Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[Lowbankclaret]

You lot appear to be convinced that the EU is going to collapse.

Face facts lads, the UK is going to collapse before they do.

I suggest otherwise.

But we are going to have to disagree nicely I hope.

[RingoMcCartney]

It’s symptomatic of you general disregard for facts of any kind. It’s fine, I know having to engage with any of the facts on Brexit would seriously challenge your world view, I get why it’s better to ignore them.

Your posts above, are symptomatic of your apparent need to relentlessly try and prove me wrong. Despite this obsession you've repeatedly fallen flat on your face and left looking like a Ringo obsessed fool!


The fact is what I said would be said, was said.
You get off on where it was said if you want. Whatever floats your boat!

Enjoy the open top bus! But you make sure the driver puts Burnley in the Satnav so you can keep coming back for more tiger.


I think your Grrrrrrrrreat!

[Mala591]

Imo it would make 'political sense' for Labour to let this withdrawal agreement pass (allow MPs to abstain?) and then focus their attention on fighting a general election on the many domestic issues which need urgent attention - poverty, inequality, knife crime, overpopulation, destruction of the green belt etc etc

[Lancasterclaret]

I suggest otherwise.

But we are going to have to disagree nicely I hope.

This is where you disagree with me but with some proof to back up your claims.

Quick hint - Germany going into recession does not mean the break up of the EU

Quick hint No 2 - The National Front in France last month and the Lega Nord in Italy both changed their policies in regards to the EU and the EURO. They now both back them. That supports my view about the longevity of the EU.

[aggi]

That's not a Murdoch quote - that's an anonymous quote of someone who is quoting Murdoch. A double quote. Who is quoting Murdoch, and does that person stand by it?

Well it's not anonymous, it's from the journalist Anthony Hilton. A lot of quotes are from a journalist quoting someone. So far as I'm aware they stand by it.

[Quickenthetempo]

This is where you disagree with me but with some proof to back up your claims.

Quick hint - Germany going into recession does not mean the break up of the EU

Quick hint No 2 - The National Front in France last month and the Lega Nord in Italy both changed their policies in regards to the EU and the EURO. They now both back them. That supports my view about the longevity of the EU.

Let's hope everyone prospers and both Unions last for ever.

[CrosspoolClarets]

The EU will not collapse but hopefully it will reform and the Euro will collapse. That would be a great end game in all this.

[Lowbankclaret]

This is where you disagree with me but with some proof to back up your claims.

Quick hint - Germany going into recession does not mean the break up of the EU

Quick hint No 2 - The National Front in France last month and the Lega Nord in Italy both changed their policies in regards to the EU and the EURO. They now both back them. That supports my view about the longevity of the EU.

Germany has some big problems, one of its biggest banks is in trouble, let’s hope it does not fold.

Lack of rainfall has disrupted its major manufacturing companies, due to not being able to navigate its major river, that been a major factor apparently in the cause of recession. Let’s hope that they get good rainfall and it was a seasonal issue and not global issues as it could continue to have a big impact on Germany.

[Lancasterclaret]

Let's hope everyone prospers and both Unions last for ever.

Amen to that.

[CrosspoolClarets]

But the Political Agreement is a wish list, its not enshrined in law.

There is one of the madder ERG types confident that this deal means we can still leave on a "No Deal" basis next year.

I mean, they both can't be right, can they?

If one assumes that there will be no national majority for crashing out, and that a free trade deal is desirable, BJ wouldn’t be able to simply dispense with the political declaration. The EU wouldn’t tolerate it. That’s why May’s version had us fearing being forced into a CU.

It isn’t enshrined in law - a good thing. But it is a guide to future talks. It seems to prevent Singapore On Thames, which will be what the extreme Tories worry about. Personally, I am partially left of centre economically so that wouldn’t be my preferred approach, it is why I, as a moderate Brexiteer, would vote for it, and why I think Labour in Leave areas should snatch their hands off too.

[AndyClaret]

Lord Trimble says that the agreement is within keeping of the GFA.

