politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the ERG plotters get their 48 letters today and TMay loses
Comments
-
Who the hell are they? I can identify just two.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not in our household and we are voting members of the partydixiedean said:
Those 7 aren't very popular round these parts.Xenon said:
White men really are despised in this country aren't they?Big_G_NorthWales said:
They are a disgrace. Not a woman in sight and no diversity.williamglenn said:
They have no awareness of just how bad that photo looks0 -
Peter Lilley but the rest, I have no idearural_voter said:
Who the hell are they? I can identify just two.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not in our household and we are voting members of the partydixiedean said:
Those 7 aren't very popular round these parts.Xenon said:
White men really are despised in this country aren't they?Big_G_NorthWales said:
They are a disgrace. Not a woman in sight and no diversity.williamglenn said:
They have no awareness of just how bad that photo looks0 -
Theresa May gives a huge sigh of relief?Sean_F said:
Out of curiosity, what happens if the draft deal is rejected by EU ministers (France and Spain seem unhappy?)0 -
Again I think we are making progress. Yes, there's absolutely nothing we could do to prepare for this eventuality. OK, so it's just the pharmaceutical and medical devices sectors that get clobbered, so I suppose those wanting No Deal would just accept the concomitant job losses as necessary collateral damage. Unfortunately, though, that same sort of collateral damage would apply across a lot of the economy. Nothing we could do about it, and no preparations we can make to avoid it altogether.geoffw said:"how we unilaterally maintain medical exports to the EU in the absence of a deal."
If the EU wishes to block medical exports (because of standards/paperwork?) then I can't see that there's anything we can unilaterally do about that in the immediate term. But why would they wish to do that - harm their own people?
As for why the EU would wish to do that: they wouldn't. They would seek a deal to avoid it. It's called the Withdrawal Agreement, and it's 500 pages long. We have the text. But if we don't ratify it, then what are they supposed to do? They have their own legal procedures to follow, They'd be a bit stuffed, of course. That's not much consolation.0 -
Could an MP put in an amendment which is to accept the deal but not the current non unilateral backstop - could perhaps pass with a majority.Philip_Thompson said:
I have no problems at all with signing a withdrawal agreement. My one concern is the backstop.Richard_Nabavi said:
I think we're slowly making progress. A 'limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules' is not No Deal. It's a Withdrawal Agreement - exactly like the 500 pager which has been negotiated - followed after the end of the transition period with a more distant relationship than Theresa May envisages. You are perfectly right that that kind of deal would in principle be possible, except that the stumbling block of the Irish border is even worse, and also it would breach the Leave campaign's promises of a 'free trade deal from Ireland to Turkey'. What it isn't though is 'no deal' - we'd still have to sign the withdrawal agreement, or something very similar to it.Xenon said:They could have got a limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules.
Instead they made no planning for this eventuality at all and came up with the current dog's dinner that no one wants.0 -
I mentally went through this argument piece by piece as to why I might vote to leave before the ref and concluded that; by the time I'd reached the end of the process as to everything that wouldn't harm/we might want to change - then we might as well stay in.Richard_Nabavi said:
I think we're slowly making progress. A 'limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules' is not No Deal. It's a Withdrawal Agreement - exactly like the 500 pager which has been negotiated - followed after the end of the transition period with a more distant relationship than Theresa May envisages. You are perfectly right that that kind of deal would in principle be possible, except that the stumbling block of the Irish border is even worse, and also it would breach the Leave campaign's promises of a 'free trade deal from Ireland to Turkey'. What it isn't though is 'no deal' - we'd still have to sign the withdrawal agreement, or something very similar to it.Xenon said:They could have got a limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules.
Instead they made no planning for this eventuality at all and came up with the current dog's dinner that no one wants.
Lack of trade deals was a big concern - the EU seems to have been busy on those in the period from when the referendum was held, so could perhaps be an argument to shift from leave to remain.0 -
The free trade deal is impossible...the EU want too much for it, so it should have been scrapped ages ago and a more realistic deal that could get through parliament passed.Richard_Nabavi said:
I think we're slowly making progress. A 'limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules' is not No Deal. It's a Withdrawal Agreement - exactly like the 500 pager which has been negotiated - followed after the end of the transition period with a more distant relationship than Theresa May envisages. You are perfectly right that that kind of deal would in principle be possible, except that the stumbling block of the Irish border is even worse, and also it would breach the Leave campaign's promises of a 'free trade deal from Ireland to Turkey'. What it isn't though is 'no deal' - we'd still have to sign the withdrawal agreement, or something very similar to it.Xenon said:They could have got a limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules.
Instead they made no planning for this eventuality at all and came up with the current dog's dinner that no one wants.
And the backstop is ridiculous.
I can see us remaining to be honest from here.0 -
Barnier and Varadkar would laugh that one out of court.TGOHF said:
Could an MP put in an amendment which is to accept the deal but not the current non unilateral backstop - could perhaps pass with a majority.Philip_Thompson said:
I have no problems at all with signing a withdrawal agreement. My one concern is the backstop.Richard_Nabavi said:
I think we're slowly making progress. A 'limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules' is not No Deal. It's a Withdrawal Agreement - exactly like the 500 pager which has been negotiated - followed after the end of the transition period with a more distant relationship than Theresa May envisages. You are perfectly right that that kind of deal would in principle be possible, except that the stumbling block of the Irish border is even worse, and also it would breach the Leave campaign's promises of a 'free trade deal from Ireland to Turkey'. What it isn't though is 'no deal' - we'd still have to sign the withdrawal agreement, or something very similar to it.Xenon said:They could have got a limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules.
Instead they made no planning for this eventuality at all and came up with the current dog's dinner that no one wants.0 -
Purely in terms of net spending/tax, about 9 bill. Then add on extra security spending.eek said:Anyone know off hand how much we spend subsidising Northern Ireland every year?
