No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Davis, Fox etc were never in charge. May always had absolute control of the Government position in the negotiations.
"Leave" is getting Brexit. Stop moaning.
But you want to stop it. Hence the concern. I am content with May's Brexit for all its faults. It is you who are desperate to ignore the vote and just cancel it.
Yes. Because I do not think the consequences are worth the "benefit".
I do wish we'd stop with this ridiculous nonsense of a No Deal referendum.
Any referendum will require the unanimous approval of the Council to extend A50. Does this seem like an EU that's prepared to let the UK spend another six months fannying about before crashing out?
Plus "no deal" would not pass muster with the electoral commission either.
The only possible referendum that can pass the triple lock of Parliament, Electoral Commission and European Council is Deal vs Remain.
It seems this needs to be posted every 20 minutes so the thicko leavers get it into their skulls.
There doesn't seem to be any facility to write posts in crayon because that might be a route into their consciousness.
It doesn't matter as there is no longer time for a referendum or election to occur in time to stop things heading off a cliff on March 29th.
As I seem to have to repeat the issue is now in Parliament's hands (God help us as no one else is going to)...
TMay unilaterally extends A50 (can she? I know she can't ratify the WA on her own) for a few months and there's your referendum.
Extending the deadline requires the unanimous agreement of all the other EU member states.
I do wish we'd stop with this ridiculous nonsense of a No Deal referendum.
Any referendum will require the unanimous approval of the Council to extend A50. Does this seem like an EU that's prepared to let the UK spend another six months fannying about before crashing out?
Plus "no deal" would not pass muster with the electoral commission either.
The only possible referendum that can pass the triple lock of Parliament, Electoral Commission and European Council is Deal vs Remain.
It seems this needs to be posted every 20 minutes so the thicko leavers get it into their skulls.
There doesn't seem to be any facility to write posts in crayon because that might be a route into their consciousness.
It doesn't matter as there is no longer time for a referendum or election to occur in time to stop things heading off a cliff on March 29th.
As I seem to have to repeat the issue is now in Parliament's hands (God help us as no one else is going to)...
TMay unilaterally extends A50 (can she? I know she can't ratify the WA on her own) for a few months and there's your referendum.
If we lurch, despite Parliament wishing to avoid it, towards a “no deal”, with delusions it can be “managed” into a quick and dirty FTA, that will not end happily or quickly.
I am in no position to second guess those who have to try and model the macro effects of such a scenario. No developed country has left a trade bloc before, let alone in disorderly fashion, and let alone one which has become a lot more than a trade bloc.
But I do fully understand the legal realities. And because so-called “WTO rules” deliver precisely no continuity in multiple key sectors of the economy, we could expect disruption on a scale and of a length that no-one has experienced in the developed world in the last couple of generations.
The complacency that such things cannot and would not ever really happen in modern economies is staggering. Mercifully, it is not shared in either Whitehall or the Berlaymont. But these are outcomes which proper political leadership is about both understanding, contingency planning against – and avoiding.
Markets continue to react, or have until this week, as if something must turn up and that “no deal” is a virtually unimaginable scenario for politicians professing to be serious, to contemplate. That risk has therefore been seriously underpriced for a year or more, because we are dealing with a political generation which has no serious experience of bad times and is frankly cavalier about precipitating events they could not then control, but feel they might exploit.
Nothing is more redolent of the pre First World War era, when very few believed that a very long period of European peace and equilibrium could be shattered in months.
The trouble is that we have a deal. In reality if MPs were not looking to simply stop Brexit by any means, the number of MPs arguing for No Deal are less than 100 and absolutely could not win in a vote between Deal and No Deal.
So right now the only people actually stopping us Leaving with a deal are the majority of the MPs who want to stop us leaving at all.
I still think a fudged deal of some sort will happen BUT, if the current stalemate continues, relations fracture and we get a finger-pointing crash out, what spiteful stuff could the UK govt unilaterally do to respond?
I remember Phil Hammond giving a veiled warning a year or so back that the UK could pull levers which would be damaging to the EU (cutting business taxes, making the financial sector extremely attractive etc)… I know that would mightily piss off the left and bring accusations of turning the UK into a tax haven, but I guess we'd need a positive response.
I do wish we'd stop with this ridiculous nonsense of a No Deal referendum.
Any referendum will require the unanimous approval of the Council to extend A50. Does this seem like an EU that's prepared to let the UK spend another six months fannying about before crashing out?
Plus "no deal" would not pass muster with the electoral commission either.
The only possible referendum that can pass the triple lock of Parliament, Electoral Commission and European Council is Deal vs Remain.
It seems this needs to be posted every 20 minutes so the thicko leavers get it into their skulls.
There doesn't seem to be any facility to write posts in crayon because that might be a route into their consciousness.
It doesn't matter as there is no longer time for a referendum or election to occur in time to stop things heading off a cliff on March 29th.
As I seem to have to repeat the issue is now in Parliament's hands (God help us as no one else is going to)...
TMay unilaterally extends A50 (can she? I know she can't ratify the WA on her own) for a few months and there's your referendum.
No. She can revoke it, but extension requires EU27 to vote unanimously.
Surely one problem for those wanting to force change this way is that the markets have already priced in the risk of this deal being rejected and a possible hard Brexit. Plus the markets will continue to dribble in that direction rather than having a single shocking move.
Once we have the certainty of No Deal the markets might even recover somewhat.
10/10 for fantasy world.
No deal could create a mighty crash, but the fundamentals are there along with pent up demand. A bounce back is not unlikely at all.
Just look at what happened after we left the ERM in 1992.
It’s quite possible that, following a brief period of adjustment and with the right government in place, no-deal Brexit could be the firing of the starting gun on a decade of economic growth. The EU are absolutely terrified of that happening.
Do things really look like that from thousands of miles away?
The biggest issue is the uncertainty. Business doesn’t like uncertainty, and spending the next decade arguing with the EU just adds more of it. It’s better to leave cleanly and spend the money on short term support for industries that require it.
The biggest issue for me is that those in charge (Mrs May and the civil service) don’t see Brexit as an opportunity. The feeling among my group of expat friends before the referendum was 50/50, but since then it’s been almost universal that having made the decision we should get out properly and not be held hostage by those who will actively wish ill on us. Everyone is expecting a pile of EU legislation specifically targeted at the U.K. from 30th March next year, probably starting with some sort of financial services tax.
I’ll be back in U.K. next week for a wedding and family Christmas, it will be interesting to hear the views of those I meet there.
I'll offer you 2-1 on a financial services tax if you want
So you reckon there’s a 33% chance of it next year? That’s worrying.
I’ll think of a way to frame the bet, but I’m on for a tenner that there will be a serious proposal for an FTT. If I win you can give it to your hosting provider.
I think the likelihood of any pan-EU FTT being implemented is minuscule. I think the likelihood of a proposal is large.
(There's a certain irony that the only FTT in the EU currently is in the UK.)
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Name one Leaver who has any influence on May, Hammond or Robbins ! May, Hammond, Rudd, Javid, Hunt, Hancock, Brokenshire etc are all Remainers as are a majority of MPs. Fox has no mandate in the negotiations or influence in the Cabinet and neither do Gove or Mordaunt as far as I can see.
Davis, Fox and Johnson made a pig's ear of their portfolios. The Leavers failed to organise themselves effectively. FFS they cannot even organise a No Confidence vote which they should have done years ago.
The truth is that the Leave Camp is filled with politicians who like the sound of their own voice rather than ones with ability. They sit around and chat and waffle.
That is why an ex-Remain PM is driving Brexit.
Your first sentence is vacuous rubbish lacking evidence with the exception of Johnson. Having a different opinion onto May is not making a pigs ear of one’s portfolio. It simp,y shows May can’t delegate and is a micro manager.
I rather agree with your second paragraph but the same observation also applies to Remainers - unless of course you think we are well governed.
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Davis, Fox etc were never in charge. May always had absolute control of the Government position in the negotiations.
I have yet to see a Leave politician who had ability rather than bluster. None of them are worth tuppence.
Gove.
The man can start an argument in an empty lift, but everybody who has encountered him during his time as a minister won't deny that he means what he says, reads up on his subject and gets stuff done.
The "blob" hated that, but since them his next two jobs, the industry have spoken very positively of his approach.
He was the first to run. He did not even make it past Day One IIRC...
I still think a fudged deal of some sort will happen BUT, if the current stalemate continues, relations fracture and we get a finger-pointing crash out, what spiteful stuff could the UK govt unilaterally do to respond?
I remember Phil Hammond giving a veiled warning a year or so back that the UK could pull levers which would be damaging to the EU (cutting business taxes, making the financial sector extremely attractive etc)… I know that would mightily piss off the left and bring accusations of turning the UK into a tax haven, but I guess we'd need a positive response.
What would the govt have up its sleeve?
Block Holyhead, Fishguard and Liverpool harbours....
God, I'm sick of this bollocks from the Brexiteers.
If we were in a situation where there had been no effort made to enact the referendum result, it was still a short time since then, and there was any prospect of one side holding a third, fourth, fifth, or whatever number referendum until the "right" result was achieved, I'd be sympathetic.
None of those is true.
It's been longer than the interval between the last two General Elections, all we've seemed to do since 2016 has been bloody Brexiting (ignoring the paranoia about May deliberately intending to derail Brexit and implicitly being willing to sacrifice the Conservative Party to do so), and if a referendum results in "Sign the Deal", it's damned well over. Once the Withdrawal Agreement is signed, we cease to be an EU member.
So what's the route to "voting until we give the right answer" if the Deal wins? If the Deal wins, It's over and out
The Leavers can make a decent case - and I'd be sympathetic to a four-way referendum after the Deal is signed, to be honest, as well - but this line that implies that a win for the Deal would still be ignored afterwards is such steaming dogshite that it damages the case.
I've tried to be as objective as possible (seeing that I was originally pro-Leave before the campaign, it's actually still a default position for me), but I'm sick and tired of tripe like this coming up.
Sorry but that is utterly wrong. No matter what result a referendum produces we do not actually leave with a deal until Parliament passes it. Only if they actually say yes to the WA in a specific vote does it actually get enacted. So it is perfectly possible that if we vote anything other than remain at another referendum Parliament could still refuse to pass it.
DUP will never support this deal with a backstop.
May passes the deal with Labour support then there will be a GE.
Who in Labour is going to support the deal to give her a majority. That thought is just pure fantasy.
Indeed. It is now a 3 way game of chicken - who blinks first. Mrs May, Labour centrist melts or the DUP.
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Davis, Fox etc were never in charge. May always had absolute control of the Government position in the negotiations.
I have yet to see a Leave politician who had ability rather than bluster. None of them are worth tuppence.
Gove.
The man can start an argument in an empty lift, but everybody who has encountered him during his time as a minister won't deny that he means what he says, reads up on his subject and gets stuff done.
The "blob" hated that, but since them his next two jobs, the industry have spoken very positively of his approach.
He was the first to run. He did not even make it past Day One IIRC...
