Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:33 am

"No Irish border" v reality in the event of a "No Deal"

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/11 ... 4131497985" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Elizabeth · Post by **Elizabeth** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:35 am

So far nobody has taken up my scenario of the PMs deal falling short by a few votes. What would happen next?
I did not intend to undermine your perception of authority Lancaster so as a way of an apology let me put it to you first.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:37 am

https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/ ... 1792243712" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Answers your question Elizabeth.

DUP basically saying "No", also reading between the lines that they would rather stay than risk divergence between NI and rest of UK.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:40 am

dsr wrote:I wasn't asking based on personal opinion, but on legal knowledge. The Brexit process is no longer under control of the UK, at least from Friday it isn't; is the Article 50 process under control of the UK, or are we back to doing whatever the EU tells us to?

I asked the same question. I don't have a definitive answer but I discussed it with a barrister I know who believed that we still had the option to revoke unilaterally.

I assume if that wasn't the case it would have been mentioned somewhere.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:42 am

aggi wrote:I asked the same question. I don't have a definitive answer but I discussed it with a barrister I know who believed that we still had the option to revoke unilaterally.

I assume if that wasn't the case it would have been mentioned somewhere.

But as I’ve said, if we asked to EU to revoke for us it’d be done before we’d finished the sentence anyway.

Elizabeth · Post by **Elizabeth** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:42 am

I will leave you Twitter's to it Lancaster.

No deal is no longer part of any reasonable debate on Brexit so I think any mention of it now further complicates the matter. Hope you agree.

What I'm getting at is that if the PMs deal loses by a very small number ,will she be given a 4th chance?

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:43 am

nil_desperandum wrote:It's not comparable because the referendum was a free vote in which every vote was equal and there was no precedent.
This evening 30 MPs voted against their own government in a crucial vote despite having a clear instruction to vote against the amendment. This is pretty massive in parliamentary terms, and was a bigger majority than was expected.

Ok take your point and begrudgingly accept it..... sulking

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:43 am

martin_p wrote:In what way is it less under our control than it is now.

Because we can't set the date. We can't leave on Friday under UK law because the date of leaving is now subject to the EU's say-so, and no matter what Parliament says, the EU makes the decision.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:48 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:"No Irish border" v reality in the event of a "No Deal"

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/11 ... 4131497985" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you ever thoguht there would be no border at all, then you were barking up completely the wrong tree. The point of the border is whether or not there should be fences and customs gates, not whether it should exist at all.

That tweet is putting up unanswerable questions and then complaining there are no answers. Of course it will be easier to commit fraud when there isn't a hard border; we know that from pre-IRA days when government subsidies were different between north and south, and fraud was committed then. But now with electronic trails and so forth, major fraud will be easier to spot and (just like now) HMRC will be able to chase the crooks within the UK.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:54 am

Donald Tusk does Stand Up
He Quips: Remainers are not sufficiently represented within Parliament.... lol
Donald Luvvie, By Constituency 406 voted Leave - 242 Voted Remain
By MPS 160 Voted Leave - 486 Voted Remain

He follows Up: Growing numbers of British people want to stay in The EU .... er evidence
1 million march - 6 million voted on the revoke Article 50 App .... Pmsl
Donald Darling 16 million voted remain - that's not more mate

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:06 pm

MPs are outraged that The Government does not have to accept the indicative votes of democratically elected members of the House.
Can you imagine if those said MPs were choosing to ignore the Electorate that democratically put them there in the first place and the manifestos on which they were elected and even a bill they previously voted into Law.
You reap what you sow..... now shut up, no one is listening to you any more, your time as an Member of Parliament is nearly up.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:22 pm

If you ever thoguht there would be no border at all, then you were barking up completely the wrong tree. The point of the border is whether or not there should be fences and customs gates, not whether it should exist at all.

That tweet is putting up unanswerable questions and then complaining there are no answers. Of course it will be easier to commit fraud when there isn't a hard border; we know that from pre-IRA days when government subsidies were different between north and south, and fraud was committed then. But now with electronic trails and so forth, major fraud will be easier to spot and (just like now) HMRC will be able to chase the crooks within the UK.