The former is usual for poorer and rural areas though, it's about 5k per person. Wales is about 4k, NE England 3.5k, NW 2.5k, etc.0 -
Amendments to the bill that affect anything relating to the EU will be futile.Pulpstar said:
Barnier and Varadkar would laugh that one out of court.TGOHF said:
Could an MP put in an amendment which is to accept the deal but not the current non unilateral backstop - could perhaps pass with a majority.Philip_Thompson said:
I have no problems at all with signing a withdrawal agreement. My one concern is the backstop.Richard_Nabavi said:
I think we're slowly making progress. A 'limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules' is not No Deal. It's a Withdrawal Agreement - exactly like the 500 pager which has been negotiated - followed after the end of the transition period with a more distant relationship than Theresa May envisages. You are perfectly right that that kind of deal would in principle be possible, except that the stumbling block of the Irish border is even worse, and also it would breach the Leave campaign's promises of a 'free trade deal from Ireland to Turkey'. What it isn't though is 'no deal' - we'd still have to sign the withdrawal agreement, or something very similar to it.Xenon said:They could have got a limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules.
Instead they made no planning for this eventuality at all and came up with the current dog's dinner that no one wants.
Because negotiating treaties is an executive power. Grieve playing politics doesn’t achieve anything.
It’s why the ‘meaningful vote’ will be anything but meaningful.0 -
One irony is that the SNP would give their eye teeth for NI's backstop; and the DUP would be very happy with Scotland's position in the Brexit.0
-
In the case of Meds (as with most other things that need approval) it depends on where the approval took place. If a UK made drug was approved by another EU member agency then with no deal it would still be approved for sale in the EU27.Richard_Nabavi said:
Again I think we are making progress. Yes, there's absolutely nothing we could do to prepare for this eventuality. OK, so it's just the pharmaceutical and medical devices sectors that get clobbered, so I suppose those wanting No Deal would just accept the concomitant job losses as necessary collateral damage. Unfortunately, though, that same sort of collateral damage would apply across a lot of the economy. Nothing we could do about it, and no preparations we can make to avoid it altogether.geoffw said:"how we unilaterally maintain medical exports to the EU in the absence of a deal."
If the EU wishes to block medical exports (because of standards/paperwork?) then I can't see that there's anything we can unilaterally do about that in the immediate term. But why would they wish to do that - harm their own people?
As for why the EU would wish to do that: they wouldn't. They would seek a deal to avoid it. It's called the Withdrawal Agreement, and it's 500 pages long. We have the text. But if we don't ratify it, then what are they supposed to do? They have their own legal procedures to follow, They'd be a bit stuffed, of course. That's not much consolation.
If the talks really did breakdown then all the EU needs to do is say that all past approvals for drugs completed by the UK agency are still valid. This does not mean new druds the UK approved after no deal date would be valid.
So we could not make any unilateral plans to keep exporting to the EU, we would be dependent on the EU realising that stuff like the number one pancreatic cancer and breast cancer drug used in the EU is made only in the UK.0 -
rural_voter said:
Who the hell are they? I can identify just two.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not in our household and we are voting members of the partydixiedean said:
Those 7 aren't very popular round these parts.Xenon said:
White men really are despised in this country aren't they?Big_G_NorthWales said:
They are a disgrace. Not a woman in sight and no diversity.williamglenn said:
They have no awareness of just how bad that photo looks
They are the men in suits.
They don't care about their image. They expect people to consider what they say.0 -
Also happens to be the WTO rules...Philip_Thompson said:
Which is the problem. We should never have agreed to that.Pulpstar said:
Aren't the single market rules for NI the backstop though ?Philip_Thompson said:
So agree a transition but don't agree anything permanent before the transition. My issue is us sacrificing permanent commitments to get a temporary transition. I have no issues as all with temporary commitments that last as long as the transition.Pulpstar said:
The issue is there isn't time for that before 29th March ! The Trade Deal will take many years to thrash out, but we need to leave to transition first.Philip_Thompson said:
Get a trade deal for the whole UK that avoids a hard border. Squares every circle.Pulpstar said:
Not to be subject to the single market in goods within the backstop ?Richard_Nabavi said:One thing which puzzles me in the current brouhaha is what exactly the DUP want. I can see what they don't like about the proposed withdrawal agreement, but they also don't want a hard border in Ireland and they still support Brexit. So the pressure they are putting on the PM is aimed at achieving what change, exactly?
0 -
Indeed. It's take it or leave it.Pulpstar said:
Barnier and Varadkar would laugh that one out of court.TGOHF said:
Could an MP put in an amendment which is to accept the deal but not the current non unilateral backstop - could perhaps pass with a majority.Philip_Thompson said:
I have no problems at all with signing a withdrawal agreement. My one concern is the backstop.Richard_Nabavi said:
I think we're slowly making progress. A 'limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules' is not No Deal. It's a Withdrawal Agreement - exactly like the 500 pager which has been negotiated - followed after the end of the transition period with a more distant relationship than Theresa May envisages. You are perfectly right that that kind of deal would in principle be possible, except that the stumbling block of the Irish border is even worse, and also it would breach the Leave campaign's promises of a 'free trade deal from Ireland to Turkey'. What it isn't though is 'no deal' - we'd still have to sign the withdrawal agreement, or something very similar to it.Xenon said:They could have got a limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules.
Instead they made no planning for this eventuality at all and came up with the current dog's dinner that no one wants.0 -
Yes I have to say that laying her to go in 2018 at the 3/1 available on betfair does look like a stonking bet. It's 20 Nov now. The letters aren't in and she's a strong fav to win a VONC even if they do go in. The big vote on the deal won't be till 7 Dec at the earliest and by then it will be beginning to feel a lot like Christmas.
The bet simply has to be done. Just give me a second ... Done it!0 -
A Withdrawal Agreement without a backstop is just a transition period.
0 -
Well it's a meaningful Hobson's choice vote.Mortimer said:
Amendments to the bill that affect anything relating to the EU will be futile.Pulpstar said:
Barnier and Varadkar would laugh that one out of court.TGOHF said:
Could an MP put in an amendment which is to accept the deal but not the current non unilateral backstop - could perhaps pass with a majority.Philip_Thompson said:
I have no problems at all with signing a withdrawal agreement. My one concern is the backstop.Richard_Nabavi said:
I think we're slowly making progress. A 'limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules' is not No Deal. It's a Withdrawal Agreement - exactly like the 500 pager which has been negotiated - followed after the end of the transition period with a more distant relationship than Theresa May envisages. You are perfectly right that that kind of deal would in principle be possible, except that the stumbling block of the Irish border is even worse, and also it would breach the Leave campaign's promises of a 'free trade deal from Ireland to Turkey'. What it isn't though is 'no deal' - we'd still have to sign the withdrawal agreement, or something very similar to it.Xenon said:They could have got a limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules.