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Name one Leaver who has any influence on May, Hammond or Robbins ! May, Hammond, Rudd, Javid, Hunt, Hancock, Brokenshire etc are all Remainers as are a majority of MPs. Fox has no mandate in the negotiations or influence in the Cabinet and neither do Gove or Mordaunt as far as I can see.
Davis, Fox and Johnson made a pig's ear of their portfolios. The Leavers failed to organise themselves effectively. FFS they cannot even organise a No Confidence vote which they should have done years ago.
The truth is that the Leave Camp is filled with politicians who like the sound of their own voice rather than ones with ability. They sit around and chat and waffle.
That is why an ex-Remain PM is driving Brexit.
Your first sentence is vacuous rubbish lacking evidence with the exception of Johnson. Having a different opinion onto May is not making a pigs ear of one’s portfolio. It simp,y shows May can’t delegate and is a micro manager.
I rather agree with your second paragraph but the same observation also applies to Remainers - unless of course you think we are well governed.
The Remain Camp has the advantage of having slightly more ability. That tiny filip is enough...
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Davis, Fox etc were never in charge. May always had absolute control of the Government position in the negotiations.
I have yet to see a Leave politician who had ability rather than bluster. None of them are worth tuppence.
Gove.
The man can start an argument in an empty lift, but everybody who has encountered him during his time as a minister won't deny that he means what he says, reads up on his subject and gets stuff done.
The "blob" hated that, but since them his next two jobs, the industry have spoken very positively of his approach.
He was the first to run. He did not even make it past Day One IIRC...
For leader, he is a terrible choice. But you asked a minister who has ability as a politician, Gove undeniably does. That doesn't mean I agree with him, just saying, same with likes of Cooper-Balls, would be infinity better than nearly all of Labour's current front bench.
God, I'm sick of this bollocks from the Brexiteers.
If we were in a situation where there had been no effort made to enact the referendum result, it was still a short time since then, and there was any prospect of one side holding a third, fourth, fifth, or whatever number referendum until the "right" result was achieved, I'd be sympathetic.
None of those is true.
It's been longer than the interval between the last two General Elections, all we've seemed to do since 2016 has been bloody Brexiting (ignoring the paranoia about May deliberately intending to derail Brexit and implicitly being willing to sacrifice the Conservative Party to do so), and if a referendum results in "Sign the Deal", it's damned well over. Once the Withdrawal Agreement is signed, we cease to be an EU member.
So what's the route to "voting until we give the right answer" if the Deal wins? If the Deal wins, It's over and out
The Leavers can make a decent case - and I'd be sympathetic to a four-way referendum after the Deal is signed, to be honest, as well - but this line that implies that a win for the Deal would still be ignored afterwards is such steaming dogshite that it damages the case.
I've tried to be as objective as possible (seeing that I was originally pro-Leave before the campaign, it's actually still a default position for me), but I'm sick and tired of tripe like this coming up.
Sorry but that is utterly wrong. No matter what result a referendum produces we do not actually leave with a deal until Parliament passes it. Only if they actually say yes to the WA in a specific vote does it actually get enacted. So it is perfectly possible that if we vote anything other than remain at another referendum Parliament could still refuse to pass it.
DUP will never support this deal with a backstop.
May passes the deal with Labour support then there will be a GE.
Who in Labour is going to support the deal to give her a majority. That thought is just pure fantasy.
Indeed. It is now a 3 way game of chicken - who blinks first. Mrs May, Labour centrist melts or the DUP.
My money is on one of the first two.
The DUP won’t blink Oh NOOOOOO!
The only one who possibly can is May as she will be the one carrying the can. As I stated before the Labour MPs don't need to do anything come the election they won't be the ones held responsible.
God, I'm sick of this bollocks from the Brexiteers.
If we were in a situation where there had been no effort made to enact the referendum result, it was still a short time since then, and there was any prospect of one side holding a third, fourth, fifth, or whatever number referendum until the "right" result was achieved, I'd be sympathetic.
None of those is true.
It's been longer than the interval between the last two General Elections, all we've seemed to do since 2016 has been bloody Brexiting (ignoring the paranoia about May deliberately intending to derail Brexit and implicitly being willing to sacrifice the Conservative Party to do so), and if a referendum results in "Sign the Deal", it's damned well over. Once the Withdrawal Agreement is signed, we cease to be an EU member.
So what's the route to "voting until we give the right answer" if the Deal wins? If the Deal wins, It's over and out
The Leavers can make a decent case - and I'd be sympathetic to a four-way referendum after the Deal is signed, to be honest, as well - but this line that implies that a win for the Deal would still be ignored afterwards is such steaming dogshite that it damages the case.
I've tried to be as objective as possible (seeing that I was originally pro-Leave before the campaign, it's actually still a default position for me), but I'm sick and tired of tripe like this coming up.
DUP will never support this deal with a backstop.
May passes the deal with Labour support then there will be a GE.
Who in Labour is going to support the deal to give her a majority. That thought is just pure fantasy.
Indeed. It is now a 3 way game of chicken - who blinks first. Mrs May, Labour centrist melts or the DUP.
My money is on one of the first two.
Speaking to my local Labour MP the centralists won't melt - they don't need to, as all a lot of their MPs can claim they are following through their constituents desire that we leave.
While No Deal is likely to be a problem their Party won't be getting the blame and there is a big advantage if it destroys the Tories...
I think it could devastate both parties. If we crash out, and the circumstances are horrible, the responsibility rests with Brexit ultras, Remain ultras, and those politicians who thought a crash out would be to their political advantage.
"Sweden starts laying the groundwork for snap election
Sweden's government talks are set to continue after parliament on Friday rejected Stefan Löfven as prime minister, with the threat of a snap election looming larger on the horizon."
"Parliament voted 200 to 116 against giving Lofven, currently caretaker prime minister, a new term. It had already voted once for Lofven's ouster in a mandatory vote in September, but has also rejected centre-right leader Ulf Kristersson as prime minister, leaving the way forward unclear.
"We are heading toward a new election at high speed," Ulf Kristersson, leader of the Moderate Party, said just before the vote."
The idea that whilst we were a member we had any influence in what the EU would consider as a positive manner is a joke. We only had the power to disrupt and block. The bottom line is that we have no interest in the EU's aspirations and do not share their goals. As such I would think they would be very pleased to see the back of us.
The way you've set up your concepts assumes the EU was always a foreign power, so it is not surprising what conclusions you reach.
Richard uses the royal 'we'. Any British person who disagrees with him gets othered.
Making stuff up as usual William. I would have thought by now you were getting tired of being called out for that.
"The bottom line is that we have no interest in the EU's aspirations and do not share their goals."
Which we are you talking about? It's not one that includes me, that's for sure.
Let's have a referendum on "join the euro and Schengen" v "WTO Leave" and find out.
I do wish we'd stop with this ridiculous nonsense of a No Deal referendum.
Any referendum will require the unanimous approval of the Council to extend A50. Does this seem like an EU that's prepared to let the UK spend another six months fannying about before crashing out?
Plus "no deal" would not pass muster with the electoral commission either.
The only possible referendum that can pass the triple lock of Parliament, Electoral Commission and European Council is Deal vs Remain.
It seems this needs to be posted every 20 minutes so the thicko leavers get it into their skulls.
There doesn't seem to be any facility to write posts in crayon because that might be a route into their consciousness.
It doesn't matter as there is no longer time for a referendum or election to occur in time to stop things heading off a cliff on March 29th.
As I seem to have to repeat the issue is now in Parliament's hands (God help us as no one else is going to)...
TMay unilaterally extends A50 (can she? I know she can't ratify the WA on her own) for a few months and there's your referendum.
No. She can revoke it, but extension requires EU27 to vote unanimously.
And/but I'm sure they would. So @eek I think there's your answer.
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Davis, Fox etc were never in charge. May always had absolute control of the Government position in the negotiations.
I have yet to see a Leave politician who had ability rather than bluster. None of them are worth tuppence.
Gove.
The man can start an argument in an empty lift, but everybody who has encountered him during his time as a minister won't deny that he means what he says, reads up on his subject and gets stuff done.
The "blob" hated that, but since them his next two jobs, the industry have spoken very positively of his approach.
He was the first to run. He did not even make it past Day One IIRC...
For leader, he is a terrible choice. But you asked a minister who has ability as a politician, Gove undeniably does. That doesn't mean I agree with him, just saying, same with likes of Cooper-Balls, would be infinity better than nearly all of Labour's current front bench.
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Davis, Fox etc were never in charge. May always had absolute control of the Government position in the negotiations.
I have yet to see a Leave politician who had ability rather than bluster. None of them are worth tuppence.
Gove.
The man can start an argument in an empty lift, but everybody who has encountered him during his time as a minister won't deny that he means what he says, reads up on his subject and gets stuff done.
The "blob" hated that, but since them his next two jobs, the industry have spoken very positively of his approach.
He was the first to run. He did not even make it past Day One IIRC...
For leader, he is a terrible choice. But you asked a minister who has ability as a politician, Gove undeniably does. That doesn't mean I agree with him, just saying, same with likes of Cooper-Balls, would be infinity better than nearly all of Labour's current front bench.
Fair enough, but IMO, Gove lacks spine.
Don't know about that. Cameron had to sack him from education, despite having mega incoming month after month and wanting to see it through.
I think it is more he is a calculating scheming bastard...
If the EU wants to ensure its survival, it will have to make far-reaching changes to the way it responds to migration, fights climate change and poverty, manages its security and common currency. For this, it must become easier to govern, easier to understand and more democratic.
The last thing the EU needs, faced with these huge tasks, is a traumatized U.K. using its power and diplomatic savoir-faire to freeze the EU in its present state. Its painful deadlock over Brexit may be diminishing the U.K.’s standing in Europe, but its diplomatic machine remains a formidable one. The U.K.’s soft power is probably unmatched for a mid-size country.
Basically, the EU is going to get bigger, more powerful within Europe, demand more money, etc. The UK would continued to be seen as causing this to drag more than necessary, but wouldn't be able to stop it, we wouldn't be remaining to experience the status quo, it would be all aboard the train to ever closer union while still been seen as a passenger who doesn't really want to be onboard.
This is spot on. I am more and more convinced the EU would very much come to regret keytjng the UK revoke. We will never be comfortable with the direction of travel and all we would be doing is ensuring the same conflict goes on for decades, ruining UK politics and paralyzing the EU in terms of its ability to deal with inevitable crisis.
The UK will be much enfeebled diplomatically after it has revoked, though not as enfeebled as it would be outside the EU. It will take many years to rebuild the influence we had before 2016, though I would expect this to be achieved eventually. If the US continues to disappear up its own fundament other EU countries will be relieved that the UK is still on board and will avoid too much triumphalism.
The idea that whilst we were a member we had any influence in what the EU would consider as a positive manner is a joke. We only had the power to disrupt and block. The bottom line is that we have no interest in the EU's aspirations and do not share their goals. As such I would think they would be very pleased to see the back of us.
The way you've set up your concepts assumes the EU was always a foreign power, so it is not surprising what conclusions you reach.
It is a foreign power.
Not yet it isn't. And hopefully it won't be for long.
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Davis, Fox etc were never in charge. May always had absolute control of the Government position in the negotiations.