[Lancasterclaret]

If one assumes that there will be no national majority for crashing out, and that a free trade deal is desirable, BJ wouldn’t be able to simply dispense with the political declaration. The EU wouldn’t tolerate it. That’s why May’s version had us fearing being forced into a CU.

It isn’t enshrined in law - a good thing. But it is a guide to future talks. It seems to prevent Singapore On Thames, which will be what the extreme Tories worry about. Personally, I am partially left of centre economically so that wouldn’t be my preferred approach, it is why I, as a moderate Brexiteer, would vote for it, and why I think Labour in Leave areas should snatch their hands off too.

That doesn't really answer the question though.

It looks to me like its still possible to crash out with a No Deal on 31/12/2021.

If that is the case, then it needs amending so that isn't possible, or I don't see how the ex-Tory MPs and Lab can back it (assuming that is the case)

[CombatClaret]

Gotta love Dominic Raab

Hails the deal as brilliant for Ni as it gives them frictionless access to the EU single market.

Hell, if only that was something we could have eh?

That's what some leavers voted for and were told they could have...

VTsm.jpg (36.36 KiB) Viewed 971 times

[CrosspoolClarets]

There's the famous Murdoch quote (although unsurprisingly he now denies it):

“I once asked Rupert Murdoch why he was so opposed to the European Union.

“‘That’s easy,’ he replied. ‘When I go into Downing Street they do what I say; when I go to Brussels they take no notice.’

Not sure I agree with the thrust of Devil’s and your remarks on lobbying.

Have you heard of Gplus europe, FleishmanHillard, FTI, Cambre or Burson-Marsteller? They are communications firms with reach, high net worth individuals and businesses will use them to lobby in Brussels. Who are they? Who funds them? What do they believe in? How do we know what is discussed? All is vague, very opaque indeed.

Whereas in the UK, whilst indeed those same firms will be hovering around, we have lobbyists like the CBI and the IFS - fairly well understood and trusted. Yes, the likes of Murdoch could have had decent access in the past, but most access comes from bodies like these, and the unions, acting on behalf of a wide group of members.

Yes another big area where I think leaving is hugely beneficial.

[willsclarets]

That's what some leavers voted for and were told they could have...

VTsm.jpg

Christ there's a hundred things that fit that bill, along with countless lies about the EU in rags like the Daily Mail and breaking electoral law by overspending on the campaign. Any deal is better than no deal, but I will never change my mind that the vote in 2016 had no real democratic legitimacy. So many people are still spouting the same bullshit now, that has long since been demonstrably proved as bullshit. I find it as sad now as I did the morning I found out so many people had been hoodwinked.

[CrosspoolClarets]

That doesn't really answer the question though.

It looks to me like its still possible to crash out with a No Deal on 31/12/2021.

If that is the case, then it needs amending so that isn't possible, or I don't see how the ex-Tory MPs and Lab can back it (assuming that is the case)

I don’t see how you can. In 2020 we will have negotiated several new trade deals, all to come into force on 1st Jan 2021, so forcing an extension of transition would interfere with that.

The EU need to have an incentive to quickly agree a FTA too. I would suggest polling and voter pressure is the way to avoid no deal, not by tying the PMs hands. I believe him if he says he doesn’t want no deal.

[Lancasterclaret]

I don’t see how you can. In 2020 we will have negotiated several new trade deals, all to come into force on 1st Jan 2021, so forcing an extension of transition would interfere with that.

The EU need to have an incentive to quickly agree a FTA too. I would suggest polling and voter pressure is the way to avoid no deal, not by tying the PMs hands. I believe him if he says he doesn’t want no deal.

You'll have to show me FTAs between major industrial countries arranged in that time scale Crosspool.

[Imploding Turtle]

You'll have to show me FTAs between major industrial countries arranged in that time scale Crosspool.

I hear Tuvalu are eager to sign a FTA. Although they have some conditions.

[aggi]

Not sure I agree with the thrust of Devil’s and your remarks on lobbying.