Instead they made no planning for this eventuality at all and came up with the current dog's dinner that no one wants.
Because negotiating treaties is an executive power. Grieve playing politics doesn’t achieve anything.
It’s why the ‘meaningful vote’ will be anything but meaningful.
0 -
The EU is asking to take on good faith that the backstop is an outcome they really don't think will ever come into effect.TGOHF said:
Could an MP put in an amendment which is to accept the deal but not the current non unilateral backstop - could perhaps pass with a majority.Philip_Thompson said:
I have no problems at all with signing a withdrawal agreement. My one concern is the backstop.Richard_Nabavi said:
I think we're slowly making progress. A 'limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules' is not No Deal. It's a Withdrawal Agreement - exactly like the 500 pager which has been negotiated - followed after the end of the transition period with a more distant relationship than Theresa May envisages. You are perfectly right that that kind of deal would in principle be possible, except that the stumbling block of the Irish border is even worse, and also it would breach the Leave campaign's promises of a 'free trade deal from Ireland to Turkey'. What it isn't though is 'no deal' - we'd still have to sign the withdrawal agreement, or something very similar to it.Xenon said:They could have got a limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules.
Instead they made no planning for this eventuality at all and came up with the current dog's dinner that no one wants.
So, how about we don't actually sign any deal - just go about implementing its terms, in good faith? That should be good enough for the EU. After all, it's supposed to be good enough for us.....0 -
It's qualified majority voting so Spain doesn't count.Sean_F said:
Out of curiosity, what happens if the draft deal is rejected by EU ministers (France and Spain seem unhappy?)0 -
To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
0 -
The unexplored risk to this bet is that Theresa May might resign. This is entirely possible if the meaningful vote is lost badly.
It’s still a good bet though which is why I’m on it.0 -
They are in for a shock then, because what they say is usually complete nonsense.David_Evershed said:rural_voter said:
Who the hell are they? I can identify just two.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not in our household and we are voting members of the partydixiedean said:
Those 7 aren't very popular round these parts.Xenon said:
White men really are despised in this country aren't they?Big_G_NorthWales said:
They are a disgrace. Not a woman in sight and no diversity.williamglenn said:
They have no awareness of just how bad that photo looks
They are the men in suits.
They don't care about their image. They expect people to consider what they say.0 -
Because I expect the deal needs to be and have legal force. A nod and a wink would likely be illegal.MarqueeMark said:
The EU is asking to take on good faith that the backstop is an outcome they really don't think will ever come into effect.TGOHF said:
Could an MP put in an amendment which is to accept the deal but not the current non unilateral backstop - could perhaps pass with a majority.Philip_Thompson said:
I have no problems at all with signing a withdrawal agreement. My one concern is the backstop.Richard_Nabavi said:
I think we're slowly making progress. A 'limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules' is not No Deal. It's a Withdrawal Agreement - exactly like the 500 pager which has been negotiated - followed after the end of the transition period with a more distant relationship than Theresa May envisages. You are perfectly right that that kind of deal would in principle be possible, except that the stumbling block of the Irish border is even worse, and also it would breach the Leave campaign's promises of a 'free trade deal from Ireland to Turkey'. What it isn't though is 'no deal' - we'd still have to sign the withdrawal agreement, or something very similar to it.Xenon said:They could have got a limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules.
Instead they made no planning for this eventuality at all and came up with the current dog's dinner that no one wants.
So, how about we don't actually sign any deal - just go about implementing its terms, in good faith? That should be good enough for the EU. After all, it's supposed to be good enough for us.....0 -
I put this up a few years ago and there was tentative interest but nothing came of it - a "Political Bettors" team for Only Connect? [I have already been on, in series 4, so couldn't be part of the team]. If you might be interested, say so - pretty sure there'd be a good team amongst the regular commenters, never mind the lurkers...
https://twitter.com/OnlyConnectQuiz/status/10646162710635397190 -
Even if she does, though, won't she stay on until a replacement is appointed?AlastairMeeks said:The unexplored risk to this bet is that Theresa May might resign. This is entirely possible if the meaningful vote is lost badly.
It’s still a good bet though which is why I’m on it.0 -
Indeed. I don't understand the "May won't resign" argument. She has a clear sense of duty and that so far has kept her battling onwards despite the massive pressure and hostility. That same sense of duty would surely have her step down if it became clear that she did not have the ability to move anything through Parliament.AlastairMeeks said:The unexplored risk to this bet is that Theresa May might resign. This is entirely possible if the meaningful vote is lost badly.
It’s still a good bet though which is why I’m on it.0 -
If it is 200 for, 400 against - why hang around?Richard_Nabavi said:
Even if she does, though, won't she stay on until a replacement is appointed?AlastairMeeks said:The unexplored risk to this bet is that Theresa May might resign. This is entirely possible if the meaningful vote is lost badly.
It’s still a good bet though which is why I’m on it.0 -
Anyone run the numbers yet - how many Labour/LD MPs would have to back the deal or abstain for it to pass ?RochdalePioneers said:
Indeed. I don't understand the "May won't resign" argument. She has a clear sense of duty and that so far has kept her battling onwards despite the massive pressure and hostility. That same sense of duty would surely have her step down if it became clear that she did not have the ability to move anything through Parliament.AlastairMeeks said:The unexplored risk to this bet is that Theresa May might resign. This is entirely possible if the meaningful vote is lost badly.
It’s still a good bet though which is why I’m on it.
0 -
Thanks. That's what I was saying.AlastairMeeks said:The unexplored risk to this bet is that Theresa May might resign. This is entirely possible if the meaningful vote is lost badly.
It’s still a good bet though which is why I’m on it.
Likely but not guaranteed. In opposition but Ed Miliband didn't. If she lost very badly (either in HOC or VONC) she might see an immediate exit to a safe pair of hands as calming the situation down. Unlikely but not impossible.Richard_Nabavi said:
Even if she does, though, won't she stay on until a replacement is appointed?AlastairMeeks said:The unexplored risk to this bet is that Theresa May might resign. This is entirely possible if the meaningful vote is lost badly.