I have yet to see a Leave politician who had ability rather than bluster. None of them are worth tuppence.
Gove.
The man can start an argument in an empty lift, but everybody who has encountered him during his time as a minister won't deny that he means what he says, reads up on his subject and gets stuff done.
The "blob" hated that, but since them his next two jobs, the industry have spoken very positively of his approach.
He was the first to run. He did not even make it past Day One IIRC...
For leader, he is a terrible choice. But you asked a minister who has ability as a politician, Gove undeniably does. That doesn't mean I agree with him, just saying, same with likes of Cooper-Balls, would be infinity better than nearly all of Labour's current front bench.
Fair enough, but IMO, Gove lacks spine.
Read Tim Shipman's first book All Out War, Gove chose to support Brexit knowing that it would lose him nearly all his political friends. He and his wife were very close to Osborne and his wife. His choice to back Brexit ended the relationship.
Speaking to my local Labour MP the centralists won't melt - they don't need to, as a lot of their MPs can claim they are merely following through their constituents desire that we leave.
While No Deal is likely to be a problem their Party won't be getting the blame and there is a big advantage if it destroys the Tories...
Correct. It's obvious that May has lost the ERG, they are not going to support a deal negotiated by her under any circumstances. They have become a separate party in all but name. And the DUP are the world's leading naysayers. So May would need at least 70 votes from the opposition parties to get a deal through. I don't think I've seen more than 10 Labour names suggested as possible deal supporters. 70 is completely out of the question. The deal is dead, it has ceased to be, it is an ex-deal. Period.
I still think a fudged deal of some sort will happen BUT, if the current stalemate continues, relations fracture and we get a finger-pointing crash out, what spiteful stuff could the UK govt unilaterally do to respond?
I remember Phil Hammond giving a veiled warning a year or so back that the UK could pull levers which would be damaging to the EU (cutting business taxes, making the financial sector extremely attractive etc)… I know that would mightily piss off the left and bring accusations of turning the UK into a tax haven, but I guess we'd need a positive response.
What would the govt have up its sleeve?
Block Holyhead, Fishguard and Liverpool harbours....
And that would achieve what exactly?
Remember that, post-Brexit, we will be a giant in world trade, straddling the globe as supplicant countries beg to send their tarriff-free goods to us.
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
"Sweden starts laying the groundwork for snap election
Sweden's government talks are set to continue after parliament on Friday rejected Stefan Löfven as prime minister, with the threat of a snap election looming larger on the horizon."
"Parliament voted 200 to 116 against giving Lofven, currently caretaker prime minister, a new term. It had already voted once for Lofven's ouster in a mandatory vote in September, but has also rejected centre-right leader Ulf Kristersson as prime minister, leaving the way forward unclear.
"We are heading toward a new election at high speed," Ulf Kristersson, leader of the Moderate Party, said just before the vote."
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Name one Leaver who has any influence on May, Hammond or Robbins ! May, Hammond, Rudd, Javid, Hunt, Hancock, Brokenshire etc are all Remainers as are a majority of MPs. Fox has no mandate in the negotiations or influence in the Cabinet and neither do Gove or Mordaunt as far as I can see.
Davis, Fox and Johnson made a pig's ear of their portfolios. The Leavers failed to organise themselves effectively. FFS they cannot even organise a No Confidence vote which they should have done years ago.
The truth is that the Leave Camp is filled with politicians who like the sound of their own voice rather than ones with ability. They sit around and chat and waffle.
That is why an ex-Remain PM is driving Brexit.
Your first sentence is vacuous rubbish lacking evidence with the exception of Johnson. Having a different opinion onto May is not making a pigs ear of one’s portfolio. It simp,y shows May can’t delegate and is a micro manager.
I rather agree with your second paragraph but the same observation also applies to Remainers - unless of course you think we are well governed.
The Remain Camp has the advantage of having slightly more ability. That tiny filip is enough...
Hardly - you can’t say one Remainer is actually doing a good job on running their portfolio let alone Brexit.
Speaking to my local Labour MP the centralists won't melt - they don't need to, as a lot of their MPs can claim they are merely following through their constituents desire that we leave.
While No Deal is likely to be a problem their Party won't be getting the blame and there is a big advantage if it destroys the Tories...
Correct. It's obvious that May has lost the ERG, they are not going to support a deal negotiated by her under any circumstances. They have become a separate party in all but name. And the DUP are the world's leading naysayers. So May would need at least 70 votes from the opposition parties to get a deal through. I don't think I've seen more than 10 Labour names suggested as possible deal supporters. 70 is completely out of the question. The deal is dead, it has ceased to be, it is an ex-deal. Period.
While that is probably so, the voters seem to think that Labour's approach to Brexit is even worse.
"Sweden starts laying the groundwork for snap election
Sweden's government talks are set to continue after parliament on Friday rejected Stefan Löfven as prime minister, with the threat of a snap election looming larger on the horizon."
"Parliament voted 200 to 116 against giving Lofven, currently caretaker prime minister, a new term. It had already voted once for Lofven's ouster in a mandatory vote in September, but has also rejected centre-right leader Ulf Kristersson as prime minister, leaving the way forward unclear.
"We are heading toward a new election at high speed," Ulf Kristersson, leader of the Moderate Party, said just before the vote."
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Name one Leaver who has any influence on May, Hammond or Robbins ! May, Hammond, Rudd, Javid, Hunt, Hancock, Brokenshire etc are all Remainers as are a majority of MPs. Fox has no mandate in the negotiations or influence in the Cabinet and neither do Gove or Mordaunt as far as I can see.
Davis, Fox and Johnson made a pig's ear of their portfolios. The Leavers failed to organise themselves effectively. FFS they cannot even organise a No Confidence vote which they should have done years ago.
The truth is that the Leave Camp is filled with politicians who like the sound of their own voice rather than ones with ability. They sit around and chat and waffle.
That is why an ex-Remain PM is driving Brexit.
Your first sentence is vacuous rubbish lacking evidence with the exception of Johnson. Having a different opinion onto May is not making a pigs ear of one’s portfolio. It simp,y shows May can’t delegate and is a micro manager.
I rather agree with your second paragraph but the same observation also applies to Remainers - unless of course you think we are well governed.
The Remain Camp has the advantage of having slightly more ability. That tiny filip is enough...
Hardly - you can’t say one Remainers is actually doing a good job on running their portfolios let alone Brexit.
Very few Remainers have been allowed near Brexit. I am still stunned by Dominic Raab's performance.
God, I'm sick of this bollocks from the Brexiteers.
If we were in a situation where there had been no effort made to enact the referendum result, it was still a short time since then, and there was any prospect of one side holding a third, fourth, fifth, or whatever number referendum until the "right" result was achieved, I'd be sympathetic.
None of those is true.
It's been longer than the interval between the last two General Elections, all we've seemed to do since 2016 has been bloody Brexiting (ignoring the paranoia about May deliberately intending to derail Brexit and implicitly being willing to sacrifice the Conservative Party to do so), and if a referendum results in "Sign the Deal", it's damned well over. Once the Withdrawal Agreement is signed, we cease to be an EU member.
So what's the route to "voting until we give the right answer" if the Deal wins? If the Deal wins, It's over and out
The Leavers can make a decent case - and I'd be sympathetic to a four-way referendum after the Deal is signed, to be honest, as well - but this line that implies that a win for the Deal would still be ignored afterwards is such steaming dogshite that it damages the case.
I've tried to be as objective as possible (seeing that I was originally pro-Leave before the campaign, it's actually still a default position for me), but I'm sick and tired of tripe like this coming up.
Sorry but that is utterly wrong. No matter what result a referendum produces we do not actually leave with a deal until Parliament passes it. Only if they actually say yes to the WA in a specific vote does it actually get enacted. So it is perfectly possible that if we vote anything other than remain at another referendum Parliament could still refuse to pass it.
DUP will never support this deal with a backstop.
May passes the deal with Labour support then there will be a GE.
Who in Labour is going to support the deal to give her a majority. That thought is just pure fantasy.
Indeed. It is now a 3 way game of chicken - who blinks first. Mrs May, Labour centrist melts or the DUP.
My money is on one of the first two.
The DUP won’t blink Oh NOOOOOO!
The only one who possibly can is May as she will be the one carrying the can. As I stated before the Labour MPs don't need to do anything come the election they won't be the ones held responsible.
I don’t think she will. She’s the only daughter of two people with strong opinions, and she has a long history of fighting on to, some would say, past, the bitter end.
It is clear from the EU press conference that the leaders support TM efforts but are hard hitting at the politicians in the HOC
In truth we have ERG wanting to walk away on a no deal, labour simply wanting to play politics for their own reasons and remainers trying to turn over the referendum
If we lurch, despite Parliament wishing to avoid it, towards a “no deal”, with delusions it can be “managed” into a quick and dirty FTA, that will not end happily or quickly.
I am in no position to second guess those who have to try and model the macro effects of such a scenario. No developed country has left a trade bloc before, let alone in disorderly fashion, and let alone one which has become a lot more than a trade bloc.
But I do fully understand the legal realities. And because so-called “WTO rules” deliver precisely no continuity in multiple key sectors of the economy, we could expect disruption on a scale and of a length that no-one has experienced in the developed world in the last couple of generations.
The complacency that such things cannot and would not ever really happen in modern economies is staggering. Mercifully, it is not shared in either Whitehall or the Berlaymont. But these are outcomes which proper political leadership is about both understanding, contingency planning against – and avoiding.
Markets continue to react, or have until this week, as if something must turn up and that “no deal” is a virtually unimaginable scenario for politicians professing to be serious, to contemplate. That risk has therefore been seriously underpriced for a year or more, because we are dealing with a political generation which has no serious experience of bad times and is frankly cavalier about precipitating events they could not then control, but feel they might exploit.
Nothing is more redolent of the pre First World War era, when very few believed that a very long period of European peace and equilibrium could be shattered in months.
The trouble is that we have a deal. In reality if MPs were not looking to simply stop Brexit by any means, the number of MPs arguing for No Deal are less than 100 and absolutely could not win in a vote between Deal and No Deal.
So right now the only people actually stopping us Leaving with a deal are the majority of the MPs who want to stop us leaving at all.
Precisely this.
The public will see MPs rending their garments at the foreseen horrors of a No Deal Brexit - yet are still prepared to play games that might deliver the Very Thing They Supposedly Fear The Most For Us All. There is on the table something which would prevent No Deal happening on a single vote. Excuse the public if they don't buy your concern, seeing instead a three year old having a tantrum in the supermarket because he's been told no, he can't have that chocolate bar - and is threatening to pull down a massive display of baked beans.
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
At least two thirds of the House of Commons.
This would be the group of people that, to date, have enabled and supported every Brexit related item going through the HoC?
I fail to see what you are worried about. You are getting Brexit and it is starting to look like you will get a WTO Brexit.
I still think a fudged deal of some sort will happen BUT, if the current stalemate continues, relations fracture and we get a finger-pointing crash out, what spiteful stuff could the UK govt unilaterally do to respond?
