Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:07 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:You know as well as I do , that I said the losing parties manifestos are binned and only the winning party in a general election has its manifesto enacted. .

Ok. So out of interest, and no deflecting here:
Which party won the last election? (Arguably the DUP?)
No party can say to have had its manifesto endorsed, because no party won.
Biggest losers the Tories. Labour not good enough to get more seats than them. SNP lost seats etc. etc.
So if you must persist with this line of argument, just tell us which manifesto from 2017 should be endorsed, and which should be binned?
Both the referendum and the subsequent GE suggest that the electorate are looking for compromise, they're not giving any specific issue or party a significant mandate.

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:11 pm

Did I just hear Theresa May quote a f#cking Russian Meerkat...???

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:18 pm

You have to stop taking manifestos as gospel in a moving situation. Situations change, policies have to react to those changing situations, even if it means that you sometimes have to ditch manifesto promises. There's already a list of Tory manifesto promises that they've ditched, why haven't you been so vocal about those Wrongo?

Claret-On-A-T-Rex · Post by **Claret-On-A-T-Rex** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:22 pm

Oh dear, sounds to me like we won't be leaving on 29th March after all.

What does Theresa May say, we leave with a deal, leave with no deal or don't leave at all.

May can't get a deal, no deal will be voted down so that only leaves one option, we won't be leaving, like I've always said.

The intelligent will fix the mistakes of the stupid.

I hope all you Leave voters are ready to storm Parliament (if you can find your way/the money to get to London).

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:22 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Their manifesto pledge was to leave the European Union. Full stop. It was literally in black and white.

So why are you not furious at all of the MPs (both brexiteers and remain) who voted down May's deal?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:26 pm

Rick_Muller wrote:Did I just hear Theresa May quote a f#cking Russian Meerkat...???

This is the dankest timeline.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:28 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:Ok. So out of interest, and no deflecting here:
Which party won the last election? (Arguably the DUP?)
No party can say to have had its manifesto endorsed, because no party won.
Biggest losers the Tories. Labour not good enough to get more seats than them. SNP lost seats etc. etc.
So if you must persist with this line of argument, just tell us which manifesto from 2017 should be endorsed, and which should be binned?
Both the referendum and the subsequent GE suggest that the electorate are looking for compromise, they're not giving any specific issue or party a significant mandate.

"Which party one the last election?"

"The Tories the biggest losers"

We have a tory PM. A tory minority government.

At the last GE, parties that pledged to honour the referendum received around 84% of votes.

The party pledged to have a 2nd referendum , the libdems, received around 10% of the vote.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:31 pm

Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:Oh dear, sounds to me like we won't be leaving on 29th March after all.

What does Theresa May say, we leave with a deal, leave with no deal or don't leave at all.

May can't get a deal, no deal will be voted down so that only leaves one option, we won't be leaving, like I've always said.

The intelligent will fix the mistakes of the stupid.

I hope all you Leave voters are ready to storm Parliament (if you can find your way/the money to get to London).

If your option comes to pass, I humbly suggest the next election will see the Brexit party rise to being in the top three parties, it might not win but it will give both Labour and the Tories a bloody nose.

The top three parties are likely to be .
TIP
Brexit Party

Followed by Tories

The Labour Party will be in the doldrums with the liberals.

randomclaret2 · Post by **randomclaret2** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:32 pm

'Claret on a T Rex' making himself look puerile ( yet again )

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:34 pm

martin_p wrote:You have to stop taking manifestos as gospel in a moving situation. Situations change, policies have to react to those changing situations, even if it means that you sometimes have to ditch manifesto promises. There's already a list of Tory manifesto promises that they've ditched, why haven't you been so vocal about those Wrongo?

Aah so, we make a pledge to leave the European Union. We are elected on that basis. Because there are enough of us to renege on that pledge. We do everything in our power to frustrate, block, undermine the process. We turn round and say it's "a mess". We are therefore entitled to ditch the manifesto on which we were returned to parliament.

If Carlsberg did slippery slopes.