It’s still a good bet though which is why I’m on it.0 -
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.0 -
So as not to leave a void. He position would be like Cameron's in 2016.MarqueeMark said:
If it is 200 for, 400 against - why hang around?Richard_Nabavi said:
Even if she does, though, won't she stay on until a replacement is appointed?AlastairMeeks said:The unexplored risk to this bet is that Theresa May might resign. This is entirely possible if the meaningful vote is lost badly.
It’s still a good bet though which is why I’m on it.0 -
The deal needs to have legal force the backstop doesn't.Slackbladder said:
Because I expect the deal needs to be and have legal force. A nod and a wink would likely be illegal.MarqueeMark said:
The EU is asking to take on good faith that the backstop is an outcome they really don't think will ever come into effect.TGOHF said:
Could an MP put in an amendment which is to accept the deal but not the current non unilateral backstop - could perhaps pass with a majority.Philip_Thompson said:
I have no problems at all with signing a withdrawal agreement. My one concern is the backstop.Richard_Nabavi said:
I think we're slowly making progress. A 'limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules' is not No Deal. It's a Withdrawal Agreement - exactly like the 500 pager which has been negotiated - followed after the end of the transition period with a more distant relationship than Theresa May envisages. You are perfectly right that that kind of deal would in principle be possible, except that the stumbling block of the Irish border is even worse, and also it would breach the Leave campaign's promises of a 'free trade deal from Ireland to Turkey'. What it isn't though is 'no deal' - we'd still have to sign the withdrawal agreement, or something very similar to it.Xenon said:They could have got a limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules.
Instead they made no planning for this eventuality at all and came up with the current dog's dinner that no one wants.
So, how about we don't actually sign any deal - just go about implementing its terms, in good faith? That should be good enough for the EU. After all, it's supposed to be good enough for us.....0 -
I think we should leave on WTO terms and abolish all tariffs and quotas. That will be a big gain to UK consumers. Though of course it involve some damage to our producers who have built their businesses behind the protective Common External Tariff. Some compensation measures to soften the blow for them might be considered. At the same time we should maintain, and even align our standards with the current EU-compliant standards where we are 100% compliant at the moment. With this arrangement there should be no need for any changes at the NI-RoI border.
0 -
I've asked him which side he plans to disappoint; he also badly misunderstands the timetable.williamglenn said:0 -
There's going to be a void if she stays. She has spent 2 years shaping a deal that has got a giant raspberry. The only task she will be left with in Downing Street is feeding Larry....Richard_Nabavi said:
So as not to leave a void. He position would be like Cameron's in 2016.MarqueeMark said:
If it is 200 for, 400 against - why hang around?Richard_Nabavi said:
Even if she does, though, won't she stay on until a replacement is appointed?AlastairMeeks said:The unexplored risk to this bet is that Theresa May might resign. This is entirely possible if the meaningful vote is lost badly.
It’s still a good bet though which is why I’m on it.0 -
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.0 -
If Labour offered TM support for her bill but the price was a GE - would she take it ?
0 -
Before or after the WA becomes law?TGOHF said:If Labour offered TM support for her bill but the price was a GE - would she take it ?
0 -
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?0 -
Well after obviously - otherwise she wouldn't accept.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Before or after the WA becomes law?TGOHF said:If Labour offered TM support for her bill but the price was a GE - would she take it ?
Her sense of "good for the nation" would be satisfied ? Or is she just swinging the lead with that line...0 -
Whilst that's true, the meaningless vote is going to take place in December, Xmas and the New Year will be almost upon us, and there's no obvious unity candidate who could take over to steady the ship while the mutinous crew decide which of them will be the next captain. So I think the most likely thing is that she'd stay while the leadership contest happened, which would take us into the new year and (hopefully!) payout for those of us who've bet against a 2018 exit!MarqueeMark said:There's going to be a void if she stays. She has spent 2 years shaping a deal that has got a giant raspberry. The only task she will be left with in Downing Street is feeding Larry....
0 -
Cameron was still PM until May became PM.Richard_Nabavi said:
So as not to leave a void. He position would be like Cameron's in 2016.MarqueeMark said:
If it is 200 for, 400 against - why hang around?Richard_Nabavi said:
Even if she does, though, won't she stay on until a replacement is appointed?AlastairMeeks said:The unexplored risk to this bet is that Theresa May might resign. This is entirely possible if the meaningful vote is lost badly.
It’s still a good bet though which is why I’m on it.0 -
They get ever more ridiculous.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?0 -
No no, there's a 585 page solution on the Gov website. So a solution certainly ∃, that it may be transcendental is neither here nor there.Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.0 -
I think she'd take it as long as Labour gave her space to make hte optics work.TGOHF said:
Well after obviously - otherwise she wouldn't accept.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Before or after the WA becomes law?TGOHF said:If Labour offered TM support for her bill but the price was a GE - would she take it ?
Her sense of "good for the nation" would be satisfied ? Or is she just swinging the lead with that line...0 -
https://twitter.com/Smicht/status/1064797534030319616Pulpstar said:One irony is that the SNP would give their eye teeth for NI's backstop; and the DUP would be very happy with Scotland's position in the Brexit.
0 -
FFS. It's a piece of piss to get out of. One merely invokes an Article of the Treaty. Not enough are prepared to pay the price though. There would be some economic damage, but no tanks, or secret police or torture or assassinations or anything.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
So not an apt comparison at all really.0 -
No they don't.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
It's perfectly possible, if completely stupid, to leave. The UK is trying to leave while retaining some of the benefits of membership. That's what's impossible.0 -
Pretty dire doses of reality coming from the Bank of England:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/nov/20/nissan-shares-carlos-ghosn-arrest-bank-of-england-mark-carney-brexit-business-live
0 -
Undeveloped countries based on argriculture and low industry 30odd years ago? Where laws and regulations were rudimentary compared to now?Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
I would certainly expect that to be the case.0 -
A general election in return for the deal to pass through. The vote on that would be fascinating - could tempt Corbyn though.TheWhiteRabbit said:
I think she'd take it as long as Labour gave her space to make the optics work.TGOHF said:
Well after obviously - otherwise she wouldn't accept.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Before or after the WA becomes law?TGOHF said:If Labour offered TM support for her bill but the price was a GE - would she take it ?