Have you heard of Gplus europe, FleishmanHillard, FTI, Cambre or Burson-Marsteller? They are communications firms with reach, high net worth individuals and businesses will use them to lobby in Brussels. Who are they? Who funds them? What do they believe in? How do we know what is discussed? All is vague, very opaque indeed.

Whereas in the UK, whilst indeed those same firms will be hovering around, we have lobbyists like the CBI and the IFS - fairly well understood and trusted. Yes, the likes of Murdoch could have had decent access in the past, but most access comes from bodies like these, and the unions, acting on behalf of a wide group of members.

Yes another big area where I think leaving is hugely beneficial.

Well GPlus Europe for instance are owned by Omnicom who are on the NYSE. Same for FleishmanHillard. These aren't secrets as you try to suggest, they're multinational firms (who are also active in the UK).

If you think the only access is those such as the CBI and IFS then you're hopelessly naive. Look at Priti Patel for instance, do you think that those donations and highly paid "jobs" from JCB are just for nothing. Do you think Hanover Communcations took Michael Fallon to the rugby because he's a good bloke and they enjoy watching matches with him?

[martin_p]

That doesn't really answer the question though.

It looks to me like its still possible to crash out with a No Deal on 31/12/2021.

If that is the case, then it needs amending so that isn't possible, or I don't see how the ex-Tory MPs and Lab can back it (assuming that is the case)

I think the dates are worse than that. As I remember it the transition period in May’s deal (which I don’t think has been changed) ended on 31/12/20. There is the facility for anything up to a two year extension (that Johnson has said he won’t use) but the request for an extension has to be submitted by the end of July 2020. That effectively gives us nine months to be very close to a trade deal. Add in the time inevitably lost to a likely election and it all seems very unlikely.

[Lancasterclaret]

https://twitter.com/nicholascecil/statu ... 5013937152" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There you have it Crosspool

ERG members specifically asking that its legal to crash out on a "No Deal" at the end of the transition period.

[Lancasterclaret]

https://twitter.com/nicholascecil/statu ... 5013937152

There you have it Crosspool

ERG members specifically asking that its legal to crash out on a "No Deal" at the end of the transition period.

Essentially he needs about 10 Labour MPs to vote for this deal.

Based on why the ERG are for the deal, its going to require written assurances on workers rights/level playing field surely?

[willsclarets]

Decision on the case brought my Jo Maugham in the Outer House that the withdrawal agreement isn't legal at 5pm.

[CrosspoolClarets]

You'll have to show me FTAs between major industrial countries arranged in that time scale Crosspool.

There has never been one where they start from a position of complete alignment.

[Lancasterclaret]

There has never been one where they start from a position of complete alignment.

But you know we won't stay at complete alignment because of the worldwide FTAs you are basing our economic recovery on.

What is wrong with saying "Well, there are none that have been completed in that time but I'm sure with a bit of British pluck and a can do attitude, then that won't matter?"

Or are you quite keen on the idea of a No Deal next year?

[AndrewJB]

Not sure I agree with the thrust of Devil’s and your remarks on lobbying.

Have you heard of Gplus europe, FleishmanHillard, FTI, Cambre or Burson-Marsteller? They are communications firms with reach, high net worth individuals and businesses will use them to lobby in Brussels. Who are they? Who funds them? What do they believe in? How do we know what is discussed? All is vague, very opaque indeed.

Whereas in the UK, whilst indeed those same firms will be hovering around, we have lobbyists like the CBI and the IFS - fairly well understood and trusted. Yes, the likes of Murdoch could have had decent access in the past, but most access comes from bodies like these, and the unions, acting on behalf of a wide group of members.

Yes another big area where I think leaving is hugely beneficial.

The influence Murdoch has in our politics is an affront to democracy.

[Paul Waine]

Interesting response by the Head of the IMF and particularly her comments on the impact on UK economy:

Ms Georgieva, 66, claimed that the worst economic effects of Brexit will have passed if MPs approve the deal on Saturday. “There are still implications for the UK economy . . . in the order of 2 percentage points with the caveat that a lot of that impact has already been absorbed.”

