my statement

It is always possible they may have a change of mind.

is miles away from

"don't worry, things will be fine you will see"

as it is equally possible they (the leavers) may not.

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by pip08456

If we leave with no actual deal then WTO rules will apply until a deal can be agreed so the world won't stop.

If that were to ever happen, yes.

It won't though because parliament will never approve a no deal exit - the votes are not even close to being there.

We will end up staying in the EU, until another government comes into place.

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

The problem with this divorce is children won't accept that the divorce is happening.

Yeah, well they're probably hoping that the parents stay together until the kids grow older - then they will be content for the olds to go off and die. (I suppose now you will go draw parallels between the ages of proportionate voters - leave vs remain...but then again, you did start this analogy!)

metaphorically speaking.

Yeah, me too...

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

It won't though because parliament will never approve a no deal exit - the votes are not even close to being there

and then what? Parliament rejects May's best efforts deal and we then do something ... or nothing.

May won't allow a second Vote because ERG has her by the cojones and Corbyn desperately wants a Hard brexit to pursue his socialist nirvana.

Must re-watch Into The Void again ..

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

Yeah, well they're probably hoping that the parents stay together until the kids grow older - then they will be content for the olds to go off and die. (I suppose now you will go draw parallels between the ages of proportionate voters - leave vs remain...but then again, you did start this analogy!)







Yeah, me too...

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

If that were to ever happen, yes.

It won't though because parliament will never approve a no deal exit - the votes are not even close to being there.

We will end up staying in the EU, until another government comes into place.

There's a little problem there no-one seems to have spotted. I'm assuming you are relying on amendment 7 on EU (Withdrawal) Bill 2018. The meaningful vote.

Before the amendment was voted on, my ministerial colleagues confirmed via a written ministerial statement and explicitly in the House that MPs would have a vote on whether to accept the final deal or not as soon as possible after the end of the negotiations. This should take place and before the European Parliament votes on the agreement.

The Prime Minister had also separately promised that a Bill would be brought forward so that the withdrawal agreement reached with the EU could be put into UK domestic law. This would give MPs another chance to debate, scrutinise and vote on the deal reached the EU.

Further agreements reached on the UK and the EU's future relationship would additionally be implemented through legislation where necessary. This would give MPs an opportunity again to scrutinise the deal reached the EU.

Source

[1andrew1]

Government's no-Brexit deal advice shows shocking rise in red tape in the event of no deal. https://news.sky.com/story/britain-u...-tape-11480037

[jonbxx]

So no major surprises in the government 'no deal' advice. Surpirsingly, there's not been much 'project fear' about the advice from the press or the ERG people. A lot of the pints raised have been called this in the past.

Here's a link to the papers - https://www.gov.uk/government/collec...u-with-no-deal

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by ianch99

and then what? Parliament rejects May's best efforts deal and we then do something ... or nothing.

May won't allow a second Vote because ERG has her by the cojones and Corbyn desperately wants a Hard brexit to pursue his socialist nirvana.

Yeah that was there ultimate goal through nationalism - the end goal of socialism. Just rather conveniently happens to be an antisemitic, support nationalized healthcare etc. Co-incidence?

Anyway aside from pointing out similarities to the Nazi's I guess I might as well use this post to say that Lab now also does seem to have found enough political room for maneuver to suggest that they would back a second referendum if a no deal exit fails, which it will:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8504001.html

Labour has cleared the way for backing a potential new referendum on Brexit if parliament rejects the deal Theresa May agrees with Brussels.
Shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer said that if the Commons votes down the deal the prime minister agrees, then it would be up to MPs to decide what happens next and “all options” would be on the table.

He rejected the idea that if Ms May fails to secure a deal or if parliament rejects the one she agrees then it would be an automatic no-deal Brexit.