Her sense of "good for the nation" would be satisfied ? Or is she just swinging the lead with that line...0 -
The ERG would get their 48 letters no problem if she attempted it.TheWhiteRabbit said:
I think she'd take it as long as Labour gave her space to make hte optics work.TGOHF said:
Well after obviously - otherwise she wouldn't accept.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Before or after the WA becomes law?TGOHF said:If Labour offered TM support for her bill but the price was a GE - would she take it ?
Her sense of "good for the nation" would be satisfied ? Or is she just swinging the lead with that line...
0 -
Sounds like a good plan. Couple that with cutting business taxes - I'd abolish employers NI and cut corporation tax personally.geoffw said:I think we should leave on WTO terms and abolish all tariffs and quotas. That will be a big gain to UK consumers. Though of course it involve some damage to our producers who have built their businesses behind the protective Common External Tariff. Some compensation measures to soften the blow for them might be considered. At the same time we should maintain, and even align our standards with the current EU-compliant standards where we are 100% compliant at the moment. With this arrangement there should be no need for any changes at the NI-RoI border.
0 -
Some Brexiteers would prefer it if there were. At least then they'd be able to see the enemy. When the enemy consists primarily of the ties of reality, it's much harder to fight against.dixiedean said:
FFS. It's a piece of piss to get out of. One merely invokes an Article of the Treaty. Not enough are prepared to pay the price though. There would be some economic damage, but no tanks, or secret police or torture or assassinations or anything.Xenon said:It's impossible to leave the EU?
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
So not an apt comparison at all really.0 -
Yes really easy to get out of. Only the Dutch, Irish and French referendums ignored and in all probability ours too. Piece of piss as you say.dixiedean said:
FFS. It's a piece of piss to get out of. One merely invokes an Article of the Treaty. Not enough are prepared to pay the price though. There would be some economic damage, but no tanks, or secret police or torture or assassinations or anything.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
So not an apt comparison at all really.0 -
Doses of reality or more project fear?Richard_Nabavi said:Pretty dire doses of reality coming from the Bank of England:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/nov/20/nissan-shares-carlos-ghosn-arrest-bank-of-england-mark-carney-brexit-business-live0 -
Yeah - let's go with Project Fear. What is the worst that could happen???Philip_Thompson said:
Doses of reality or more project fear?Richard_Nabavi said:Pretty dire doses of reality coming from the Bank of England:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/nov/20/nissan-shares-carlos-ghosn-arrest-bank-of-england-mark-carney-brexit-business-live0 -
So all those apologists on here that have been telling us that there can be no further negotiation seem to have been full of shit.0
-
Cameron wasn't rejected by either the Commons or his own MPs. Different scenario.Richard_Nabavi said:
So as not to leave a void. He position would be like Cameron's in 2016.MarqueeMark said:
If it is 200 for, 400 against - why hang around?Richard_Nabavi said:
Even if she does, though, won't she stay on until a replacement is appointed?AlastairMeeks said:The unexplored risk to this bet is that Theresa May might resign. This is entirely possible if the meaningful vote is lost badly.
It’s still a good bet though which is why I’m on it.0 -
... did you correct my typo?Pulpstar said:
A general election in return for the deal to pass through. The vote on that would be fascinating - could tempt Corbyn though.TheWhiteRabbit said:
I think she'd take it as long as Labour gave her space to make the optics work.TGOHF said:
Well after obviously - otherwise she wouldn't accept.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Before or after the WA becomes law?TGOHF said:If Labour offered TM support for her bill but the price was a GE - would she take it ?
Her sense of "good for the nation" would be satisfied ? Or is she just swinging the lead with that line...0 -
Thanks to the, ahem, genius of the FTPA, though, that is not in her gift.Pulpstar said:
A general election in return for the deal to pass through. The vote on that would be fascinating - could tempt Corbyn though.TheWhiteRabbit said:
I think she'd take it as long as Labour gave her space to make the optics work.TGOHF said:
Well after obviously - otherwise she wouldn't accept.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Before or after the WA becomes law?TGOHF said:If Labour offered TM support for her bill but the price was a GE - would she take it ?
Her sense of "good for the nation" would be satisfied ? Or is she just swinging the lead with that line...
Support would be needed from Tory MPs who might not be confident of returning. Would she get it? As well as minor parties? Several of whom are skint.0 -
Are you living in a parallel universe in which Cameron is in his ninth year as PM and Article 50 was never invoked?Xenon said:
Yes really easy to get out of. Only the Dutch, Irish and French referendums ignored and in all probability ours too. Piece of piss as you say.dixiedean said:
FFS. It's a piece of piss to get out of. One merely invokes an Article of the Treaty. Not enough are prepared to pay the price though. There would be some economic damage, but no tanks, or secret police or torture or assassinations or anything.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
So not an apt comparison at all really.0 -
Dura_Ace said:
No they don't.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
It's perfectly possible, if completely stupid, to leave. The UK is trying to leave while retaining some of the benefits of membership. That's what's impossible.
0 -
The worst that could happen is some of the many warnings from before the referendum actually turns out to be true. Not happened yet, but they're getting recycled here now.Beverley_C said:
Yeah - let's go with Project Fear. What is the worst that could happen???Philip_Thompson said:
Doses of reality or more project fear?Richard_Nabavi said:Pretty dire doses of reality coming from the Bank of England:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/nov/20/nissan-shares-carlos-ghosn-arrest-bank-of-england-mark-carney-brexit-business-live0 -
No.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... did you correct my typo?Pulpstar said:
A general election in return for the deal to pass through. The vote on that would be fascinating - could tempt Corbyn though.TheWhiteRabbit said:
I think she'd take it as long as Labour gave her space to make the optics work.TGOHF said:
Well after obviously - otherwise she wouldn't accept.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Before or after the WA becomes law?TGOHF said:If Labour offered TM support for her bill but the price was a GE - would she take it ?