I remember Phil Hammond giving a veiled warning a year or so back that the UK could pull levers which would be damaging to the EU (cutting business taxes, making the financial sector extremely attractive etc)… I know that would mightily piss off the left and bring accusations of turning the UK into a tax haven, but I guess we'd need a positive response.
What would the govt have up its sleeve?
Threaten to nuke those EU countries that aren't in NATO?
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Name one Leaver who has any influence on May, Hammond or Robbins ! May, Hammond, Rudd, Javid, Hunt, Hancock, Brokenshire etc are all Remainers as are a majority of MPs. Fox has no mandate in the negotiations or influence in the Cabinet and neither do Gove or Mordaunt as far as I can see.
The truth is that the Leave Camp is filled with politicians who like the sound of their own voice rather than ones with ability. They sit around and chat and waffle.
That is why an ex-Remain PM is driving Brexit.
Your first sentence is vacuous rubbish lacking evidence with the exception of Johnson. Having a different opinion onto May is not making a pigs ear of one’s portfolio. It simp,y shows May can’t delegate and is a micro manager.
I rather agree with your second paragraph but the same observation also applies to Remainers - unless of course you think we are well governed.
The Remain Camp has the advantage of having slightly more ability. That tiny filip is enough...
Hardly - you can’t say one Remainers is actually doing a good job on running their portfolios let alone Brexit.
Very few Remainers have been allowed near Brexit. I am still stunned by Dominic Raab's performance.
Very few is better than none which is the position with Leavers. Raab didn’t have the job to match his title. He was effectively relegated to doing Baker’s job as May and Robbins kept an iron grip on Brexit decision making.
Mrs C, the deal's down to May and Olly Robbins[sp]. Whether you rate Davis/Raab or not, neither negotiated the deal, neither approved of it.
Davis wanted so-called Canada Plus. If we had that, criticising him for the downsides would be fair enough. But we don't. We have the May-Robbins deal. And, as PM (who circumvented/undercut her own Cabinet ministers), May bears prime responsibility for that.
And May's position is crucial to what happens next. She seems intent on yet more pointless prevarication for nothing (at most, she'll get a non-legally binding utterance of vague support), running down the clock. If her deal gets crushed in the Commons, which seems likely, she can either cling to it or threaten no deal, or a second referendum.
I do wish we'd stop with this ridiculous nonsense of a No Deal referendum.
Any referendum will require the unanimous approval of the Council to extend A50. Does this seem like an EU that's prepared to let the UK spend another six months fannying about before crashing out?
Plus "no deal" would not pass muster with the electoral commission either.
The only possible referendum that can pass the triple lock of Parliament, Electoral Commission and European Council is Deal vs Remain.
It seems this needs to be posted every 20 minutes so the thicko leavers get it into their skulls.
There doesn't seem to be any facility to write posts in crayon because that might be a route into their consciousness.
It doesn't matter as there is no longer time for a referendum or election to occur in time to stop things heading off a cliff on March 29th.
As I seem to have to repeat the issue is now in Parliament's hands (God help us as no one else is going to)...
TMay unilaterally extends A50 (can she? I know she can't ratify the WA on her own) for a few months and there's your referendum.
May wouldn't need the backing of Parliament to ask the EU27 for an extension but they would have to grant it unanimously.
It is clear from the EU press conference that the leaders support TM efforts but are hard hitting at the politicians in the HOC
In truth we have ERG wanting to walk away on a no deal, labour simply wanting to play politics for their own reasons and remainers trying to turn over the referendum
The EU have hit the nail on the head
I think we are simply going to have paralysis until business starts kicking off big time. Perhaps then this nonsense will reach some resolution.
I don’t think she will. She’s the only daughter of two people with strong opinions, and she has a long history of fighting on to, some would say, past, the bitter end.
And so we roll out of the EU on March 29th to a no deal Brexit. Thank God I sell software that is priced in Dollars and Euros as I suspect they are about to be worth a lot more...
Once we have the certainty of No Deal the markets might even recover somewhat.
10/10 for fantasy world.
No deal could create a mighty crash, but the fundamentals are there along with pent up demand. A bounce back is not unlikely at all.
Just look at what happened after we left the ERM in 1992.
It’s quite possible that, following a brief period of adjustment and with the right government in place, no-deal Brexit could be the firing of the starting gun on a decade of economic growth. The EU are absolutely terrified of that happening.
Do things really look like that from thousands of miles away?
The biggest issue is the uncertainty. Business doesn’t like uncertainty, and spending the next decade arguing with the EU just adds more of it. It’s better to leave cleanly and spend the money on short term support for industries that require it.
The biggest issue for me is that those in charge (Mrs May and the civil service) don’t see Brexit as an opportunity. The feeling among my group of expat friends before the referendum was 50/50, but since then it’s been almost universal that having made the decision we should get out properly and not be held hostage by those who will actively wish ill on us. Everyone is expecting a pile of EU legislation specifically targeted at the U.K. from 30th March next year, probably starting with some sort of financial services tax.
I’ll be back in U.K. next week for a wedding and family Christmas, it will be interesting to hear the views of those I meet there.
I'll offer you 2-1 on a financial services tax if you want
So you reckon there’s a 33% chance of it next year? That’s worrying.
I’ll think of a way to frame the bet, but I’m on for a tenner that there will be a serious proposal for an FTT. If I win you can give it to your hosting provider.
I think the likelihood of any pan-EU FTT being implemented is minuscule. I think the likelihood of a proposal is large.
(There's a certain irony that the only FTT in the EU currently is in the UK.)
Yes, the bet would need to hinge on how far it got down the legislative process and on what timescale. It’s definitely the sort of thing someone’s going to propose the day after our politicians leave Brussels if there’s a transition period though.
They’ve also got an EU army to think about, and the copyright link proposal that will break the internet first so it might take a while to actually come into effect.
I do wish we'd stop with this ridiculous nonsense of a No Deal referendum.
Any referendum will require the unanimous approval of the Council to extend A50. Does this seem like an EU that's prepared to let the UK spend another six months fannying about before crashing out?
Plus "no deal" would not pass muster with the electoral commission either.
The only possible referendum that can pass the triple lock of Parliament, Electoral Commission and European Council is Deal vs Remain.
It seems this needs to be posted every 20 minutes so the thicko leavers get it into their skulls.
There doesn't seem to be any facility to write posts in crayon because that might be a route into their consciousness.
It doesn't matter as there is no longer time for a referendum or election to occur in time to stop things heading off a cliff on March 29th.
As I seem to have to repeat the issue is now in Parliament's hands (God help us as no one else is going to)...
TMay unilaterally extends A50 (can she? I know she can't ratify the WA on her own) for a few months and there's your referendum.
No. She can revoke it, but extension requires EU27 to vote unanimously.
She needs the backing of Parliament and the ECJ to revoke it, but not the EU27.
The idea that whilst we were a member we had any influence in what the EU would consider as a positive manner is a joke. We only had the power to disrupt and block. The bottom line is that we have no interest in the EU's aspirations and do not share their goals. As such I would think they would be very pleased to see the back of us.
The way you've set up your concepts assumes the EU was always a foreign power, so it is not surprising what conclusions you reach.
Richard uses the royal 'we'. Any British person who disagrees with him gets othered.
Making stuff up as usual William. I would have thought by now you were getting tired of being called out for that.
"The bottom line is that we have no interest in the EU's aspirations and do not share their goals."
Which we are you talking about? It's not one that includes me, that's for sure.
Let's have a referendum on "join the euro and Schengen" v "WTO Leave" and find out.
I agree, those are the only two possible options for long term good relations with EU.
We are at this stage because of our semi detached half in half out status. We look on and see disadvantages where decisions are taken for the benefit of the Euro group. This will become a greater issue. The unintended consequences of our pre referendum status, along with immigration are the reasons we voted out. To return to be the slightly disconnected member is insanity. Do the same thing and expect a different result? The result will be the same but more so, if you look at the direction the ship is sailing in. I don't want to be the permanently disgruntled member.
Either in or out are the mature options, if you plan adequately for them.
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
No - it is in the hands of Leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) some of whom have legged it and left a ex-Remainer tin-earred PM who is charging us determinately towards WTO Brexit, all assisted by a Parliament who, to date, have backed every law, act or motion to take us out.
Remainers? Where?
Name one Leaver who has any influence on May, Hammond or Robbins ! May, Hammond, Rudd, Javid, Hunt, Hancock, Brokenshire etc are all Remainers as are a majority of MPs. Fox has no mandate in the negotiations or influence in the Cabinet and neither do Gove or Mordaunt as far as I can see.
Davis, Fox and Johnson made a pig's ear of their portfolios. The Leavers failed to organise themselves effectively. FFS they cannot even organise a No Confidence vote which they should have done years ago.
The truth is that the Leave Camp is filled with politicians who like the sound of their own voice rather than ones with ability. They sit around and chat and waffle.
That is why an ex-Remain PM is driving Brexit.
Your first sentence is vacuous rubbish lacking evidence with the exception of Johnson. Having a different opinion onto May is not making a pigs ear of one’s portfolio. It simp,y shows May can’t delegate and is a micro manager.
I rather agree with your second paragraph but the same observation also applies to Remainers - unless of course you think we are well governed.
The Remain Camp has the advantage of having slightly more ability. That tiny filip is enough...
Hardly - you can’t say one Remainers is actually doing a good job on running their portfolios let alone Brexit.
Very few Remainers have been allowed near Brexit. I am still stunned by Dominic Raab's performance.
I do wish we'd stop with this ridiculous nonsense of a No Deal referendum.
Any referendum will require the unanimous approval of the Council to extend A50. Does this seem like an EU that's prepared to let the UK spend another six months fannying about before crashing out?
Plus "no deal" would not pass muster with the electoral commission either.
The only possible referendum that can pass the triple lock of Parliament, Electoral Commission and European Council is Deal vs Remain.
It seems this needs to be posted every 20 minutes so the thicko leavers get it into their skulls.
There doesn't seem to be any facility to write posts in crayon because that might be a route into their consciousness.
It doesn't matter as there is no longer time for a referendum or election to occur in time to stop things heading off a cliff on March 29th.
As I seem to have to repeat the issue is now in Parliament's hands (God help us as no one else is going to)...
TMay unilaterally extends A50 (can she? I know she can't ratify the WA on her own) for a few months and there's your referendum.
No. She can revoke it, but extension requires EU27 to vote unanimously.
She needs the backing of Parliament and the ECJ to revoke it, but not the EU27.
The ECJ say she can revoke it unilaterally. No one knows if OUR Parliament has to be involved - that is still up for debate.
The ECJ case changed everything and yet some seem intent on peddling the fantasy that no deal is a default .
The UK can choose by itself to stop a no deal . If the government chooses not to Its their responsibility.
Some also think MPs and the government will be immune to the chaos before even exit day . A host of businesses will make their intentions known , the pound will implode etc and this will focus minds .
The delusional no deal fantasists can scream as much as they like but by that point no one will be listening .
The games up for the hard Brexiters it’s either a soft Brexit or no Brexit .
I do wish we'd stop with this ridiculous nonsense of a No Deal referendum.