Barry Gardiner made a mess of his comments but he is a seat right next to Barnet which is the most conservative town in the UK and is worried that the leave vote will spill over into his area, not to mention Barnet has the biggest Jewish community in the UK so that is something that he is afraid of, too. His vote total and percentage has been steadily increasing for a decade + now so I don't think that he wants to squander that at all.

The thing is, everyone knew this was coming but for all Labor's talk of respecting the vote etc, we all know that if there is no deal, they are going to turn suit and refuse to leave / favor another vote / advocate remaining etc. We all know that it is going to happen - agree with it or not, it is a reality. If May stays, and continues with the idiocy of chequers / her plan to stay aligned on goods only, then we're staying in the EU as there is no way a no deal exit gets through parliament.

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

Yeah that was there ultimate goal through nationalism - the end goal of socialism. Just rather conveniently happens to be an antisemitic, support nationalized healthcare etc. Co-incidence?

Anyway aside from pointing out similarities to the Nazi's I guess I might as well use this post to say that Lab now also does seem to have found enough political room for maneuver to suggest that they would back a second referendum if a no deal exit fails, which it will:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8504001.html


Barry Gardiner made a mess of his comments but he is a seat right next to Barnet which is the most conservative town in the UK and is worried that the leave vote will spill over into his area, not to mention Barnet has the biggest Jewish community in the UK so that is something that he is afraid of, too. His vote total and percentage has been steadily increasing for a decade + now so I don't think that he wants to squander that at all.

The thing is, everyone knew this was coming but for all Labor's talk of respecting the vote etc, we all know that if there is no deal, they are going to turn suit and refuse to leave / favor another vote / advocate remaining etc. We all know that it is going to happen - agree with it or not, it is a reality. If May stays, and continues with the idiocy of chequers / her plan to stay aligned on goods only, then we're staying in the EU as there is no way a no deal exit gets through parliament.

Actually (and not a lot of people know this), the Nazi's privatised a lot of the State industries...

http://www.ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf

Abstract:
The Great Depression spurred State ownership in Western capitalist countries. Germany was no exception; the last governments of the Weimar Republic took over firms in diverse sectors. Later, the Nazi regime transferred public ownership and public services to the private sector. In doing so, they went against the mainstream trends in the Western capitalist countries, none of which systematically reprivatized firms during the 1930s. Privatization in Nazi Germany was also unique in transferring to private hands the delivery of public services previously provided by government. The firms and the services transferred to private ownership belonged to diverse sectors. Privatization was part of an intentional policy with multiple objectives and was not ideologically driven. As in many recent privatizations, particularly within the European Union, strong financial restrictions were a central motivation. In addition, privatization was used as a political tool to enhance support for the government and for the Nazi Party.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...9.2009.00473.x

Abstract
Nationalization was particularly important in the early 1930s in Germany. The state took over a large industrial concern, large commercial banks, and other minor firms. In the mid‐1930s, the Nazi regime transferred public ownership to the private sector. In doing so, they went against the mainstream trends in western capitalistic countries, none of which systematically reprivatized firms during the 1930s. Privatization was used as a political tool to enhance support for the government and for the Nazi Party. In addition, growing financial restrictions because of the cost of the rearmament programme provided additional motivations for privatization.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

Yeah that was there ultimate goal through nationalism - the end goal of socialism. Just rather conveniently happens to be an antisemitic, support nationalized healthcare etc. Co-incidence?

Anyway aside from pointing out similarities to the Nazi's I guess I might as well use this post to say that Lab now also does seem to have found enough political room for maneuver to suggest that they would back a second referendum if a no deal exit fails, which it will:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8504001.html


Barry Gardiner made a mess of his comments but he is a seat right next to Barnet which is the most conservative town in the UK and is worried that the leave vote will spill over into his area, not to mention Barnet has the biggest Jewish community in the UK so that is something that he is afraid of, too. His vote total and percentage has been steadily increasing for a decade + now so I don't think that he wants to squander that at all.