Her sense of "good for the nation" would be satisfied ? Or is she just swinging the lead with that line...0 -
Are you living in a parallel universe in which the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty was dropped after the Dutch, Irish and French all rejected it?williamglenn said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which Cameron is in his ninth year as PM and Article 50 was never invoked?Xenon said:
Yes really easy to get out of. Only the Dutch, Irish and French referendums ignored and in all probability ours too. Piece of piss as you say.dixiedean said:
FFS. It's a piece of piss to get out of. One merely invokes an Article of the Treaty. Not enough are prepared to pay the price though. There would be some economic damage, but no tanks, or secret police or torture or assassinations or anything.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
So not an apt comparison at all really.0 -
I'm living in the real world, in which the Lisbon Treaty was democratically ratified by every member state.Philip_Thompson said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty was dropped after the Dutch, Irish and French all rejected it?williamglenn said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which Cameron is in his ninth year as PM and Article 50 was never invoked?Xenon said:
Yes really easy to get out of. Only the Dutch, Irish and French referendums ignored and in all probability ours too. Piece of piss as you say.dixiedean said:
FFS. It's a piece of piss to get out of. One merely invokes an Article of the Treaty. Not enough are prepared to pay the price though. There would be some economic damage, but no tanks, or secret police or torture or assassinations or anything.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
So not an apt comparison at all really.0 -
The backstop is the single greatest error of May's career of terrible errors.
The backstop might be the single greatest foreign policy fuck up in UK politics since Suez?
The backstop needs to die, and that means May's dodgy deal needs to die, and that means May's career needs to die. There must be no forgiveness for a fuckup of this magnitude.0 -
When were the Dutch and French referendums that reversed their democratic rejections of it?williamglenn said:
I'm living in the real world, in which the Lisbon Treaty was democratically ratified by every member state.Philip_Thompson said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty was dropped after the Dutch, Irish and French all rejected it?williamglenn said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which Cameron is in his ninth year as PM and Article 50 was never invoked?Xenon said:
Yes really easy to get out of. Only the Dutch, Irish and French referendums ignored and in all probability ours too. Piece of piss as you say.dixiedean said:
FFS. It's a piece of piss to get out of. One merely invokes an Article of the Treaty. Not enough are prepared to pay the price though. There would be some economic damage, but no tanks, or secret police or torture or assassinations or anything.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
So not an apt comparison at all really.0 -
Yes, the "No Deal" terminology is one pushed by the Remain camp including No 10.Richard_Nabavi said:
I think we're slowly making progress. A 'limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules' is not No Deal. It's a Withdrawal Agreement - exactly like the 500 pager which has been negotiated - followed after the end of the transition period with a more distant relationship than Theresa May envisages. You are perfectly right that that kind of deal would in principle be possible, except that the stumbling block of the Irish border is even worse, and also it would breach the Leave campaign's promises of a 'free trade deal from Ireland to Turkey'. What it isn't though is 'no deal' - we'd still have to sign the withdrawal agreement, or something very similar to it.Xenon said:They could have got a limited "deal" keeping things running if they'd said we'd go for hard brexit with WTO rules.
Instead they made no planning for this eventuality at all and came up with the current dog's dinner that no one wants.
Such a limited agreement would be fine in the short term, securing the UK's exit but without a trade agreement other than WTO terms.
It would kick into dust the EU's hope of reversing Brexit. So, with the choice being narrowed to a choice between a WTO continuation or a trade agreement, they would have to negotiate in good faith, making the best of what for them would be a bad job compared to the UK remaining.
The EU have a £95bn annual balance of payments surplus in trade in goods with the UK to protect, selling us twice as much as we sell them, so there will be a lot of pressure on EU negotiators after April. Furthermore, the UK would not already have ceded the ground on financial services that it has in May's agreement - which astonishingly allows the EU to unilaterally withdraw from current arrangements at just a month's notice, as the same time as the EU's goods exports are protected under the customs union. The question of continuing UK payments to the EU budget would be moot, the only settled point being that the EU would know they would not get a penny if an agreement were not reached, because the UK was already out of the EU.
The EU has been willing to reach trade agreements with the likes of Canada when negotiating from a far stronger position. Once the UK has left, I would expect a deal to be reached within two months.0 -
We're not out yet.williamglenn said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which Cameron is in his ninth year as PM and Article 50 was never invoked?Xenon said:
Yes really easy to get out of. Only the Dutch, Irish and French referendums ignored and in all probability ours too. Piece of piss as you say.dixiedean said:
FFS. It's a piece of piss to get out of. One merely invokes an Article of the Treaty. Not enough are prepared to pay the price though. There would be some economic damage, but no tanks, or secret police or torture or assassinations or anything.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
So not an apt comparison at all really.
My prediction: The deal fails to go through parliament and then another referendum with two options, remain and this crappy deal with the former winning.0 -
Fine.grabcocque said:The backstop is the single greatest error of May's career of terrible errors.
The backstop might be the single greatest foreign policy fuck up in UK politics since Suez?
The backstop needs to die, and that means May's dodgy deal needs to die, and that means May's career needs to die. There must be no forgiveness for a fuckup of this magnitude.
Have you checked with the EU that the end of Mrs May's career would kill off the backstop? Just thought it would be as well to give them a buzz first to check there are no snags.0 -
That's a question for their electorates. You'll be able to point to our example of a second referendum on Brexit as a model for best practice in this area.Philip_Thompson said:
When were the Dutch and French referendums that reversed their democratic rejections of it?williamglenn said:
I'm living in the real world, in which the Lisbon Treaty was democratically ratified by every member state.Philip_Thompson said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty was dropped after the Dutch, Irish and French all rejected it?williamglenn said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which Cameron is in his ninth year as PM and Article 50 was never invoked?Xenon said:
Yes really easy to get out of. Only the Dutch, Irish and French referendums ignored and in all probability ours too. Piece of piss as you say.dixiedean said:
FFS. It's a piece of piss to get out of. One merely invokes an Article of the Treaty. Not enough are prepared to pay the price though. There would be some economic damage, but no tanks, or secret police or torture or assassinations or anything.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
So not an apt comparison at all really.0 -
Even if May did face a No confidence vote she will almost certainly win it given over 200 out of 318 Tory MPs are reported to back the Deal and she only needs to won by 1
That will keep her in place for a year until well past Brexit Day while a new leader would take over with barely 2 months left to get a Deal agreed, almost impossible0 -
If the new PM says 'over my dead body' to the backstop then yes it would. It wasn't even in their original proposals, it only came in when May revealed how weak she was and it was pathetic to agree to it.Richard_Nabavi said:
Fine.grabcocque said:The backstop is the single greatest error of May's career of terrible errors.