Come off it DSR.

You are an accountant. You know that is not a feasible long term solution. You know this.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:30 pm

Labour are whipping in support of the referendum indicative vote.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:32 pm

dsr wrote:Because we can't set the date. We can't leave on Friday under UK law because the date of leaving is now subject to the EU's say-so, and no matter what Parliament says, the EU makes the decision.

We can’t leave on Friday because of our decision to ask for an extension. Our decision.

Elizabeth · Post by **Elizabeth** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:39 pm

The PM would be best advised in my opinion to leave her third attempt to get her deal through Parliament until after these indicative votes have been finalised.

Elizabeth · Post by **Elizabeth** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:41 pm

For clarity Julie Cooper , Labour MP for Burnley is on record every time the referendum subject has come up, as stating she will not support a second referendum.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:50 pm

martin_p wrote:We can’t leave on Friday because of our decision to ask for an extension. Our decision.

Exactly. We can't leave on Friday, even though UK law still stays we must. We aren't in control.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:51 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Come off it DSR.

You are an accountant. You know that is not a feasible long term solution. You know this.

I presume you think MTD (Making Tax Digital) won't help?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:54 pm

If we leave with a No deal in two weeks time?

Last update we had said 6% of businesses had signed up for it.

So no, not really!

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:55 pm

dsr wrote:I wasn't asking based on personal opinion, but on legal knowledge. The Brexit process is no longer under control of the UK, at least from Friday it isn't; is the Article 50 process under control of the UK, or are we back to doing whatever the EU tells us to?

Legal knowledge isn't required. It was made quite clear in December, (and confirmed by an ECJ ruling,) that Parliament is sovereign and that if we choose to invoke or revoke Article 50, it's a decision for the UK alone. We have total control over this until we leave, and if we've left then the question is irrelevant.
(But I suspect you already knew this)

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:55 pm

martin_p wrote:Nissan cite Brexit as a problem as the withdraw new jobs from the UK.

Just in case you want to be accurate, it might be worth pointing out that Nissan said it wasn't a Brexit related decision, is was a business related decision; and also that it was the Brexit uncertainty, not Brexit itself, that wasn't helping.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:57 pm

You want to claim that as a "Win" for Brexit, you knock yourself out. Jeez.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:58 pm

dsr wrote:Exactly. We can't leave on Friday, even though UK law still stays we must. We aren't in control.

And that law will be amended tonight.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:59 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:If we leave with a No deal in two weeks time?

Last update we had said 6% of businesses had signed up for it.

So no, not really!

By "long term" I assumed you meant more than a fortnight.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:59 pm

Elizabeth wrote:For clarity Julie Cooper , Labour MP for Burnley is on record every time the referendum subject has come up, as stating she will not support a second referendum.

That's a truly daft statement to make by your MP.
I don't favour a 2nd vote myself at present, but no one should rule it out under any circumstances.
If, for example, it came down to a binary choice between a referendum and revoking Article 50 (and therefore remaining), then Cooper should back a referendum because her constituents still want to leave - according to available data, and she would be denying them the chance.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:59 pm

martin_p wrote:And that law will be amended tonight.

Which will make no difference at all.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:01 pm

dsr wrote:Just in case you want to be accurate, it might be worth pointing out that Nissan said it wasn't a Brexit related decision, is was a business related decision; and also that it was the Brexit uncertainty, not Brexit itself, that wasn't helping.

Wow, how many weeks have you gone back to pick that out. Do you think Brexit uncertainty exists without Brexit? Are they separate unrelated entities? You seem to be on some extreme semantic rush today with this and your article 50 legal argument!

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:04 pm

dsr wrote:Which will make no difference at all.

Will it not, ok. We’ve chosen (or at least parliament has) not to leave on Friday. I’m not sure how that constitutes us not making a decision.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:04 pm

By "long term" I assumed you meant more than a fortnight.

Okay, so you think MTD will be ready in six months? a year? ever?

The main point is that the technical solutions which are required will require more than MTD.