Any referendum will require the unanimous approval of the Council to extend A50. Does this seem like an EU that's prepared to let the UK spend another six months fannying about before crashing out?
Plus "no deal" would not pass muster with the electoral commission either.
The only possible referendum that can pass the triple lock of Parliament, Electoral Commission and European Council is Deal vs Remain.
It seems this needs to be posted every 20 minutes so the thicko leavers get it into their skulls.
There doesn't seem to be any facility to write posts in crayon because that might be a route into their consciousness.
It doesn't matter as there is no longer time for a referendum or election to occur in time to stop things heading off a cliff on March 29th.
As I seem to have to repeat the issue is now in Parliament's hands (God help us as no one else is going to)...
TMay unilaterally extends A50 (can she? I know she can't ratify the WA on her own) for a few months and there's your referendum.
May wouldn't need the backing of Parliament to ask the EU27 for an extension but they would have to grant it unanimously.
I can't see how that is not going to happen. Substitute "heading for a no deal crash out" with "TMay asks, and the EU27 grants an extension to A50" and a lot more of these discussions make sense.
Excuse the public if they don't buy your concern, seeing instead a three year old having a tantrum in the supermarket because he's been told no, he can't have that chocolate bar - and is threatening to pull down a massive display of baked beans.
I'm sure the Moggster at 3 years old wouldn't have been anywhere as vulgar as a supermarket, so you must mean in Fortnum's threatening to pull down a display of marrons glacés.
I still think a fudged deal of some sort will happen BUT, if the current stalemate continues, relations fracture and we get a finger-pointing crash out, what spiteful stuff could the UK govt unilaterally do to respond?
I remember Phil Hammond giving a veiled warning a year or so back that the UK could pull levers which would be damaging to the EU (cutting business taxes, making the financial sector extremely attractive etc)… I know that would mightily piss off the left and bring accusations of turning the UK into a tax haven, but I guess we'd need a positive response.
What would the govt have up its sleeve?
The UK could cut corporation tax further, but the problem is that going from retaining 82% of profits to retaining 90% (you get 10% more) is a less meaningful for most businesses than going from 65% to 82% (a more than 25% jump). And it's not like there aren't other places in Europe with very low corporation tax rates.
We could make it extremely easy for entrepreneurs of all types to come to the UK and start up businesses. (But those visas will, of course, be gamed and we would probably just need to accept that.) We could theoretically cut higher rate taxes for the same reason. But that might not be politically popular.
The issue we, as a country, have is that we already run a meaningful budget deficit, and debt-to-GDP is close to 100%. (And probably above it, if we include off balance sheet items like PFI.) Note to all: back in 2001, our debt-to-GDP level was half the average EU level, it's now twenty points above. This means the room for fiscal maneuver is quite limited.
We could (and should) loosen up regulations. There is an opportunity in VAT (yay!), but in other areas (like product certification or GDPR), we're likely to end up rule takers whether we like it or not.
We could further loosen labour market regulation. We could (and should) remove some of the rules around "bankers bonuses".
These will help. But they aren't panaceas.
But can't we become more like Singapore?
Sure, but Singapore has an economy where consumer spending is a very small share of the economy and has one of the world's highest savings rates. Getting from here to there would be extremely painful.
The idea that whilst we were a member we had any influence in what the EU would consider as a positive manner is a joke. We only had the power to disrupt and block. The bottom line is that we have no interest in the EU's aspirations and do not share their goals. As such I would think they would be very pleased to see the back of us.
The way you've set up your concepts assumes the EU was always a foreign power, so it is not surprising what conclusions you reach.
Richard uses the royal 'we'. Any British person who disagrees with him gets othered.
Making stuff up as usual William. I would have thought by now you were getting tired of being called out for that.
"The bottom line is that we have no interest in the EU's aspirations and do not share their goals."
Which we are you talking about? It's not one that includes me, that's for sure.
Conversely, I have zero interest in living in a Federal Europe. That’s the inevitable end game for Eurozone members. At least you’re an honest federalist.
If only...if only...we had had some kind of a get out clause. Something which we could have used to avoid that ever closer union...non-discrimination for non-Eurozone members...you know, that sort of thing. If only.
Topping, my dear fellow, you aren’t referring to the bucket of warm piss Cameron brought back are you? If it’s not in a treaty it’s worthless. EUCO (as Varadkar himself said today) is a political body. It’s a serious and important body, but from the perspective of the European Project, it comprises a raggle-taggle bunch of ephemeral national leaders.
However, we’ve been down this road many times and we’re never going to agree are we? You think Leavers have fucked up a sweet deal, which is fair enough.
Excuse the public if they don't buy your concern, seeing instead a three year old having a tantrum in the supermarket because he's been told no, he can't have that chocolate bar - and is threatening to pull down a massive display of baked beans.
I'm sure the Moggster at 3 years old wouldn't have been anywhere as vulgar as a supermarket, so you must mean in Fortnum's threatening to pull down a display of marrons glacés.
Start with 2 assertions. We will not be leaving on 29 March without a deal. The WA is the only deal under which we can leave on 29 March.
Combine to derive a conclusion. The WA will be ratified or Article 50 will be extended.
Article 50 extension? Will be granted if we wish to hold a referendum. This can be offered only by Labour, no Tory PM could do it, so it requires Corbyn to become PM and to do so very soon. This will not happen because a pre-Brexit GE is not possible for the Tories and the DUP will not vote him in without one. Therefore a referendum will not happen and neither will an article 50 extension.
Meaning the alternative must be true. The WA will be ratified. It can be ratified only with Labour support, therefore we can draw a further conclusion.
The WA will be ratified with Labour support.
There are 2 ways in which this can occur. (1) A deal is struck such that Labour let it through in return for a post-Brexit GE soon after. (2) A high noon choice is forced between the WA and No Deal, causing sufficient Labour MPs to crack.
Of these it must be (1) since (2) risks No Deal and this contradicts one of our opening assertions. And it makes sense. Such a deal does not involve Labour backtracking since the WA is perfectly compatible with their preferred BINO FTA relationship.
So there it is. Labour do a big beautiful ‘In the National Interest’ deal with the government. The WA is passed, we leave the EU on 29 March 2019 and a General Election follows quickly afterwards.
I do wish we'd stop with this ridiculous nonsense of a No Deal referendum.
Any referendum will require the unanimous approval of the Council to extend A50. Does this seem like an EU that's prepared to let the UK spend another six months fannying about before crashing out?
Plus "no deal" would not pass muster with the electoral commission either.
The only possible referendum that can pass the triple lock of Parliament, Electoral Commission and European Council is Deal vs Remain.
It seems this needs to be posted every 20 minutes so the thicko leavers get it into their skulls.
There doesn't seem to be any facility to write posts in crayon because that might be a route into their consciousness.
It doesn't matter as there is no longer time for a referendum or election to occur in time to stop things heading off a cliff on March 29th.
As I seem to have to repeat the issue is now in Parliament's hands (God help us as no one else is going to)...
TMay unilaterally extends A50 (can she? I know she can't ratify the WA on her own) for a few months and there's your referendum.
No. She can revoke it, but extension requires EU27 to vote unanimously.
She needs the backing of Parliament and the ECJ to revoke it, but not the EU27.
The ECJ say she can revoke it unilaterally. No one knows if OUR Parliament has to be involved - that is still up for debate.
No, the ECJ have said that the UK can revoke it subject to their own veto. They haven't taken a view on whether that would be the government alone or if it would need legislation but it's pretty clear from reading extant statute and court rulings that revocation would require primary legislation.
The ECJ case changed everything and yet some seem intent on peddling the fantasy that no deal is a default .
The UK can choose by itself to stop a no deal . If the government chooses not to Its their responsibility.
Some also think MPs and the government will be immune to the chaos before even exit day . A host of businesses will make their intentions known , the pound will implode etc and this will focus minds .
The delusional no deal fantasists can scream as much as they like but by that point no one will be listening .
The games up for the hard Brexiters it’s either a soft Brexit or no Brexit .
"No deal" still is the default. All the ECJ ruling did was slightly lower the threshold for passing one specific option to substitute for it.
I do wish we'd stop with this ridiculous nonsense of a No Deal referendum.
Any referendum will require the unanimous approval of the Council to extend A50. Does this seem like an EU that's prepared to let the UK spend another six months fannying about before crashing out?
Plus "no deal" would not pass muster with the electoral commission either.
The only possible referendum that can pass the triple lock of Parliament, Electoral Commission and European Council is Deal vs Remain.
It seems this needs to be posted every 20 minutes so the thicko leavers get it into their skulls.
There doesn't seem to be any facility to write posts in crayon because that might be a route into their consciousness.
It doesn't matter as there is no longer time for a referendum or election to occur in time to stop things heading off a cliff on March 29th.
As I seem to have to repeat the issue is now in Parliament's hands (God help us as no one else is going to)...
TMay unilaterally extends A50 (can she? I know she can't ratify the WA on her own) for a few months and there's your referendum.
May wouldn't need the backing of Parliament to ask the EU27 for an extension but they would have to grant it unanimously.
I can't see how that is not going to happen.
It only takes one of them to think that if they refuse, Parliament will revoke.
No deal by accident has always been a bigger risk than no deal by agreement.
Start with 2 assertions. We will not be leaving on 29 March without a deal. The WA is the only deal under which we can leave on 29 March.
Combine to derive a conclusion. The WA will be ratified or Article 50 will be extended.
Article 50 extension? Will be granted if we wish to hold a referendum. This can be offered only by Labour, no Tory PM could do it, so it requires Corbyn to become PM and to do so very soon. This will not happen because a pre-Brexit GE is not possible for the Tories and the DUP will not vote him in without one. Therefore a referendum will not happen and neither will an article 50 extension.
Meaning the alternative must be true. The WA will be ratified. It can be ratified only with Labour support, therefore we can draw a further conclusion.
The WA will be ratified with Labour support.
There are 2 ways in which this can occur. (1) A deal is struck such that Labour let it through in return for a post-Brexit GE soon after. (2) A high noon choice is forced between the WA and No Deal, causing sufficient Labour MPs to crack.
Of these it must be (1) since (2) risks No Deal and this contradicts one of our opening assertions. And it makes sense. Such a deal does not involve Labour backtracking since the WA is perfectly compatible with their preferred BINO FTA relationship.
So there it is. Labour do a big beautiful ‘In the National Interest’ deal with the government. The WA is passed, we leave the EU on 29 March 2019 and a General Election follows quickly afterwards.
TINOPO.
May would be prevented by the Cabinet of offering a GE. Next..
I don’t think she will. She’s the only daughter of two people with strong opinions, and she has a long history of fighting on to, some would say, past, the bitter end.
And so we roll out of the EU on March 29th to a no deal Brexit. Thank God I sell software that is priced in Dollars and Euros as I suspect they are about to be worth a lot more...
I fear your first sentence is right. However one at least of my sons is in a similar position to yourself, and in a good position. The only snag as far as I am concerned is that he has three daughters at a fee-paying school, which will make it difficult for him to help out his poor old Mum and Dad when pensions crash.
No it is not. It is a membership organisation and Free Trade Area.
An organisation intent on ever closer union that we’ve said we’re leaving.
