Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[martin_p]

I see where you're coming from. But I think we'd seek a further longer term extension to A50 in those circumstances. If we were to revoke A50 in its entirety it should only be as a result of a general election or referendum.

The scenario I’d posed was essentially an emergency revocation of a50 when no other options other than no deal were open to us. It’s the only case where I’d support revocation without another vote.

[taio]

You're slightly missing my point. To clarify: My point being that if an "extension" is off the table, and you were only left with the other two options,we would be keeping all options open by revoking but not by "No dealing".
In the circumstances I am describing there wouldn't be time for a referendum or GE, but one or the other or both could be held later if you revoked.
You can only revoke Article 50 "in its entirety", but there's absolutely nothing to stop any EU country invoking Article 50 at any time if they want to leave. Might not be a popular move with the EU to do it more than once, but if after further consideration we agree to re-invoke it, then it wouldn't really matter whether the EU were happy or not.

In those circumstances it's down to opinion. As I suggested both options would be very unpalatable to me. I only leaned toward one. It's splitting hairs really. I suspect HoC will overwhelmingly vote these as the two least favourable options. Not binding but can't be ignored.

[hampsteadclaret]

5587.. thank you for your polite reasonable reply.

I put some stats up today of my own, re putative voting results. They are all reasonably likely or thereabouts, in a second referendum, which many remainers want.

I was/am very interested in a second referendum result which provides a small % margin of victory

for REMAIN.

- because if that happened and they won say, by 2%, and went on to revoke Article 50 - that would cause loads of trouble bearing in mind the winning margin on 23/6/2016 was 3.8%.

I was hoping one of the remainers on here would grasp that, and acknowledge that grasping ‘victory’ in that way would cause trouble.

taio got that one clear, and so have you with your comment.

The rest danced round my clear question, refusing to state the obvious, and then trying to tell me I’m stupid for not understanding their evasive responses.

- transparent

** anyone pushing for a second referendum should see what John Curtice said ( briefly) today on the BBC.

[Jakubclaret]

Literally thousands of leavers would abstain with a 2nd referendum vote & I wouldn’t blame them, I wouldn’t vote again, it would make a mockery of democracy, if that’s the road they are going to go down, lots of people I should imagine when they voted initially thought that would be that & naturally expected the result to be respected & honoured.

[nil_desperandum]

In those circumstances it's down to opinion. As I suggested both options would be very unpalatable to me. I only leaned toward one. It's splitting hairs really. I suspect HoC will overwhelmingly vote these as the two least favourable options. Not binding but can't be ignored.

Actually we could arrive at this situation very soon. The default option remains No deal, but MPs have already voted against this, so if it came to the brink with nothing agreed then all those MPs who oppose No deal would have to seriously consider supporting a motion to revoke A50. Only 2 options would be on the table.
This has been the consequence of May continually kicking the can down the road and taking it to the line.

[taio]

Actually we could arrive at this situation very soon. The default option remains No deal, but MPs have already voted against this, so if it came to the brink with nothing agreed then all those MPs who oppose No deal would have to seriously consider supporting a motion to revoke A50. Only 2 options would be on the table.
This has been the consequence of May continually kicking the can down the road and taking it to the line.

We'll see - I don't believe we'll end up with just those two choices.

[nil_desperandum]

We'll see - I don't believe we'll end up with just those two choices.

Nor do I tbh, but at present it certainly can't be ruled out, since we are no nearer to a deal now than we have been for months.

[summitclaret]

Actually we could arrive at this situation very soon. The default option remains No deal, but MPs have already voted against this, so if it came to the brink with nothing agreed then all those MPs who oppose No deal would have to seriously consider supporting a motion to revoke A50. Only 2 options would be on the table.
This has been the consequence of May continually kicking the can down the road and taking it to the line.

Surely they would vote for May's deal and all stop olaying games.

[summitclaret]

There are CU/SM options coming out like mad now. Here come the remainers many ignoring their voters. This is going to end in a bloodbath as the tories will never accept such blatant dismissal of their manifesto. Surely they will put a 3 line whip on May's deal in the indicative votes

[nil_desperandum]

There are CU/SM options coming out like mad now. Here come the remainers many ignoring their voters. This is going to end in a bloodbath as the tories will never accept such blatant dismissal of their manifesto. Surely they will put a 3 line whip on May's deal in the indicative votes

Wasn't it whipped by the Tories on the previous 2 occasions it was defeated (heavily) in the commons?

[summitclaret]

Its different now. The ones she needs to worry about are the many remainers in the government. She need to ensure rhat her deal beats any softer (pointless imo) Brexit.