( As for the majority of Tories, you'll have to look elsewhere if you expect me to back em)

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:36 pm

I'm a bit bored of the whole 'undermining democracy' argument. Democracy was undermined the moment a binary referendum was held on a blatantly non-binary issue and a campaign of lies and misinformation was allowed to inform it. It has been subsequently further undermined by the PM appointing ministers to high office purely based on their Brexit stance, by the PM allowing her ministers to repeatedly lie to Parliament, by the PM taking a narrow mandate to Leave the EU and using it to empower the the most extreme elements in her party to drive us towards a no deal Brexit, by the PM doing everything in her power to refuse Parliament a say on the matter, by the PM continually kicking issues into the long grass to appease a fringe element in her own party, by the government being found in contempt of Parliament, and countless other examples. The list is endless and at this stage in proceedings the notion that actually asking the public whether or not they want to continue with this pantomime is in itself an affront to democracy is laughable.

AndyClaret · Post by **AndyClaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:39 pm

I told you Corbyn's second referendum was a con, he wants it AFTER may's deal has been voted through.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:41 pm

Always the case, as he's not in charge.

Been saying it non-stop, but all it takes is the ERG to vote for mays deal, and all this goes away and you can all plan your Brexit existence without hindrance.

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:42 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:It's like Sean Dyche saying hell try and get the best possible result from Newcastle and if we draw, you claiming he promised a win.

I you want to read it through Remoaner tinted glasses fine.

I could easily argue that having said repeatedly that "no deal is better than a bad deal" it opened the door to leaving with no deal, as that would evidently be the "best deal"

Huff and puff all you like, and I notice you didn't want to argue the toss over the labour manifesto. Neither manifesto promised they would offer a second referendum BEFORE the first was implemented.?

It did NOT say that we would have to leave with a deal.

Both said theyd carry out the wishes of the British people as expressed in the referendum, leave the single market and customs, end free movement of people and end the jurisdiction of the ECJ.

As I've said yours and my opinions are utterly irrelevant compared to how millions of leave voters perceive what labour is attempting to do.

https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/negotiating-brexit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour’s manifesto pledge above. They’ve been consistent in their support for a soft Brexit and in opposing a no deal. Not sure what you expect them to do, as they always said a second referendum would be their final option, once all others are ruled out. And it looks as though we’re nearly there.

AndyClaret · Post by **AndyClaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:46 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Always the case, as he's not in charge.

Been saying it non-stop, but all it takes is the ERG to vote for mays deal, and all this goes away and you can all plan your Brexit existence without hindrance.

You are meant to have a referendum if it's rejected by parliament, or if there is deadlock, not if it's already been passed.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:51 pm

Bacchus wrote:I'm a bit bored of the whole 'undermining democracy' argument. Democracy was undermined the moment a binary referendum was held on a blatantly non-binary issue and a campaign of lies and misinformation was allowed to inform it. It has been subsequently further undermined by the PM appointing ministers to high office purely based on their Brexit stance, by the PM allowing her ministers to repeatedly lie to Parliament, by the PM taking a narrow mandate to Leave the EU and using it to empower the the most extreme elements in her party to drive us towards a no deal Brexit, by the PM doing everything in her power to refuse Parliament a say on the matter, by the PM continually kicking issues into the long grass to appease a fringe element in her own party, by the government being found in contempt of Parliament, and countless other examples. The list is endless and at this stage in proceedings the notion that actually asking the public whether or not they want to continue with this pantomime is in itself an affront to democracy is laughable.

That's a really top post, and should be one that the majority of both remainers AND leavers can broadly or totally agree with.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:51 pm

AndrewJB wrote:https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/negotiating-brexit/

Labour’s manifesto pledge above. They’ve been consistent in their support for a soft Brexit and in opposing a no deal. Not sure what you expect them to do, as they always said a second referendum would be their final option, once all others are ruled out. And it looks as though we’re nearly there.

Labour - the party that never offered the electorate the option of a referendum in the first place. It WASN’T in their manifesto.

Labour - the party the pledged to leave the European Union, end free movement of people, leave the single market and customs union, end the jurisdiction of the ECJ. It WAS in their manifesto.

Labour - the party that wants to offer a 2nd referendum to the electorate, BEFORE the result of the one they didn't want is implemented. It WASN'T in their manifesto!