That tech does not exist without some sort of infrastructure.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:05 pm

martin_p wrote:Wow, how many weeks have you gone back to pick that out. Do you think Brexit uncertainty exists without Brexit? Are they separate unrelated entities? You seem to be on some extreme semantic rush today with this and your article 50 legal argument!

Obviously they are related. But we had the chance to end all this Brexit uncertainty, simply by carrying out the referendum result. Remainers have ensured that Brexit uncertainty goes on, because they think that Brexit uncertainty (and paying out vast sums of money) are a better option that Brexit certainty, paying less, and trading under WTO rules.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:08 pm

Elizabeth wrote:I doubt there are many if any posters who are informed enough to comment with any authority on this complicated Brexit matter.
Many remain voters have for a long time wanted the UK to honour the referendum result.
My biggest regret in the whole sorry situation has been witnessing the antics of fellow citizens and members of Parliament who have from the day after the referendum result made it their purpose to overturn what was a clear message from voters that they wanted to leave

I know, from some of the sagely posts executing that conclusion can only be the outcome, some of us would be better off deployed within employment for parliament in the House of Commons upper & lower houses, some of us are wasted discussing this on a football forum.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:09 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Okay, so you think MTD will be ready in six months? a year? ever?

The main point is that the technical solutions which are required will require more than MTD.

That tech does not exist without some sort of infrastructure.

It'll be a lot longer than that. Long term, in fact. But are you trying to design a system where no-one can possibly commit any sort of fraud at all, ever? Or are you trying to design one where there might be smaller petty frauds but you can still catch most of what you catch now? You can't get a perfect system; we don't have one now, even though we have a sea border. We need a system that is good enough for the purpose, and I see know reason why that can't be done with the technology available now and still in development.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:10 pm

I want the system we have now.

Works okay

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:12 pm

dsr wrote:Obviously they are related. But we had the chance to end all this Brexit uncertainty, simply by carrying out the referendum result. Remainers have ensured that Brexit uncertainty goes on, because they think that Brexit uncertainty (and paying out vast sums of money) are a better option that Brexit certainty, paying less, and trading under WTO rules.

Yes, remainers like Jacob Rees-Mogg, Boris Johnson and Steve Baker. You continue to blame others for the mess we’re in if you want, it’s what Brexiteers do best, but back in the real world businesses understand how disasterous a no deal Brexit would be.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:20 pm

martin_p wrote:Yes, remainers like Jacob Rees-Mogg, Boris Johnson and Steve Baker. You continue to blame others for the mess we’re in if you want, it’s what Brexiteers do best, but back in the real world businesses understand how disasterous a no deal Brexit would be.

Economically, we aren't in a mess. We're doing very well. Now, if only we could rid of this Brexit uncertainty, we'd be away.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:22 pm

Now, if only we could rid of this Brexit uncertainty, we'd be away.

"Will someone not rid me of this turbulent priest?"

(I reckon dsr is calling for the revoking Article 50 there)

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:26 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:"Will someone not rid me of this turbulent priest?"

(I reckon dsr is calling for the revoking Article 50 there)

That wouldn't help. Deciding to implement the referendum result might help calm the waters. Deciding to ignore it, wouldn't.

Essentially, it's simple. We voted to leave the EU, and the implication was the MPs would do it on the best possible terms. They have tried, and got no terms off the EU that even Remainers can stomach, and so we should just go. Neither the world, nor world trade, will end.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:34 pm

dsr wrote:That wouldn't help. Deciding to implement the referendum result might help calm the waters. Deciding to ignore it, wouldn't.

Essentially, it's simple. We voted to leave the EU, and the implication was the MPs would do it on the best possible terms. They have tried, and got no terms off the EU that even Remainers can stomach, and so we should just go. Neither the world, nor world trade, will end.

That pretty much sums this up, nobody seems to be in agreement about anything, we should have the courage of our convictions & crack on with a no deal, I also think if we was aggressive with this stance, I’d wager the EU would climb down & also start try to negotiate even further, we have nothing to lose really with the unacceptable deal on offer.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:35 pm

Business have clarity if we revoke dsr.