[nil_desperandum]

Its different now. The ones she needs to worry about are the many remainers in the government. She need to ensure rhat her deal beats any softer (pointless imo) Brexit.

Well yes, but the ERG members will either vote for it or they won't - it won't matter whether they are "whipped" or not. That's my point.
They've twice before defied the whip on this, so it won't make a jot of difference this time. If they've changed their minds then they'll back May's deal, but at this stage it won't be because they've been "whipped".

[bfcjg]

If May hadn't of called the election and lost her majority the Ulster Unionists would have been as they always have been the "respectable" face of the UVF/UDA and what a shame gangsters are holding the UK to ransom.

[Lord Beamish]

]

* maybe your new errand boy Beamish could have a crack at it?

Errand boy. That’s funny. Not as funny as my liking of Lancaster’s post getting right under the skin of this messageboard’s biggest blowhards(and there’s some serious competition for that ‘accolade’).

[Greenmile]

5587.. thank you for your polite reasonable reply.

I put some stats up today of my own, re putative voting results. They are all reasonably likely or thereabouts, in a second referendum, which many remainers want.

I was/am very interested in a second referendum result which provides a small % margin of victory

for REMAIN.

- because if that happened and they won say, by 2%, and went on to revoke Article 50 - that would cause loads of trouble bearing in mind the winning margin on 23/6/2016 was 3.8%.

I was hoping one of the remainers on here would grasp that, and acknowledge that grasping ‘victory’ in that way would cause trouble.

taio got that one clear, and so have you with your comment.

The rest danced round my clear question, refusing to state the obvious, and then trying to tell me I’m stupid for not understanding their evasive responses.

- transparent

** anyone pushing for a second referendum should see what John Curtice said ( briefly) today on the BBC.

What sort of trouble?

Try not to dance ‘round my clear question if you can.

[TheFamilyCat]

Literally thousands of leavers would abstain with a 2nd referendum vote & I wouldn’t blame them, I wouldn’t vote again, it would make a mockery of democracy, if that’s the road they are going to go down, lots of people I should imagine when they voted initially thought that would be that & naturally expected the result to be respected & honoured.

You think that given a chance to win again and make it impossible to deny them of Brexit, people would abstain from voting?

Or are you just getting your excuses in early?

[Jakubclaret]

You think that given a chance to win again and make it impossible to deny them of Brexit, people would abstain from voting?

Or are you just getting your excuses in early?

Actually I think I was wrong earlier saying thousands I thought about it afterwards I actually think it would be millions, it’s a point of principle, this informed argument as justification is quite frankly ******** & insulting, people knew exactly what they were voting for & people who don’t usually vote all made the effort, for years prior to this people were reading the newspapers & watching the television, since 1975 we haven’t been experiencing a media blackout.

[Lowbankclaret]

Now here’s a reason to stay in the EU. Great idea.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/cars/ ... rules.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[summitclaret]

Well yes, but the ERG members will either vote for it or they won't - it won't matter whether they are "whipped" or not. That's my point.
They've twice before defied the whip on this, so it won't make a jot of difference this time. If they've changed their minds then they'll back May's deal, but at this stage it won't be because they've been "whipped".

I agre re thd ERG. However you are still missing my point my point. Its the many remainers in the government that the whip is needed for now that there us momentum behind the none brexit CU/SU option.

[nil_desperandum]

I agre re thd ERG. However you are still missing my point my point. Its the many remainers in the government that the whip is needed for now that there us momentum behind the none brexit CU/SU option.

Maybe true, but lets' be honest: we're well past the stage now where May has any authority to whip" her MPs on any motion. She's a total lame duck.

[TheFamilyCat]

Actually I think I was wrong earlier saying thousands I thought about it afterwards I actually think it would be millions, it’s a point of principle, this informed argument as justification is quite frankly ******** & insulting, people knew exactly what they were voting for & people who don’t usually vote all made the effort, for years prior to this people were reading the newspapers & watching the television, since 1975 we haven’t been experiencing a media blackout.

I think the last 33 months have proved precisely that people didn’t know what they were voting for*

If it comes to a second vote, after all possible outcomes have been agreed** (as should have happened before the referendum), then surely people who feel so passionately about it will vote again to make sure it happens.

*It’s very important here to point out that what you wanted and what you were actually voting for are two different things. For extra evidence to support this, I present exhibit A, Brexiteer Michael Gove who stated that no deal was never aim of the campaign he helped to lead.