Labour (and the Tories)- playing fast and loose with democracy.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:56 pm

Bacchus wrote:I'm a bit bored of the whole 'undermining democracy' argument. Democracy was undermined the moment a binary referendum was held on a blatantly non-binary issue and a campaign of lies and misinformation was allowed to inform it. It has been subsequently further undermined by the PM appointing ministers to high office purely based on their Brexit stance, by the PM allowing her ministers to repeatedly lie to Parliament, by the PM taking a narrow mandate to Leave the EU and using it to empower the the most extreme elements in her party to drive us towards a no deal Brexit, by the PM doing everything in her power to refuse Parliament a say on the matter, by the PM continually kicking issues into the long grass to appease a fringe element in her own party, by the government being found in contempt of Parliament, and countless other examples. The list is endless and at this stage in proceedings the notion that actually asking the public whether or not they want to continue with this pantomime is in itself an affront to democracy is laughable.

What is an affront to democracy is doing everything you can to frustrate and undermine the process of leaving and simultaneously demanding a 2nd referendum cos there's "deadlock" you've caused. BEFORE implementing the biggest single expression of democracy the nation has ever witnessed.

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:59 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Labour - the party that never offered the electorate the option of a referendum in the first place. It WASN’T in their manifesto.

Labour - the party the pledged to leave the European Union, end free movement of people, leave the single market and customs union, end the jurisdiction of the ECJ. It WAS in their manifesto.

Labour - the party that wants to offer a 2nd referendum to the electorate, BEFORE the result of the one they didn't want is implemented. It WASN'T in their manifesto!

Labour (and the Tories)- playing fast and loose with democracy.

Not really. The manifesto commitments were never given a chance, so a second referendum is a perfectly reasonable fallback position in the circumstances (which are that May has contrived a deal that is bad, and Labour has always opposed no deal). Considering 87% of the electorate voted for a managed withdrawal, it’s rather undemocratic of May to leave that on the table.

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:05 pm

"the biggest single expression of democracy the nation has ever witnessed."

Not heard that one before.........you won, apparently, get over it.

Bacchus absolutely summed the situation up beautifully. For people to suddenly start bleating about being ripped off is pathetic. Did anyone seriously expect anything else to happen under our system?

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:05 pm

AndrewJB wrote:Not really. The manifesto commitments were never given a chance, so a second referendum is a perfectly reasonable fallback position in the circumstances (which are that May has contrived a deal that is bad, and Labour has always opposed no deal). Considering 87% of the electorate voted for a managed withdrawal, it’s rather undemocratic of May to leave that on the table.

Another with the - , "we make a pledge to leave the European Union. We are elected on that basis. Because there are enough of us to renege on that pledge. We do everything in our power to frustrate, block, undermine the process. We turn round and say it's "a mess". We are therefore entitled to ditch the manifesto on which we were returned to parliament." Approach.

If Carlsberg did slippery slopes.

Burnley Ace · Post by **Burnley Ace** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:05 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Their manifesto pledge was to leave the European Union. Full stop. It was literally in black and white. Where in the manifesto did it say remain will always be an option? How can you have remain as an option if you want to accept ( not respect) and crucially , help implement Leave.

And you're falling for the myth perpetuated by Remoaners that brexit was dependent on whether we had a deal or not.

The question on the ballot paper was Leave or Remain.

Deal or no Deal was not on the ballot paper.

The vast majority of MPs voted to have a referendum.

The vast majority of MPS stood on manifestos that pledged to leave the European Union.

The vast majority of MPS voted to trigger article 50. Which meant that in law, we leave the European Union on the 29th of March with or WITHOUT a deal.

That's what THEY voted for.

And now the majority from all parties are reneging on everything they've promised to deliver.

You , I expect, will disagree. It doesn't matter one jot.

There are millions out there that do. And the actions of a few hundred self righteous, duplicitous MPS is going to cause long term and permanently fracture trust in politicians and democracy itself.

You haven’t read the Labour manifesto have you? I even copied it out for you!! Where in the Labour manifesto does it say that they would leave with no deal? It says the opposite- acting in the national interest and leaving with a deal- that’s what every Labour voter voted for

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:13 pm

I have watched hours of Parliament live in the last few weeks and the one thing that has struck me is I have not once seen Burnley’s MP make any comment.

Guich · Post by **Guich** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:14 pm

My biggest worry is that if we don't resolve this reasonably quickly, with a deal, then we'll see a rapid and huge rise in the far right, and that would be a disgusting legacy of Westminster's unwillingness to listen to the electorate.