And making a total pig's ear of doing so.
What do you expect. Brexit is in the hands of Remainers who see this purely as matter of immigration control, who have failed to prepare for it, and don’t have a clue what to do when it happens.
Remainers? Where?
Name one Leaver who has any influence on May, Hammond or Robbins ! May, Hammond, Rudd, Javid, Hunt, Hancock, Brokenshire etc are all Remainers as are a majority of MPs. Fox has no mandate in the negotiations or influence in the Cabinet and neither do Gove or Mordaunt as far as I can see.
Davis, Fox and Johnson made a pig's ear of their portfolios. The Leavers failed to organise themselves effectively. FFS they cannot even organise a No Confidence vote which they should have done years ago.
The truth is that the Leave Camp is filled with politicians who like the sound of their own voice rather than ones with ability. They sit around and chat and waffle.
That is why an ex-Remain PM is driving Brexit.
Your first sentence is vacuous rubbish lacking evidence with the exception of Johnson. Having a different opinion onto May is not making a pigs ear of one’s portfolio. It simp,y shows May can’t delegate and is a micro manager.
I rather agree with your second paragraph but the same observation also applies to Remainers - unless of course you think we are well governed.
The Remain Camp has the advantage of having slightly more ability. That tiny filip is enough...
Hardly - you can’t say one Remainers is actually doing a good job on running their portfolios let alone Brexit.
Very few Remainers have been allowed near Brexit. I am still stunned by Dominic Raab's performance.
Apart from Robbins, Hammond, May...
The key people making decisions outside cabinet on May's sofa also included Liddington, Barwell and Clark all very strong pro-EU people.
What is it with the EU demanding that countries vote until they give the right answer?
God, I'm sick of this bollocks from the Brexiteers.
If we were in a situation where there had been no effort made to enact the referendum result, it was still a short time since then, and there was any prospect of one side holding a third, fourth, fifth, or whatever number referendum until the "right" result was achieved, I'd be sympathetic.
None of those is true.
It's been longer than the interval between the last two General Elections, all we've seemed to do since 2016 has been bloody Brexiting (ignoring the paranoia about May deliberately intending to derail Brexit and implicitly being willing to sacrifice the Conservative Party to do so), and if a referendum results in "Sign the Deal", it's damned well over. Once the Withdrawal Agreement is signed, we cease to be an EU member.
So what's the route to "voting until we give the right answer" if the Deal wins? If the Deal wins, It's over and out
You're assuming that the Commons would accept it.
In which case it's all moot, we ain't leaving, they're going to revoke A50 anyway. After all, if they're willing to ignore two referendums, they're certainly willing to ignore one.
I don’t think she will. She’s the only daughter of two people with strong opinions, and she has a long history of fighting on to, some would say, past, the bitter end.
And so we roll out of the EU on March 29th to a no deal Brexit. Thank God I sell software that is priced in Dollars and Euros as I suspect they are about to be worth a lot more...
I fear your first sentence is right. However one at least of my sons is in a similar position to yourself, and in a good position. The only snag as far as I am concerned is that he has three daughters at a fee-paying school, which will make it difficult for him to help out his poor old Mum and Dad when pensions crash.
Completed your last sentence for you
when pensions crash again. Never forget Gordon 'Pension Destroyer' Brown
The ECJ case changed everything and yet some seem intent on peddling the fantasy that no deal is a default .
It is not a fantasy. It is encoded in law.
You’re talking as if it’s set in stone ! All laws can be changed and you are aware the executive can change exit day with a mere stroke of the pen. Good old Henry Vlll powers . The Gina Miller case only deals with the removal of rights without parliamentary approval that’s why Article 50 needed their consent . If rights aren’t changed as in the status quo remains May can revoke the Article without needing MPs , she can also seek an extension or change exit day because rights aren’t abrogated !
Abrogated rights is basically the Gina Miller case in a nutshell .
I do wish we'd stop with this ridiculous nonsense of a No Deal referendum.
Any referendum will require the unanimous approval of the Council to extend A50. Does this seem like an EU that's prepared to let the UK spend another six months fannying about before crashing out?
Plus "no deal" would not pass muster with the electoral commission either.
The only possible referendum that can pass the triple lock of Parliament, Electoral Commission and European Council is Deal vs Remain.
It seems this needs to be posted every 20 minutes so the thicko leavers get it into their skulls.
There doesn't seem to be any facility to write posts in crayon because that might be a route into their consciousness.
It doesn't matter as there is no longer time for a referendum or election to occur in time to stop things heading off a cliff on March 29th.
As I seem to have to repeat the issue is now in Parliament's hands (God help us as no one else is going to)...
TMay unilaterally extends A50 (can she? I know she can't ratify the WA on her own) for a few months and there's your referendum.
No. She can revoke it, but extension requires EU27 to vote unanimously.
She needs the backing of Parliament and the ECJ to revoke it, but not the EU27.
The ECJ say she can revoke it unilaterally. No one knows if OUR Parliament has to be involved - that is still up for debate.
No, the ECJ have said that the UK can revoke it subject to their own veto. They haven't taken a view on whether that would be the government alone or if it would need legislation but it's pretty clear from reading extant statute and court rulings that revocation would require primary legislation.
Any attempt to revoke A50 has to satisfy both the CJEU and the UK Supreme Court.
Even if the CJEU were willing to rule that a letter from the PM was sufficient, under EU law, to revoke A50, the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 would still remain in force, which repeals the European Communities Act 1972 on 29th March 2019. That can only be repealed by another statute, otherwise the UK Supreme Court will uphold it.
I still think a fudged deal of some sort will happen BUT, if the current stalemate continues, relations fracture and we get a finger-pointing crash out, what spiteful stuff could the UK govt unilaterally do to respond?
I remember Phil Hammond giving a veiled warning a year or so back that the UK could pull levers which would be damaging to the EU (cutting business taxes, making the financial sector extremely attractive etc)… I know that would mightily piss off the left and bring accusations of turning the UK into a tax haven, but I guess we'd need a positive response.
What would the govt have up its sleeve?
The UK could cut corporation tax further, but the problem is that going from retaining 82% of profits to retaining 90% (you get 10% more) is a less meaningful for most businesses than going from 65% to 82% (a more than 25% jump). And it's not like there aren't other places in Europe with very low corporation tax rates.
We could make it extremely easy for entrepreneurs of all types to come to the UK and start up businesses. (But those visas will, of course, be gamed and we would probably just need to accept that.) We could theoretically cut higher rate taxes for the same reason. But that might not be politically popular.
The issue we, as a country, have is that we already run a meaningful budget deficit, and debt-to-GDP is close to 100%. (And probably above it, if we include off balance sheet items like PFI.) Note to all: back in 2001, our debt-to-GDP level was half the average EU level, it's now twenty points above. This means the room for fiscal maneuver is quite limited.
We could (and should) loosen up regulations. There is an opportunity in VAT (yay!), but in other areas (like product certification or GDPR), we're likely to end up rule takers whether we like it or not.
We could further loosen labour market regulation. We could (and should) remove some of the rules around "bankers bonuses".
These will help. But they aren't panaceas.
But can't we become more like Singapore?
Sure, but Singapore has an economy where consumer spending is a very small share of the economy and has one of the world's highest savings rates. Getting from here to there would be extremely painful.
Thank you, really appreciate the response!
I suppose, if No Deal does happen, we will be forced into a response in order to allay business fears. I suspect the EU will fear the fact that as one country we'll be a lot daintier in manoeuvring than they will as a 27-state bloc.
The ECJ case changed everything and yet some seem intent on peddling the fantasy that no deal is a default .
It is not a fantasy. It is encoded in law.
You’re talking as if it’s set in stone ! All laws can be changed and you are aware the executive can change exit day with a mere stroke of the pen. Good old Henry Vlll powers . The Gina Miller case only deals with the removal of rights without parliamentary approval that’s why Article 50 needed their consent . If rights aren’t changed as in the status quo remains May can revoke the Article without needing MPs , she can also seek an extension or change exit day because rights aren’t abrogated !
Abrogated rights is basically the Gina Miller case in a nutshell .
No, May cannot prevent the 2017 Act from coming into force. It does require another statute to prevent it from taking effect.
What is it with the EU demanding that countries vote until they give the right answer?
God, I'm sick of this bollocks from the Brexiteers.
If we were in a situation where there had been no effort made to enact the referendum result, it was still a short time since then, and there was any prospect of one side holding a third, fourth, fifth, or whatever number referendum until the "right" result was achieved, I'd be sympathetic.
None of those is true.
It's been longer than the interval between the last two General Elections, all we've seemed to do since 2016 has been bloody Brexiting (ignoring the paranoia about May deliberately intending to derail Brexit and implicitly being willing to sacrifice the Conservative Party to do so), and if a referendum results in "Sign the Deal", it's damned well over. Once the Withdrawal Agreement is signed, we cease to be an EU member.
So what's the route to "voting until we give the right answer" if the Deal wins? If the Deal wins, It's over and out
You're assuming that the Commons would accept it.
In which case it's all moot, we ain't leaving, they're going to revoke A50 anyway. After all, if they're willing to ignore two referendums, they're certainly willing to ignore one.
I don’t think she will. She’s the only daughter of two people with strong opinions, and she has a long history of fighting on to, some would say, past, the bitter end.
And so we roll out of the EU on March 29th to a no deal Brexit. Thank God I sell software that is priced in Dollars and Euros as I suspect they are about to be worth a lot more...
I fear your first sentence is right. However one at least of my sons is in a similar position to yourself, and in a good position. The only snag as far as I am concerned is that he has three daughters at a fee-paying school, which will make it difficult for him to help out his poor old Mum and Dad when pensions crash.
Completed your last sentence for you
when pensions crash again. Never forget Gordon 'Pension Destroyer' Brown
I was retired when Brown was PM, so no probs. On reflection my life has generally been better under Labour rather than the Tories. Pretty well the only thing I have to thank Tories for is Rab Butlers 1944 Education Act.
A referendum where the options are May's Deal or No Deal is probably the least painful way out of this. Respects the original referendum but allows voters a say over the remaining options.
Impressively awful ratings for EVERYONE in the latest YouGov. Who do you like? May? Corbyn? Cable? Johnson? Tories? Labour? LibDems? UKIP? The slow race is won by Labour, which just manages to get to 30% who like us. Everyone else is either worse or much worse.
It reminds me of those US surveys which regularly show huge majorities for "Congress is doing a bad job", which when elections come round don't seem to depress turnout or produce amazingly different results.
Impressively awful ratings for EVERYONE in the latest YouGov. Who do you like? May? Corbyn? Cable? Johnson? Tories? Labour? LibDems? UKIP? The slow race is won by Labour, which just manages to get to 30% who like us. Everyone else is either worse or much worse.
It reminds me of those US surveys which regularly show huge majorities for "Congress is doing a bad job", which when elections come round don't seem to depress turnout or produce amazingly different results.
Yet, it could be worse. Our politicians are still far more popular than Emmanuel Macron.
I do wish we'd stop with this ridiculous nonsense of a No Deal referendum.