The backstop might be the single greatest foreign policy fuck up in UK politics since Suez?
The backstop needs to die, and that means May's dodgy deal needs to die, and that means May's career needs to die. There must be no forgiveness for a fuckup of this magnitude.
Have you checked with the EU that the end of Mrs May's career would kill off the backstop? Just thought it would be as well to give them a buzz first to check there are no snags.0 -
Maybe not. But May still deserves to be made to pay for an unforced fuckup of this astonishingly huge magnitude.Richard_Nabavi said:
Fine.grabcocque said:The backstop is the single greatest error of May's career of terrible errors.
The backstop might be the single greatest foreign policy fuck up in UK politics since Suez?
The backstop needs to die, and that means May's dodgy deal needs to die, and that means May's career needs to die. There must be no forgiveness for a fuckup of this magnitude.
Have you checked with the EU that the end of Mrs May's career would kill off the backstop? Just thought it would be as well to give them a buzz first to check there are no snags.
Whoever has to suffer by picking through the smoldering remains of her disastrous idiocy, it cannot be her.0 -
Only after a second vote in Ireland...williamglenn said:
I'm living in the real world, in which the Lisbon Treaty was democratically ratified by every member state.Philip_Thompson said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty was dropped after the Dutch, Irish and French all rejected it?williamglenn said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which Cameron is in his ninth year as PM and Article 50 was never invoked?Xenon said:
Yes really easy to get out of. Only the Dutch, Irish and French referendums ignored and in all probability ours too. Piece of piss as you say.dixiedean said:
FFS. It's a piece of piss to get out of. One merely invokes an Article of the Treaty. Not enough are prepared to pay the price though. There would be some economic damage, but no tanks, or secret police or torture or assassinations or anything.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
So not an apt comparison at all really.0 -
Well said. The rest of the deal is not that bad, it has bits to upset everyone and bits to please everyone. The backstop is unforgiveable.grabcocque said:The backstop is the single greatest error of May's career of terrible errors.
The backstop might be the single greatest foreign policy fuck up in UK politics since Suez?
The backstop needs to die, and that means May's dodgy deal needs to die, and that means May's career needs to die. There must be no forgiveness for a fuckup of this magnitude.0 -
Mr. Xenon, I suspect that's the likeliest outcome.
But it may be that Labour (some MPs, anyway) will back the deal in sufficient numbers for it to pass.0 -
If anything was a fuck up, it was not making clear before the referendum that the British state would uphold its previous commitments to Northern Ireland even if it made a UK-wide Brexit impossible.grabcocque said:
Maybe not. But May still deserves to be made to pay for an unforced fuckup of this astonishingly huge magnitude.Richard_Nabavi said:
Fine.grabcocque said:The backstop is the single greatest error of May's career of terrible errors.
The backstop might be the single greatest foreign policy fuck up in UK politics since Suez?
The backstop needs to die, and that means May's dodgy deal needs to die, and that means May's career needs to die. There must be no forgiveness for a fuckup of this magnitude.
Have you checked with the EU that the end of Mrs May's career would kill off the backstop? Just thought it would be as well to give them a buzz first to check there are no snags.
Whoever has to suffer by picking through the smoldering remains of her disastrous idiocy, it cannot be her.0 -
We spent 40+ years integrating ourselves into Europe. Do you seriously imagine we can undo all that in 2 years?Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
We could really do hard, hard Brexit. Just stop interacting with Europe, refuse to pay anything, put barriers on all ports or entry. Of course the country would grind to a halt and food shortages would become a reality very quickly. About 30% of our food comes directly from Europe as does peak energy demands from the cross-channel grids.
If we had the sort of Brexit some of the economically illiterate Leavers keep banging on about then it really would feel like the Soviet Union with queues for potatoes and foodstuffs.
But that would fine wouldn't it?0 -
Bloody well hope so!Xenon said:
We're not out yet.williamglenn said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which Cameron is in his ninth year as PM and Article 50 was never invoked?Xenon said:
Yes really easy to get out of. Only the Dutch, Irish and French referendums ignored and in all probability ours too. Piece of piss as you say.dixiedean said:
FFS. It's a piece of piss to get out of. One merely invokes an Article of the Treaty. Not enough are prepared to pay the price though. There would be some economic damage, but no tanks, or secret police or torture or assassinations or anything.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
So not an apt comparison at all really.
My prediction: The deal fails to go through parliament and then another referendum with two options, remain and this crappy deal with the former winning.
Can't see it at the moment with the Labour party's sitting on the fence stance!0 -
To William voting again and again until you get the right answer is reasonable. No second vote in the Netherlands or France though.eek said:
Only after a second vote in Ireland...williamglenn said:
I'm living in the real world, in which the Lisbon Treaty was democratically ratified by every member state.Philip_Thompson said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty was dropped after the Dutch, Irish and French all rejected it?williamglenn said:
Are you living in a parallel universe in which Cameron is in his ninth year as PM and Article 50 was never invoked?Xenon said:
Yes really easy to get out of. Only the Dutch, Irish and French referendums ignored and in all probability ours too. Piece of piss as you say.dixiedean said:
FFS. It's a piece of piss to get out of. One merely invokes an Article of the Treaty. Not enough are prepared to pay the price though. There would be some economic damage, but no tanks, or secret police or torture or assassinations or anything.Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
So not an apt comparison at all really.0 -
Government once again fails to halt the court cases that will rule Brexit revocable:
http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-fails-again-to-block-court-case-that-could-allow-the-uk-to-reverse-brexit-2018-110 -
The EU have been absolutely clear No backstop and guarantee of No hard border in Ireland then No Deal.Philip_Thompson said:
If the new PM says 'over my dead body' to the backstop then yes it would. It wasn't even in their original proposals, it only came in when May revealed how weak she was and it was pathetic to agree to it.Richard_Nabavi said:
Fine.grabcocque said:The backstop is the single greatest error of May's career of terrible errors.
The backstop might be the single greatest foreign policy fuck up in UK politics since Suez?
The backstop needs to die, and that means May's dodgy deal needs to die, and that means May's career needs to die. There must be no forgiveness for a fuckup of this magnitude.
Have you checked with the EU that the end of Mrs May's career would kill off the backstop? Just thought it would be as well to give them a buzz first to check there are no snags.