**the preferred option of another of your Brexit figureheads, Jacob Rees-Mogg.

[Jakubclaret]

I think the last 33 months have proved precisely that people didn’t know what they were voting for*

If it comes to a second vote, after all possible outcomes have been agreed** (as should have happened before the referendum), then surely people who feel so passionately about it will vote again to make sure it happens.

*It’s very important here to point out that what you wanted and what you were actually voting for are two different things. For extra evidence to support this, I present exhibit A, Brexiteer Michael Gove who stated that no deal was never aim of the campaign he helped to lead.

**the preferred option of another of your Brexit figureheads, Jacob Rees-Mogg.

Well you can all spin & distort the truth, in truth 3 years things haven’t really changed that much we’ve had over 40 years locked inside the thing & probably will never see a release, it’s freedom of choice whether people decide to vote again, I won’t be doing & my opinion however much waffle or persuasion you throw at people plenty of others will do the same, I’m turning in, night.

[TheFamilyCat]

Well you can all spin & distort the truth, in truth 3 years things haven’t really changed that much we’ve had over 40 years locked inside the thing & probably will never see a release, it’s freedom of choice whether people decide to vote again, I won’t be doing & my opinion however much waffle or persuasion you throw at people plenty of others will do the same, I’m turning in, night.

I’ve not spun or distorted anything. Not have I thrown any persuasion at anyone. Just saying things as I see them and questioning what doesn’t seem to make sense.

[nil_desperandum]

Question for Jakub and any other brexiteer currently engaged in this debate.
How would you feel about May standing down and being replaced by Gove, (one of the favourites to replace her)?
(Bearing in mind he was one of the leaders of the Leave campaign but now claims that he never advocated leaving without a deal, backs May's deal, and says that if May's deal is voted down he might support a softer Norway type arrangement).

[Lowbankclaret]

No one wants a Norway deal, that’s the worst outcome we could have.

All the rules and controls from Europe, paying the same amount, but getting no grants or help and no MEP’s. No trade deals outside of the EU.That’s not leaving, that’s surrendering to the EU.
I would prefer to stay in.

[Rick_Muller]

No one wants a Norway deal, that’s the worst outcome we could have.

All the rules and controls from Europe, paying the same amount, but getting no grants or help and no MEP’s. No trade deals outside of the EU.That’s not leaving, that’s surrendering to the EU.
I would prefer to stay in.

lets hope the penny drops for others...

[aggi]

No one wants a Norway deal, that’s the worst outcome we could have.

All the rules and controls from Europe, paying the same amount, but getting no grants or help and no MEP’s. No trade deals outside of the EU.That’s not leaving, that’s surrendering to the EU.
I would prefer to stay in.

Norway can make their own trade deals outside of the EU and pay less.

Seriously, after you posted a load of made-up stuff yesterday I thought you may at least think about whether what you're regurgitating has any basis in fact.

[Lowbankclaret]

Any deal that locks us into free movement, still accepting all EU law and not allowing other trade deals, is not a deal we should be doing. We will be significantly worse off and the EU will punish us for generations with no way to buy from anywhere else.

[summitclaret]

There are going to be dozens of alternative indicative options at this rate. Any bets that the limelight one does not even select a free trade deal for the ballot list.

[South West Claret.]

I trust the vote will be secret..as in the true Tory tradition?

[Lowbankclaret]

Norway can make their own trade deals outside of the EU and pay less.

Seriously, after you posted a load of made-up stuff yesterday I thought you may at least think about whether what you're regurgitating has any basis in fact.

I spent 6 months debating this with a Norway national who worked with us , Marcus contiously said we were better staying in than the deal they have.

Norway pay the same amount per head, so yes they pay less, we would pay the same as we do today.

The EU rules are very restrictive, so whilst you may in theory be allowed to do trade deals , EU laws prevent it.

As the US trade advisor said on Radio 4 last week. If you accept a free trade deal with the EU and accept the EU restrictions on Agriculture you cannot have a trade deal with the US. He was saying if the UK do a trade deal it needs to avoid these restrictions.

[CombatClaret]

I spent 6 months debating this with a Norway national who worked with us , Marcus contiously said we were better staying in than the deal they have.
Norway pay the same amount per head, so yes they pay less, we would pay the same as we do today.
The EU rules are very restrictive, so whilst you may in theory be allowed to do trade deals , EU laws prevent it.

Being outside the Common Commercial Policy gives Norway and other EEA members the
freedom to strike new trade deals with third countries. Iceland, for example, recently
concluded an FTA with China. However, trade deals signed by EFTA countries tend to be
shallower than the EU’s, which reflect its close alignment to the EU’s regulatory model. - Fullfact.org

So not prevented in any way.