Any referendum will require the unanimous approval of the Council to extend A50. Does this seem like an EU that's prepared to let the UK spend another six months fannying about before crashing out?
Plus "no deal" would not pass muster with the electoral commission either.
The only possible referendum that can pass the triple lock of Parliament, Electoral Commission and European Council is Deal vs Remain.
It seems this needs to be posted every 20 minutes so the thicko leavers get it into their skulls.
There doesn't seem to be any facility to write posts in crayon because that might be a route into their consciousness.
It doesn't matter as there is no longer time for a referendum or election to occur in time to stop things heading off a cliff on March 29th.
As I seem to have to repeat the issue is now in Parliament's hands (God help us as no one else is going to)...
TMay unilaterally extends A50 (can she? I know she can't ratify the WA on her own) for a few months and there's your referendum.
No. She can revoke it, but extension requires EU27 to vote unanimously.
She needs the backing of Parliament and the ECJ to revoke it, but not the EU27.
The ECJ say she can revoke it unilaterally. No one knows if OUR Parliament has to be involved - that is still up for debate.
No, the ECJ have said that the UK can revoke it subject to their own veto. They haven't taken a view on whether that would be the government alone or if it would need legislation but it's pretty clear from reading extant statute and court rulings that revocation would require primary legislation.
Any attempt to revoke A50 has to satisfy both the CJEU and the UK Supreme Court.
Even if the CJEU were willing to rule that a letter from the PM was sufficient, under EU law, to revoke A50, the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 would still remain in force, which repeals the European Communities Act 1972 on 29th March 2019. That can only be repealed by another statute, otherwise the UK Supreme Court will uphold it.
I think you're getting confused with the European Union (Withdrawal) Act - section 1 of this technically isn't in force at the moment but nonetheless the hurdle to activate it is so low I can't see how the ECJ could accept revocation with it still on the statute book.
Impressively awful ratings for EVERYONE in the latest YouGov. Who do you like? May? Corbyn? Cable? Johnson? Tories? Labour? LibDems? UKIP? The slow race is won by Labour, which just manages to get to 30% who like us. Everyone else is either worse or much worse.
It reminds me of those US surveys which regularly show huge majorities for "Congress is doing a bad job", which when elections come round don't seem to depress turnout or produce amazingly different results.
Which is another reason that those in power will never give up FPTP in the US or here. The potency of only one real alternative to the incumbent (both to the alternative and to the incumbent) in terms of maintaining electoral power is too strong. And those who benefit, if they've got any level of intelligence at all, will always be able to rationalise it - even to themselves.
If we lurch, despite Parliament wishing to avoid it, towards a “no deal”, with delusions it can be “managed” into a quick and dirty FTA, that will not end happily or quickly.
I am in no position to second guess those who have to try and model the macro effects of such a scenario. No developed country has left a trade bloc before, let alone in disorderly fashion, and let alone one which has become a lot more than a trade bloc.
But I do fully understand the legal realities. And because so-called “WTO rules” deliver precisely no continuity in multiple key sectors of the economy, we could expect disruption on a scale and of a length that no-one has experienced in the developed world in the last couple of generations.
The complacency that such things cannot and would not ever really happen in modern economies is staggering. Mercifully, it is not shared in either Whitehall or the Berlaymont. But these are outcomes which proper political leadership is about both understanding, contingency planning against – and avoiding.
Markets continue to react, or have until this week, as if something must turn up and that “no deal” is a virtually unimaginable scenario for politicians professing to be serious, to contemplate. That risk has therefore been seriously underpriced for a year or more, because we are dealing with a political generation which has no serious experience of bad times and is frankly cavalier about precipitating events they could not then control, but feel they might exploit.
Nothing is more redolent of the pre First World War era, when very few believed that a very long period of European peace and equilibrium could be shattered in months.
The trouble is that we have a deal. In reality if MPs were not looking to simply stop Brexit by any means, the number of MPs arguing for No Deal are less than 100 and absolutely could not win in a vote between Deal and No Deal.
So right now the only people actually stopping us Leaving with a deal are the majority of the MPs who want to stop us leaving at all.
The Commons have had numerous opportunities to stop Brexit in its tracks and haven't done so. The reality is that they are humans and get carried along by events. Remember back in 2016 and at least until the election in 2017 Brexit was all conquering. It won the referendum. The government was behind it and the people were behind the government - in eye watering quantities if you believed the polls. And most of us on here did.
Brexit was inevitable and unstoppable.
It's only now that it is proving to be unworkable that MPs are beginning to realise that they can't back it.
A referendum where the options are May's Deal or No Deal is probably the least painful way out of this. Respects the original referendum but allows voters a say over the remaining options.
A referendum where the options are May's Deal or No Deal is probably the least painful way out of this. Respects the original referendum but allows voters a say over the remaining options.
There are two major problems with this:
(1) Parliament doesn't want either option. We've already seen what happens if Parliament calls a referendum which includes an option they don't want to implement; (2) You risk "no deal" not on the merits of the question but on a general "the government wants X, I think the government is incompetent/divided/full of Evil Tories so I therefore want Not X" line of thought.
These are smaller problems than putting Remain back on the ballot paper. They are still big problems.
The Tories and David Cameron in particular should pay a huge price for taking us to this position.
I will always have sympathy for Cameron because the ERG are a pain in the arse and the 2012-2015 period looked extremely precarious for the Tories with UKIP seemingly on the march. Offering a referendum and campaigning to stay in the EU was his only option from a Tory point of view. If he hadn't done it then UKIP would've stolen his right flank and Labour would've likely won enough marginals to shade the 2015 GE.
With hindsight, the best thing (from a centre-ground Tory point of view) that could've happened was for the Lib Dems to retain their seats and enter into another coalition on the agreement that the referendum be scrapped.
From a Labour (and a countrywide) point of view, we would've been better off with Miliband winning.
But I still think the arc towards a referendum was inevitable. Whether anyone likes it or not our EU membership was a subject which needed to be tackled at some point.
The Tories and David Cameron in particular should pay a huge price for taking us to this position.
Cameron is quite young so he will have many years to regret his arrogance and he will probably still be here when his decision to hold the referendum is judged alongside Munich and the loss of the American colonies as one of the most disastrous episodes in British history.
As for the Tories, who cares about them? Maybe Brexit will destroy them for good and they will split into an English nationalist, UKIP lite wing and a Christian Democrat moderate wing. At the moment that seems the most likely, the ERG are already a separate party in all but name.
If we lurch, despite Parliament wishing to avoid it, towards a “no deal”, with delusions it can be “managed” into a quick and dirty FTA, that will not end happily or quickly.
I am in no position to second guess those who have to try and model the macro effects of such a scenario. No developed country has left a trade bloc before, let alone in disorderly fashion, and let alone one which has become a lot more than a trade bloc.
But I do fully understand the legal realities. And because so-called “WTO rules” deliver precisely no continuity in multiple key sectors of the economy, we could expect disruption on a scale and of a length that no-one has experienced in the developed world in the last couple of generations.
The complacency that such things cannot and would not ever really happen in modern economies is staggering. Mercifully, it is not shared in either Whitehall or the Berlaymont. But these are outcomes which proper political leadership is about both understanding, contingency planning against – and avoiding.
Markets continue to react, or have until this week, as if something must turn up and that “no deal” is a virtually unimaginable scenario for politicians professing to be serious, to contemplate. That risk has therefore been seriously underpriced for a year or more, because we are dealing with a political generation which has no serious experience of bad times and is frankly cavalier about precipitating events they could not then control, but feel they might exploit.
Nothing is more redolent of the pre First World War era, when very few believed that a very long period of European peace and equilibrium could be shattered in months.
The trouble is that we have a deal. In reality if MPs were not looking to simply stop Brexit by any means, the number of MPs arguing for No Deal are less than 100 and absolutely could not win in a vote between Deal and No Deal.
So right now the only people actually stopping us Leaving with a deal are the majority of the MPs who want to stop us leaving at all.
Brexit was inevitable and unstoppable.
It's only now that it is proving to be unworkable that MPs are beginning to realise that they can't back it.
It's not so much that Brexit is unworkable, rather they've belatedly woken up to the fact that they don't like it. They really should not have voted in favour of triggering A50 if they couldn't face leaving the EU.
It is clear from the EU press conference that the leaders support TM efforts but are hard hitting at the politicians in the HOC
In truth we have ERG wanting to walk away on a no deal, labour simply wanting to play politics for their own reasons and remainers trying to turn over the referendum
The EU have hit the nail on the head
I think we are simply going to have paralysis until business starts kicking off big time. Perhaps then this nonsense will reach some resolution.
Assuming that business does start kicking off big time, of course, rather than treating the whole thing with weary resignation.
Nobody who has been watching this pantomime play out - probably before, but certainly after the General Election debacle - will have been in any doubt as to the seriousness of the difficulties that this Government would have in both negotiating a withdrawal agreement and getting it through a Parliament in which there's no majority for very much at all, apart from voting itself a regular annual pay hike. It would therefore be crackers for any business not to have drafted contingency plans for Hard Brexit, and I'd imagine that most of them are already putting said plans into effect now if they've not done so already.
Whilst it is possible to have sympathy with the people running the most exposed businesses, such as haulage companies, who may not be able to do very much to mitigate the situation, one is compelled to wonder why companies more generally would only just be waking up to the possibility of dislocation now, or even remaining in a state of blissful ignorance until around about February or March time - and, as a consequence, flying into a panic flap over the situation? I work for a FTSE100 company and our board have been working on the assumption of no deal, and telling us as such, for some considerable period of time now.
On your other point, I also wish that Parliament would get on with it and make its mind up, but I'm not holding my breath. Given both that there is no majority for anything except staying in the EU, and that even those holding that position are deeply divided across both party lines and multiple policy positions (Andrex soft Brexit? General Election? 2nd referendum? Revocation by Parliament?) there is no sign of any progress towards a resolution and the distinct possibility that none may ever be found: the most likely outcome of all this is still Hard Brexit on March 29th. Indeed, for all the good MPs are doing right now they might just as well all go home, and not bother to come back to Westminster until May finally brings the meaningful vote forward (or, if she never tries, once we get to January 21st and the game enters stoppage time.)
Impressively awful ratings for EVERYONE in the latest YouGov. Who do you like? May? Corbyn? Cable? Johnson? Tories? Labour? LibDems? UKIP? The slow race is won by Labour, which just manages to get to 30% who like us. Everyone else is either worse or much worse.
It reminds me of those US surveys which regularly show huge majorities for "Congress is doing a bad job", which when elections come round don't seem to depress turnout or produce amazingly different results.
"Don't Know" has regularly been leading or just slightly trailing May for Best PM (with Corbyn consistently trailing in third place). Since in part DK on this question is probably a good proxy for "Neither" there's an opportunity for the first party to replace its leader with someone better (if there's someone better to be had...)
May has until the end of January - pass her deal or she'll be escorted out of no 10.
Indeed. And it only passes with Labour support. Ditto if she is replaced. The WA cannot pass without Labour support. And the WA must pass or else it's article 50 extension and a referendum. But no referendum possible with a tory PM. Hence the WA must pass with Labour support. Which they give in return for the promise of a 2019 GE post 29 March. That is what I foresee. Not quite predict, only a fool would predict, but foresee.