More clarity than you could shake a stick at.

And saying "No Deal" when you know its not what was voted for and by ignoring the implications doesn't help your cause.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:39 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Business have clarity if we revoke dsr.

More clarity than you could shake a stick at.

And saying "No Deal" when you know its not what was voted for and by ignoring the implications doesn't help your cause.

There is no clarity in a divided House of Commons and the knowledge that another referendum is round the corner when the Conservative party eventually decides to follow its membership and the people who voted for it.

As for the referendum, the vote was to leave the EU. You have managed to persuade yourself that some of the people who voted leave really meant remain and others meant leave, but in a way that looks as much like remain as possible; but the only definite fact about what we voted for, was that we voted to leave. The intransigence of the EU and the incompetence of our own politicians does not change that fact.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:43 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Business have clarity if we revoke dsr.

More clarity than you could shake a stick at.

And saying "No Deal" when you know its not what was voted for and by ignoring the implications doesn't help your cause.

We all voted with the actual realisation & possibilities of a deal or no deal, unfortunately it could transpire to be a no deal despite negotiations, it’s nothing that wasn’t envisaged prior. Businesses will just have to adapt & manage & there’s no logical reason why there couldn’t, free from restriction some businesses will flourish in a different economic landscape & have the scope to innovate.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:53 pm

Just in. Tories to get free votes and cabinet to abstain.

Labour say want referendum on tory brexit but not if the get in power

You could not make either of the above up.

Time to sack the lot of them

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:53 pm

Labour support a referendum. Unless of course it's their deal...

https://mobile.twitter.com/RobDotHutton ... 0209516544" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You could make it up, I suppose. No-one would believe you. But you could...

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:57 pm

I love Rob Hutton. V good at getting the best quotes!

You have managed to persuade yourself that some of the people who voted leave really meant remain and others meant leave

And you've convinced yourself that 17.4 million people voted for a "No Deal" and your own personal vision of Brexit.

Mays deal was the compromise, but I've got this feeling that the zealots of Brexit have blown themselves and it up, and who knows what we end up with?

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:02 pm

Just look at rhis new poll. How bad must corbyn be to be so far behind May.

At 13.48

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-poli ... s-47696409" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:05 pm

Surprised he is rated that high, guy is a **** and a danger

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:06 pm

dsr wrote:There is no clarity in a divided House of Commons and the knowledge that another referendum is round the corner when the Conservative party eventually decides to follow its membership and the people who voted for it.

As for the referendum, the vote was to leave the EU. You have managed to persuade yourself that some of the people who voted leave really meant remain and others meant leave, but in a way that looks as much like remain as possible; but the only definite fact about what we voted for, was that we voted to leave. The intransigence of the EU and the incompetence of our own politicians does not change that fact.

And there was a deal on the table which would mean we’d be out of the EU in less than sixty hours time if JRM and his mates hadn’t scuppered it.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:08 pm

summitclaret wrote:Just in. Tories to get free votes and cabinet to abstain.

Labour say want referendum on tory brexit but not if the get in power

You could not make either of the above up.

Time to sack the lot of them

We might get that chance soon with a GE,what that will do to the brexit process heaven knows.

I have to smile at Labour's position,their not that principled regarding another referendum,wonder what their members make of this.

You'd almost think they where just being opportunistic to grab power surely not.

All these upstanding members of parliament have the best interest of the country at heart course they do.

Clearly Labour turned a deaf ear to the EU saying no more negotiations over the WA.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:14 pm

dsr wrote:Because we can't set the date. We can't leave on Friday under UK law because the date of leaving is now subject to the EU's say-so, and no matter what Parliament says, the EU makes the decision.

That was because the UK sent them a letter asking for that though. If we'd wanted to leave on Friday we could have done. The UK requested the extension, not the EU.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:14 pm

tiger76 wrote:We might get that chance soon with a GE,what that will do to the brexit process heaven knows.

I have to smile at Labour's position,their not that principled regarding another referendum,wonder what their members make of this.

You'd almost think they where just being opportunistic to grab power surely not.

Their members are massively in favour of a referendum so most will be delighted.