[Lowbankclaret]

Norway population 5.3 million.
UK population 63.4 million

This info says it’s difficult to compare but Norway pays approx 12% less than UK per head . So we would save very little with a Norway deal and possibly have tariffs imposed as happens to Norway’s agriculture.

https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-eu-payments/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[aggi]

I spent 6 months debating this with a Norway national who worked with us , Marcus contiously said we were better staying in than the deal they have.

Norway pay the same amount per head, so yes they pay less, we would pay the same as we do today.

The EU rules are very restrictive, so whilst you may in theory be allowed to do trade deals , EU laws prevent it.

As the US trade advisor said on Radio 4 last week. If you accept a free trade deal with the EU and accept the EU restrictions on Agriculture you cannot have a trade deal with the US. He was saying if the UK do a trade deal it needs to avoid these restrictions.

Or, according to the facts, they pay less per head. https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-eu-payments/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Really? Someone should tell the EU that EFTA have been out making trade deals that they're not allowed to https://www.efta.int/free-trade/free-tr ... /hong-kong" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[martin_p]

Or, according to the facts, they pay less per head. https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-eu-payments/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Really? Someone should tell the EU that EFTA have been out making trade deals that they're not allowed to https://www.efta.int/free-trade/free-tr ... /hong-kong" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Can’t believe that someone would be misinformed about their relationship with the he EU in Norway. That would never happen here.

[South West Claret.]

Dear South West Claret,

The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Revoke Article 50 and remain in the EU.”.

Government responded:

This Government will not revoke Article 50. We will honour the result of the 2016 referendum and work with Parliament to deliver a deal that ensures we leave the European Union.

It remains the Government’s firm policy not to revoke Article 50. We will honour the outcome of the 2016 referendum and work to deliver an exit which benefits everyone, whether they voted to Leave or to Remain.

Revoking Article 50, and thereby remaining in the European Union, would undermine both our democracy and the trust that millions of voters have placed in Government.

The Government acknowledges the considerable number of people who have signed this petition. However, close to three quarters of the electorate took part in the 2016 referendum, trusting that the result would be respected. This Government wrote to every household prior to the referendum, promising that the outcome of the referendum would be implemented. 17.4 million people then voted to leave the European Union, providing the biggest democratic mandate for any course of action ever directed at UK Government.

British people cast their votes once again in the 2017 General Election where over 80% of those who voted, voted for parties, including the Opposition, who committed in their manifestos to upholding the result of the referendum.

This Government stands by this commitment.

Revoking Article 50 would break the promises made by Government to the British people, disrespect the clear instruction from a democratic vote, and in turn, reduce confidence in our democracy. As the Prime Minister has said, failing to deliver Brexit would cause “potentially irreparable damage to public trust”, and it is imperative that people can trust their Government to respect their votes and deliver the best outcome for them.

Department for Exiting the European Union.

Click this link to view the response online:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petition ... sponse=yes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This petition has over 100,000 signatures. The Petitions Committee will consider it for a debate. They can also gather further evidence and press the government for action.

The Committee is made up of 11 MPs, from political parties in government and in opposition. It is entirely independent of the Government. Find out more about the Committee: https://petition.parliament.uk/help#petitions-committee" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament

[dsr]

I wonder if this petition will have the desired effect of making the MPs talk about Brexit?

[nil_desperandum]

No one wants a Norway deal, that’s the worst outcome we could have.

.

Just to be clear - until leave won the referendum Farage was telling us that the Norway or Switzerland option would be really good for the UK.
He's even captured on Youtube saying it:

"I have to say that everybody from David Cameron to half this panel say, "Wouldn't it be terrible if we were like Norway and Switzerland?" Really? They're rich. They're happy. They're self governing.

Speaking on BBC Question Time in Lincoln, 17 January 2013.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd32oZCI1ZU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[CrosspoolClarets]

The reason people used Norway and Switzerland as examples in 2016 was because they were out of the EU. No European country was out with a Canada style FTA so nobody could be held up as an example. No doubts though that we are a more attractive trading partner than either of the above two, we are the world’s fifth biggest economy, so I don’t think we should feel we only should mirror what they have.

However, in the interests of balance, what they have isn’t bad. Not great, but not bad (as long as you love unlimited migration). The bad bit would be if we add a unique “plus” to the Norway and stay in a customs union, following EU tariffs designed to suit Germany and other big EU exporters. That would be a disaster. You only have to look at some of the records of the people suggesting it to see their judgement - e.g. Oliver Letwin and the Poll Tax.