The Times report is headlined: IMF chief Kristalina Georgieva ‘jumped for joy’ on hearing Brexit deal

I've added the underlines, of course.

[Spijed]

Mark D'Arcy

Parliamentary Correspondent

Sir Oliver Letwin
PA MediaCopyright: PA Media
The latest gambit by an alliance of anti-no deal MPs could be a real problem for government whips.

Sir Oliver's amendment is a cunningly-crafted proposition which, crucially, could be voted for by MPs who want a deal, but don't trust this one, and don't trust the government.

It rests on the idea that were Parliament to approve the deal for the purposes of the Benn Act now, there might then be a danger that the subsequent legislation to enact it might be, somehow, derailed, resulting in a no-deal exit on 31 October.

With the Benn Act out of the way, they believe that some manoeuvre, some legislative judo move, by factions inside and outside the government, who favour a "clean Brexit" could leave no time for any effective counter… and Britain would be out, with no deal.

This reflects the sheer level of distrust that has accumulated over several cycles of Brexit angst.

[Spijed]

Could PM's deal pave way for no-deal? ERG checking....
The Evening Standard's deputy political editor tweets...

Members of the European Research Group (ERG) have asked Geoffrey Cox, the Attorney General, to confirm their view that the UK could leave the EU with "no deal" in a year's time even if Boris Johnson's withdrawal agreement is implemented, the Evening Standard reports.

The pro-Brexit group apparently thinks this scenario could come to pass in the event that the EU and the government are unable to agree on a trade deal once the transition period ends at the end of 2020.

[RingoMcCartney]

But you know we won't stay at complete alignment because of the worldwide FTAs you are basing our economic recovery on.

What is wrong with saying "Well, there are none that have been completed in that time but I'm sure with a bit of British pluck and a can do attitude, then that won't matter?"

Or are you quite keen on the idea of a No Deal next year?

Genuine question.

You're a lib dem Lancasterclaret.

Were they to form a government at the next general election they've said that, without a referendum, theyd scrap Article 50.

Do you agree with that policy?

[Imploding Turtle]

Genuine question.

You're a lib dem Lancasterclaret.

Were they to form a government at the next general election they've said that, without a referendum, theyd scrap Article 50.

Do you agree with that policy?

If it's part of their manifesto which got them elected then clearly it's what the public has decided it wants.

There's nothing wrong with a party enacting the promises on which is got elected. That's all we want the Brextremists to do. They campaigned on certain promised to win the Brexit vote, all we want is for them to honour those campaign promises.

[Lancasterclaret]

Genuine question.

You're a lib dem Lancasterclaret.

Were they to form a government at the next general election they've said that, without a referendum, theyd scrap Article 50.

Do you agree with that policy?

If they win the next election Ringo, i'll french kiss you!

[TheFamilyCat]

If they win the next election Ringo, i'll french kiss you!

He'll only accept an English kiss.

[RingoMcCartney]

If they win the next election Ringo, i'll french kiss you!

If I thought you were about to kiss me, I'd probably flee and hide in France!

Anyway, enough of your crush!

Do you agree with the policy, however unlikely?

[Spijed]

Alex Wickham
@alexwickham
·
47m
Tory whips balancing act

Some Spartans not backing deal yet, asking for commitment to leave transition period on WTO terms if a FTA cannot be agreed

Paterson a problem

But make that commitment and the former Tory rebels and Labour MPs will fall away

[RingoMcCartney]

If it's part of their manifesto which got them elected then clearly it's what the public has decided it wants.

There's nothing wrong with a party enacting the promises on which is got elected.

This is true.

It's called democracy.

[Lancasterclaret]

If I thought you were about to kiss me, I'd probably flee and hide in France!

Anyway, enough of your crush!

Do you agree with the policy, however unlikely?

Honestly?