Impressively awful ratings for EVERYONE in the latest YouGov. Who do you like? May? Corbyn? Cable? Johnson? Tories? Labour? LibDems? UKIP? The slow race is won by Labour, which just manages to get to 30% who like us. Everyone else is either worse or much worse.
It reminds me of those US surveys which regularly show huge majorities for "Congress is doing a bad job", which when elections come round don't seem to depress turnout or produce amazingly different results.
During 2018, the party that has dropped the most is Labour, and the leader who has dropped the most is Corbyn. That's quite an achievement, opposing a government that has gone wrong at almost every turn.
Comments
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38503504
So right now the only people actually stopping us Leaving with a deal are the majority of the MPs who want to stop us leaving at all.
I still think a fudged deal of some sort will happen BUT, if the current stalemate continues, relations fracture and we get a finger-pointing crash out, what spiteful stuff could the UK govt unilaterally do to respond?
I remember Phil Hammond giving a veiled warning a year or so back that the UK could pull levers which would be damaging to the EU (cutting business taxes, making the financial sector extremely attractive etc)… I know that would mightily piss off the left and bring accusations of turning the UK into a tax haven, but I guess we'd need a positive response.
What would the govt have up its sleeve?
(There's a certain irony that the only FTT in the EU currently is in the UK.)
I rather agree with your second paragraph but the same observation also applies to Remainers - unless of course you think we are well governed.
I think it is more he is a calculating scheming bastard...
Remember that, post-Brexit, we will be a giant in world trade, straddling the globe as supplicant countries beg to send their tarriff-free goods to us.
No sign in the polls that a second election would solve anything.
In truth we have ERG wanting to walk away on a no deal, labour simply wanting to play politics for their own reasons and remainers trying to turn over the referendum
The EU have hit the nail on the head
The public will see MPs rending their garments at the foreseen horrors of a No Deal Brexit - yet are still prepared to play games that might deliver the Very Thing They Supposedly Fear The Most For Us All. There is on the table something which would prevent No Deal happening on a single vote. Excuse the public if they don't buy your concern, seeing instead a three year old having a tantrum in the supermarket because he's been told no, he can't have that chocolate bar - and is threatening to pull down a massive display of baked beans.
I fail to see what you are worried about. You are getting Brexit and it is starting to look like you will get a WTO Brexit.
Davis wanted so-called Canada Plus. If we had that, criticising him for the downsides would be fair enough. But we don't. We have the May-Robbins deal. And, as PM (who circumvented/undercut her own Cabinet ministers), May bears prime responsibility for that.
And May's position is crucial to what happens next. She seems intent on yet more pointless prevarication for nothing (at most, she'll get a non-legally binding utterance of vague support), running down the clock. If her deal gets crushed in the Commons, which seems likely, she can either cling to it or threaten no deal, or a second referendum.
They’ve also got an EU army to think about, and the copyright link proposal that will break the internet first so it might take a while to actually come into effect.
One would think away from no deal.
We are at this stage because of our semi detached half in half out status. We look on and see disadvantages where decisions are taken for the benefit of the Euro group. This will become a greater issue. The unintended consequences of our pre referendum status, along with immigration are the reasons we voted out. To return to be the slightly disconnected member is insanity. Do the same thing and expect a different result? The result will be the same but more so, if you look at the direction the ship is sailing in. I don't want to be the permanently disgruntled member.
Either in or out are the mature options, if you plan adequately for them.
The UK can choose by itself to stop a no deal . If the government chooses not to Its their responsibility.
Some also think MPs and the government will be immune to the chaos before even exit day . A host of businesses will make their intentions known , the pound will implode etc and this will focus minds .
The delusional no deal fantasists can scream as much as they like but by that point no one will be listening .
The games up for the hard Brexiters it’s either a soft Brexit or no Brexit .
We could make it extremely easy for entrepreneurs of all types to come to the UK and start up businesses. (But those visas will, of course, be gamed and we would probably just need to accept that.) We could theoretically cut higher rate taxes for the same reason. But that might not be politically popular.
The issue we, as a country, have is that we already run a meaningful budget deficit, and debt-to-GDP is close to 100%. (And probably above it, if we include off balance sheet items like PFI.) Note to all: back in 2001, our debt-to-GDP level was half the average EU level, it's now twenty points above. This means the room for fiscal maneuver is quite limited.
We could (and should) loosen up regulations. There is an opportunity in VAT (yay!), but in other areas (like product certification or GDPR), we're likely to end up rule takers whether we like it or not.
We could further loosen labour market regulation. We could (and should) remove some of the rules around "bankers bonuses".
These will help. But they aren't panaceas.
But can't we become more like Singapore?
Sure, but Singapore has an economy where consumer spending is a very small share of the economy and has one of the world's highest savings rates. Getting from here to there would be extremely painful.
However, we’ve been down this road many times and we’re never going to agree are we? You think Leavers have fucked up a sweet deal, which is fair enough.
It frees MPs from the need to take a decision, while still leaving them free to point the finger at each other.
Start with 2 assertions. We will not be leaving on 29 March without a deal. The WA is the only deal under which we can leave on 29 March.
Combine to derive a conclusion. The WA will be ratified or Article 50 will be extended.
Article 50 extension? Will be granted if we wish to hold a referendum. This can be offered only by Labour, no Tory PM could do it, so it requires Corbyn to become PM and to do so very soon. This will not happen because a pre-Brexit GE is not possible for the Tories and the DUP will not vote him in without one. Therefore a referendum will not happen and neither will an article 50 extension.
Meaning the alternative must be true. The WA will be ratified. It can be ratified only with Labour support, therefore we can draw a further conclusion.
The WA will be ratified with Labour support.
There are 2 ways in which this can occur. (1) A deal is struck such that Labour let it through in return for a post-Brexit GE soon after. (2) A high noon choice is forced between the WA and No Deal, causing sufficient Labour MPs to crack.
Of these it must be (1) since (2) risks No Deal and this contradicts one of our opening assertions. And it makes sense. Such a deal does not involve Labour backtracking since the WA is perfectly compatible with their preferred BINO FTA relationship.
So there it is. Labour do a big beautiful ‘In the National Interest’ deal with the government. The WA is passed, we leave the EU on 29 March 2019 and a General Election follows quickly afterwards.
TINOPO.
No deal by accident has always been a bigger risk than no deal by agreement.
After all, if they're willing to ignore two referendums, they're certainly willing to ignore one.
when pensions crash again. Never forget Gordon 'Pension Destroyer' Brown
You’re talking as if it’s set in stone ! All laws can be changed and you are aware the executive can change exit day with a mere stroke of the pen. Good old Henry Vlll powers . The Gina Miller case only deals with the removal of rights without parliamentary approval that’s why Article 50 needed their consent . If rights aren’t changed as in the status quo remains May can revoke the Article without needing MPs , she can also seek an extension or change exit day because rights aren’t abrogated !
Abrogated rights is basically the Gina Miller case in a nutshell .
Even if the CJEU were willing to rule that a letter from the PM was sufficient, under EU law, to revoke A50, the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 would still remain in force, which repeals the European Communities Act 1972 on 29th March 2019. That can only be repealed by another statute, otherwise the UK Supreme Court will uphold it.
I suppose, if No Deal does happen, we will be forced into a response in order to allay business fears. I suspect the EU will fear the fact that as one country we'll be a lot daintier in manoeuvring than they will as a 27-state bloc.
The Tories and David Cameron in particular should pay a huge price for taking us to this position.
Anyway, domestic duties approach...
Later peeps!
On reflection my life has generally been better under Labour rather than the Tories. Pretty well the only thing I have to thank Tories for is Rab Butlers 1944 Education Act.
Best bad option available to her and her party. Ditto for JC and his party.
And therefore the most likely unlikely outcome of this impasse.
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/1srrdfz0ub/YG Trackers - Favourability.pdf
It reminds me of those US surveys which regularly show huge majorities for "Congress is doing a bad job", which when elections come round don't seem to depress turnout or produce amazingly different results.
The potency of only one real alternative to the incumbent (both to the alternative and to the incumbent) in terms of maintaining electoral power is too strong. And those who benefit, if they've got any level of intelligence at all, will always be able to rationalise it - even to themselves.
Brexit was inevitable and unstoppable.
It's only now that it is proving to be unworkable that MPs are beginning to realise that they can't back it.
(1) Parliament doesn't want either option. We've already seen what happens if Parliament calls a referendum which includes an option they don't want to implement;
(2) You risk "no deal" not on the merits of the question but on a general "the government wants X, I think the government is incompetent/divided/full of Evil Tories so I therefore want Not X" line of thought.
These are smaller problems than putting Remain back on the ballot paper. They are still big problems.
With hindsight, the best thing (from a centre-ground Tory point of view) that could've happened was for the Lib Dems to retain their seats and enter into another coalition on the agreement that the referendum be scrapped.
From a Labour (and a countrywide) point of view, we would've been better off with Miliband winning.
But I still think the arc towards a referendum was inevitable. Whether anyone likes it or not our EU membership was a subject which needed to be tackled at some point.
As for the Tories, who cares about them? Maybe Brexit will destroy them for good and they will split into an English nationalist, UKIP lite wing and a Christian Democrat moderate wing. At the moment that seems the most likely, the ERG are already a separate party in all but name.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-conway-calls-trump-a-liar-after-kellyanne-conway-defends-him-on-tv/2018/12/14/53d2704c-ffa1-11e8-83c0-b06139e540e5_story.html
Nobody who has been watching this pantomime play out - probably before, but certainly after the General Election debacle - will have been in any doubt as to the seriousness of the difficulties that this Government would have in both negotiating a withdrawal agreement and getting it through a Parliament in which there's no majority for very much at all, apart from voting itself a regular annual pay hike. It would therefore be crackers for any business not to have drafted contingency plans for Hard Brexit, and I'd imagine that most of them are already putting said plans into effect now if they've not done so already.
Whilst it is possible to have sympathy with the people running the most exposed businesses, such as haulage companies, who may not be able to do very much to mitigate the situation, one is compelled to wonder why companies more generally would only just be waking up to the possibility of dislocation now, or even remaining in a state of blissful ignorance until around about February or March time - and, as a consequence, flying into a panic flap over the situation? I work for a FTSE100 company and our board have been working on the assumption of no deal, and telling us as such, for some considerable period of time now.
On your other point, I also wish that Parliament would get on with it and make its mind up, but I'm not holding my breath. Given both that there is no majority for anything except staying in the EU, and that even those holding that position are deeply divided across both party lines and multiple policy positions (Andrex soft Brexit? General Election? 2nd referendum? Revocation by Parliament?) there is no sign of any progress towards a resolution and the distinct possibility that none may ever be found: the most likely outcome of all this is still Hard Brexit on March 29th. Indeed, for all the good MPs are doing right now they might just as well all go home, and not bother to come back to Westminster until May finally brings the meaningful vote forward (or, if she never tries, once we get to January 21st and the game enters stoppage time.)