That means there is no alternative deal to May's achievable from an alternative Tory leader, the only alternative is permanent Customs Union for the whole UK from PM Corbyn quite probably with permanent Single Market too as the SNP will demand that and he will need them for a majority0 -
-
Alternatively we can leave without putting up barriers. And it was your beloved EU that decided 2 years and no longer than 2 years (with no pre-notification talks allowed) is appropriate.Beverley_C said:
We spent 40+ years integrating ourselves into Europe. Do you seriously imagine we can undo all that in 2 years?Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
We could really do hard, hard Brexit. Just stop interacting with Europe, refuse to pay anything, put barriers on all ports or entry. Of course the country would grind to a halt and food shortages would become a reality very quickly. About 30% of our food comes directly from Europe as does peak energy demands from the cross-channel grids.
If we had the sort of Brexit some of the economically illiterate Leavers keep banging on about then it really would feel like the Soviet Union with queues for potatoes and foodstuffs.
But that would fine wouldn't it?0 -
They're bluffing.HYUFD said:
The EU have been absolutely clear No backstop and guarantee of No hard border in Ireland then No Deal.Philip_Thompson said:
If the new PM says 'over my dead body' to the backstop then yes it would. It wasn't even in their original proposals, it only came in when May revealed how weak she was and it was pathetic to agree to it.Richard_Nabavi said:
Fine.grabcocque said:The backstop is the single greatest error of May's career of terrible errors.
The backstop might be the single greatest foreign policy fuck up in UK politics since Suez?
The backstop needs to die, and that means May's dodgy deal needs to die, and that means May's career needs to die. There must be no forgiveness for a fuckup of this magnitude.
Have you checked with the EU that the end of Mrs May's career would kill off the backstop? Just thought it would be as well to give them a buzz first to check there are no snags.
That means there is no alternative deal to May's achievable from an alternative Tory leader, the only alternative is permanent Customs Union for the whole UK from PM Corbyn quite probably with permanent Single Market too as the SNP will demand that and he will need them for a majority0 -
It isn't really a choice. There's going to be a general election next year regardless. A new leader might detoxify the poison and incompetence May has spewed all over the process, but it won't change the numbers in Parliament.Scott_P said:0 -
Interesting implied threat to VoNC the government there, not even Baker and Mogg have gone that farScott_P said:
0 -
-
What about change the leader AND have an election?Scott_P said:
0 -
It's unreasonable to argue that the GFA must override the constitutional wish of a majority of British voters to leave the European Union, particularly as the GFA does not bind any part of the UK to remain in the European Union.williamglenn said:
If anything was a fuck up, it was not making clear before the referendum that the British state would uphold its previous commitments to Northern Ireland even if it made a UK-wide Brexit impossible.grabcocque said:
Maybe not. But May still deserves to be made to pay for an unforced fuckup of this astonishingly huge magnitude.Richard_Nabavi said:
Fine.grabcocque said:The backstop is the single greatest error of May's career of terrible errors.
The backstop might be the single greatest foreign policy fuck up in UK politics since Suez?
The backstop needs to die, and that means May's dodgy deal needs to die, and that means May's career needs to die. There must be no forgiveness for a fuckup of this magnitude.
Have you checked with the EU that the end of Mrs May's career would kill off the backstop? Just thought it would be as well to give them a buzz first to check there are no snags.
Whoever has to suffer by picking through the smoldering remains of her disastrous idiocy, it cannot be her.0 -
And it was a British Lawyer who wrote the 2 years bit into the treaty....Philip_Thompson said:
Alternatively we can leave without putting up barriers. And it was your beloved EU that decided 2 years and no longer than 2 years (with no pre-notification talks allowed) is appropriate.Beverley_C said:
We spent 40+ years integrating ourselves into Europe. Do you seriously imagine we can undo all that in 2 years?Xenon said:
It's impossible to leave the EU?Beverley_C said:
Or maybe Brexit is like the squareroot of -1? Only imaginary solutions exist.Xenon said:
The EU are playing hardball because we wanted a free trade agreement.Richard_Nabavi said:To be clear, what I am saying is:
- 'No deal' is not an option
- It is not the case that the UK could have prepared for 'no deal', it is simply not possible for us unilaterally to avoid the disastrous consequences. It is a blame-shifting fantasy to say it's all Theresa May's fault for not planning for no deal.
Following on from that, I think the EU have over-reached by insisting on the Irish backstop, with potentially disastrous consequence for both sides, but I don't think they will back down on this.
May should have realised that wasn't possible ages ago instead of capitulating on everything else.
It is absolutely her fault that they continued down this path long after it was shown that we couldn't get any acceptable deal from it.
FFS it was easier for countries to get out of the Soviet Union. The comparisons get ever more apt every day don't they?
We could really do hard, hard Brexit. Just stop interacting with Europe, refuse to pay anything, put barriers on all ports or entry. Of course the country would grind to a halt and food shortages would become a reality very quickly. About 30% of our food comes directly from Europe as does peak energy demands from the cross-channel grids.
If we had the sort of Brexit some of the economically illiterate Leavers keep banging on about then it really would feel like the Soviet Union with queues for potatoes and foodstuffs.
But that would fine wouldn't it?
Edit: If we do not put up barriers then our own industry is exposed to worldwide competition which will undercut many of them.0 -
No -- the Prime Minister would lose a no confidence vote because any likely successor would have broadly the same policies, and few MPs will want her anywhere near an election campaign.HYUFD said:Even if May did face a No confidence vote she will almost certainly win it given over 200 out of 318 Tory MPs are reported to back the Deal and she only needs to won by 1
That will keep her in place for a year until well past Brexit Day while a new leader would take over with barely 2 months left to get a Deal agreed, almost impossible
There has been a paradox. Two paradoxes. The smaller is that Theresa May has got better at campaigning which ought to strengthen her position but probably won't. The crucial one is the ERG is revealed to be a busted flush. This means backbenchers can vote against May knowing that the ERG can't get 48 letters written so does not have a prayer of getting a Brexiteer into the final two.
The ERG's blustering has made it safe to depose Theresa May!
0 -
Amongst the mockery it seems they're planning on going for Mickey Fab's post vote ambush.Scott_P said:0 -
They just can't help themselves can they:
https://twitter.com/BBCVickiYoung/status/10648566887910932490