The thing is, everyone knew this was coming but for all Labor's talk of respecting the vote etc, we all know that if there is no deal, they are going to turn suit and refuse to leave / favor another vote / advocate remaining etc. We all know that it is going to happen - agree with it or not, it is a reality. If May stays, and continues with the idiocy of chequers / her plan to stay aligned on goods only, then we're staying in the EU as there is no way a no deal exit gets through parliament.

I think the only way Labour will support a second referendum is if they get rid of Corbyn. He has waited for decades for this, there is no way he will do a 180 and buy into remaining in the EU.

As both sides will soon recognise the disaster that No Deal represents, the posturing, esp. by Rabb of playing down the impact of WTO No Deal in March will be replaced by a last minute muddy fudge of a Withdrawal Agreement to allow the UK/EU to move into a transition limbo where they will try (and fail) to square the circle.

After this tedious 20 months, I guess we will end up in the unavoidable (while the current Players are in charge) WTO Brexit but at least we will have had 2 more years (ish) to make the pain less.

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by pip08456

There's a little problem there no-one seems to have spotted. I'm assuming you are relying on amendment 7 on EU (Withdrawal) Bill 2018. The meaningful vote.

Source

Yeah Sepiroth made the best comments on it here, as best I can see:

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...&postcount=627

The first part of his comments best explain the difficulties in getting an agreement from all member states etc but Barnier and Macron really did hint that were there to be that "substantial change" then it could lead to an extension of A50:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...y-eu-officials

EU officials and diplomats have told the Guardian it would instead require a fundamental shift in British politics for there to be any value for the EU in an extension of the UK’s membership. That position is echoed in Berlin and Paris, among other EU capitals.
Article 50 can only be extended by the unanimous agreement of the 27 other member states, and on the request of the withdrawing state, which May has already said she is not prepared to do.

At this point every person knows that May's opinion is irrelevant - even if she is opposed nobody cares.

What becomes interesting is what Barnier and co determine to be a "substantial change"...is it a leadership contest? If the prospect of a new government suffices that would surely warrant a delay...and at that point we all know that the UK will be staying in the EU.

One thing to remember...Ireland is still a part of the EU. If the EU were to protect their interests (as they should) then they will likely show a little leniency to keep the UK in. (To avoid a hard border etc).

Of course they could shatter the UK into pieces by allowing a hard border, seeing a United Ireland (following a BP) and break British sovereignty altogether....but they're not nasty like that.

Only way that there is any chance to leave, is if there is a leadership contest / new Tory PM, who promises a GE. Even then, the odds that we are leaving in March of next year are next to zero.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

Even then, the odds that we are leaving in March of next year are next to zero.

Brave words, Chloe.😀

[Chloé Palmas]

People who are definitely in favor of leaving don't really dispute it though ; Mick is not annoyed because he thinks that I am wrong, he is angry because we will be tied into the EU, one way or another for good now, and that is a best case scenario. (For those that want to leave).

People who are pissed off at what May has done are not angry at other people for pointing it out, they are pissed off because of because of the reality of the situation.

To everyone other than Old Boy it seems.

William Hague once said that there are two types of views on Europe within the cabinet. Those that are Euroskeptic and want to stay in a reformed EU and those who are Euroskeptic on Europe who wish to leave.

That is still the case and May's plan is not placating the former at all (it is just a permanent alignment) and the latter are pissed off as hell at her in general + they want a complete severing of terms with the EU in every way possible.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

<SNIP>


William Hague once said that there are two types of views on Europe within the cabinet. Those that are Euroskeptic and want to stay in a reformed EU and those who are Euroskeptic on Europe who wish to leave.

That is still the case and May's plan is not placating the former at all (it is just a permanent alignment) and the latter are pissed off as hell at her in general + they want a complete severing of terms with the EU in every way possible.

I fit the category I've highlighted above. Something no British PM could achieve - a reformed EU given French intransigence over the CAP and German hegemony (issues that the Remainers in this thread have avoided discussing).