[aggi]

Rees Mogg willing to support May's deal if the DUP do:

I apologise for changing my mind. Theresa May’s deal is a bad one, it does not deliver on the promises made in the Tory Party manifesto and its negotiation was a failure of statesmanship.

A £39 billion bill for nothing, a minimum of 21 months of vassalage, the continued involvement of the European Court and, worst of all, a backstop with no end date.

Yet, I am now willing to support it if the Democratic Unionist Party does, and by doing so will be accused of infirmity of purpose by some and treachery by others.

Clearly realised that the EU aren't going to crumble at the 11th hour and panicked about no Brexit at all. Nice how he blames it on everyone else though.

[martin_p]

Rees Mogg willing to support May's deal if the DUP do:

I apologise for changing my mind. Theresa May’s deal is a bad one, it does not deliver on the promises made in the Tory Party manifesto and its negotiation was a failure of statesmanship.

A £39 billion bill for nothing, a minimum of 21 months of vassalage, the continued involvement of the European Court and, worst of all, a backstop with no end date.

Yet, I am now willing to support it if the Democratic Unionist Party does, and by doing so will be accused of infirmity of purpose by some and treachery by others.

Clearly realised that the EU aren't going to crumble at the 11th hour and panicked about no Brexit at all. Nice how he blames it on everyone else though.

He’s still delegating decision making to the DUP though. And this on a day when the DUP Brexit spokesman has said a long extension would be better than May’s deal. Besides, others in the ERG don’t have such ‘infirmity of purpose’ and May needs pretty much all of them on her side.

[AndyClaret]

Being outside the Common Commercial Policy gives Norway and other EEA members the
freedom to strike new trade deals with third countries. Iceland, for example, recently
concluded an FTA with China. However, trade deals signed by EFTA countries tend to be
shallower than the EU’s, which reflect its close alignment to the EU’s regulatory model. - Fullfact.org

So not prevented in any way.

Norway aren't in the customs union, the plan is for us to be in a customs union, so no, we won't be able to make free trade deals.

[Rick_Muller]

Parliament is going to debate the petition you signed – “Revoke Article 50 and remain in the EU.”.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The debate is scheduled for 1 April 2019.

Once the debate has happened, we’ll email you a video and transcript.

Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament

[ClaretAndJew]

Nothing will happen

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

Rees Mogg willing to support May's deal if the DUP do:

I apologise for changing my mind. Theresa May’s deal is a bad one, it does not deliver on the promises made in the Tory Party manifesto and its negotiation was a failure of statesmanship.

A £39 billion bill for nothing, a minimum of 21 months of vassalage, the continued involvement of the European Court and, worst of all, a backstop with no end date.

Yet, I am now willing to support it if the Democratic Unionist Party does, and by doing so will be accused of infirmity of purpose by some and treachery by others.

Clearly realised that the EU aren't going to crumble at the 11th hour and panicked about no Brexit at all. Nice how he blames it on everyone else though.

What an utter tool this man is.

[SmudgetheClaret]

The Liberal Left and Lies (over the cliff edge)

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/11058 ... eith-Still" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Jakubclaret]

What an utter tool this man is.

He’s not far from it, the rise as been remarkable he’s a very clever shrewd politician who in time I believe as designs on number 10, the way he has engineered things so far & obscurely, May is on borrowed time & when the time comes I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he emerges as 1 of the favourites, he’s not my kind of politician but he’s far from stupid & you can see the method to the madness that now he’s becoming lukewarm to a idea when mays position is under threat, the damage as already been done it’s the waiting game.

[SmudgetheClaret]

I honestly don’t get the panic from Jacob who I admire ! let’s go for a decent extension let the Brexit party smash the EU elections along with euro sceptics right across the block and bring the Tower of Babel down one small bite at a time !

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

Worrying people admire Jacob. Course he has designs on number 10 all part of this process as well as further lining his pockets along the way. No lose for the likes of him.

[Lancasterclaret]

Norway aren't in the customs union, the plan is for us to be in a customs union, so no, we won't be able to make free trade deals.

This is why I don't really like it when it gets specific.

Yes, we can't do free trade deals, but we also have the full advantage of all the EU trade deals (which is a bigger market, so their deal will be better than the ones we could negotiate*)

*might be odd exceptions, but the point still stands.

It would absolutely lift the level of debate if people could acknowledge the pros and cons of each part of the deal.

And worth mentioning as well that me and andyclaret broadly agree on the need for us to be in a customs union (because of the frictionless trade)