I don't know

I'm torn really, as Parliament is sovereign, so in theory with a majority they could do whatever they wanted (same applies to Tories wanting to leave with a "No Deal" for example)

But overturning a referendum probably should involve another one.

But its one of those that I'd worry more about if it was likely.

And it isn't, though I can see the Lib Dems making big gains in an election.

[AndyClaret]

Sarah Champion to vote FOR the deal, that's 11 switchers now.

[RingoMcCartney]

Honestly?

I don't know

I'm torn really, as Parliament is sovereign, so in theory with a majority they could do whatever they wanted (same applies to Tories wanting to leave with a "No Deal" for example)

But overturning a referendum probably should involve another one.

But its one of those that I'd worry more about if it was likely.

And it isn't, though I can see the Lib Dems making big gains in an election.

Some serious fence sitting there.

Let me put it this way. If, at the next general election, the libdems have in their manifesto, a pledge to tear up Article 50 , would they get your vote?

[AndyClaret]

Macron: No further delay.

https://twitter.com/adamparsons/status/ ... 8937652225" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Lancasterclaret]

Some serious fence sitting there.

Let me put it this way. If, at the next general election, the libdems have in their manifesto, a pledge to tear up Article 50 , would they get your vote?

Of course.

I don't agree with everything in a manifesto btw.

Do you?

[Lancasterclaret]

Macron: No further delay.

https://twitter.com/adamparsons/status/ ... 8937652225" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You do know other people can see that tweet?

Why claim it says something it doesn't?

[Imploding Turtle]

This is true.

It's called democracy.

Yes. So we agree. If you promise something in a campaign, win based on those promises, and then after the vote you then try to enact something other than you promised everyone else gets to say "no, that's not what you campaigned on".

[AndyClaret]

Varadker: Do not assume we will grant an extension.

https://twitter.com/NicolaRBartlett/sta ... 3446828035" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Lancasterclaret]

Varadker: Do not assume we will grant an extension.

https://twitter.com/NicolaRBartlett/sta ... 3446828035" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Again, not a definite "no"

[RingoMcCartney]

Of course.

I don't agree with everything in a manifesto btw.

Do you?

No.

But presumably, you dont disagree with the idea of scrapping Article 50 enough, to vote for another party?

And youd vote Libdem fully aware that should they form a government, they will enact what they pledged to do in the manifesto you voted for?

Yes?

[Imploding Turtle]

You do know other people can see that tweet?

Why claim it says something it doesn't?

Because he knows that the reason the EU leaders are talking up the idea of no extension is quite possibly to help get this deal through parliament.

The reason Andy's framing it like a definitive statement from Macron is so that if the deal fails on Saturday, and the EU decide to grant an extension, Andy can lie and claim that the EU have gone back on their word.

[dsr]

It's in the EU's interest not to let the MPs know what they would do about an extension. If they say no extension, it encourages ERG to vote down the bill. If they say yes extension, it encourages the Leave-with-a-deal-but don't-want-to-vote-with-Johnson supporters to vote it down. Keep everyone guessing, and both types will probably vote for it for fear of something worse.

[Lancasterclaret]

No.

But presumably, you dont disagree with the idea of scrapping Article 50 enough, to vote for another party?

And youd vote Libdem fully aware that should they form a government, they will enact what they pledged to do in the manifesto you voted for?

Yes?

Well no

I voted labour last time to make sure the Tories didn't win my marginal. I agreed with some of their manifesto, and I didn't agree with other parts of it, but my main reason for voting Labour was to stop the Tories winning it. I won't be doing that this time because neither party has enough that I feel I can vote for.

Look, if the Lib Dems win the next election, they'd have to win seats they have never won. They'd have to win seats all over the country and they'd probably have to have a majority.

They'd need 321-330 seats.

Thats 304-313 more than they have now.

If they managed that, they'd have a mandate to do whatever they wanted.

As Johnston would or Corbyn would.

[AndyClaret]

You do know other people can see that tweet?

Why claim it says something it doesn't?