It's been a mess from the very start. The arrogance of the EU (before Cameron called the referendum) epitomises the whole problem, as does May's unwillingness to listen to anybody. And when we need a strong, sensible and erudite opposition we have a f**king clown.

John Mann has it right. This is now a North v South (or London) issue. Working class v Middle Class.

Nobody, but nobody, in our Parliament or the EU emerges from this with any credit at all.

If we bodge it for much longer and the far right rears its ugly head on our land...I'm off

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:18 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:the biggest single expression of democracy the nation has ever witnessed.

What will you copy and paste if the next referendum has an even bigger turnout but delivers a different result?

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:20 pm

Burnley Ace wrote:You haven’t read the Labour manifesto have you? I even copied it out for you!! Where in the Labour manifesto does it say that they would leave with no deal? It says the opposite- acting in the national interest and leaving with a deal- that’s what every Labour voter voted for

The vast majority of majority of ALL MPs voted to trigger article 50. That meant , in law, we leave the European Union WITHOUT a deal if none has been agreed.

Where in the labour manifesto does it see " We respect the referendum result but will only honour it if a withdrawal deal is negotiated"

You're using YOUR own personal interpretation of what the labour manifesto said and assuming millions of labour leave voters understood it the same way as you.

Listening to callers on the radio today. You're wrong to do so.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:22 pm

Biggest expression of democracy the nation has ever witnessed wasn't this vote btw.

I know facts don't matter, but I thought I'd better mention it.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:23 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Aah so, we make a pledge to leave the European Union. We are elected on that basis. Because there are enough of us to renege on that pledge. We do everything in our power to frustrate, block, undermine the process. We turn round and say it's "a mess". We are therefore entitled to ditch the manifesto on which we were returned to parliament.

If Carlsberg did slippery slopes.

( As for the majority of Tories, you'll have to look elsewhere if you expect me to back em)

OK, i'll ask you again then. Who are these MPs that are stopping a deal that respects both the PMs red lines and the EUs red lines? You can't keep making these claims without some examples.

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:27 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Another with the - , "we make a pledge to leave the European Union. We are elected on that basis. Because there are enough of us to renege on that pledge. We do everything in our power to frustrate, block, undermine the process. We turn round and say it's "a mess". We are therefore entitled to ditch the manifesto on which we were returned to parliament." Approach.

If Carlsberg did slippery slopes.

Labour very clearly promised to leave the EU but retain a close relationship, and stay in the single market. Not sure why you think they should now support May’s bad deal.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:27 pm

Listening to callers on the radio today. You're wrong to do so.

I've been listening all day. There are a lot of people just like you who like ringing up radio stations to vent their spleen.

The really interesting thing is they are all fixating on one particular thing (not the same thing) and ignoring everything else.

Widespread ignorance of experts, even when presented with the evidence

Inability to accept other points of view

So far I've heard

- army won't obey the government
- police will join in with the protestors
- mass civil (and uncivil disorder)

Bloke on LBC now is just repeating all the lies that have been debunked repeatedly on here and elsewhere.

Its enlightening if nothing else, but you would be mad to think they form anything other than a fringe opinion.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:31 pm

It’s fascinating trying to work out what the Maybot has done today, who it helps.

On one hand she has caved in to the Remainer wing of Parliament.

On the other hand she has pushed the cliff edge back to June 30th, AFTER the European Parliamentary elections, and 1 DAY before the old Parliament winds down. On July 11th the new EU Commission will vote its new President.

So, given that we have a legal right, approved by the ECJ, to rescind A50 and Remain (with things unchanged in a status quo, it isn’t the same as Rejoin) how does that tally with the above? The EU couldn’t have a Commission with no U.K. MEPs if there was to be another extension, and if we rescinded A50 they would probably be sitting illegally as well.

I suspect that what she has tried to do is take Remain off the table in any practical sense.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:34 pm

I've not heard that from anyone else.

Not even the ERG.

She's trying to get her deal through,and to do that she has to compromise and give parliament a chance to reject "No Deal"

by giving that to parliament, she cuts the ERG off at the knees as they know parliament will never vote for a "No Deal"

KateR · Post by **KateR** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:40 pm

to take "leave with no deal" off the table is sheer stupidity and shows a compete lack of negotiating knowledge for those demanding it, bit like having a bus driver taking us over the Alps with no prior driving experience or having passed a driving test ever.

To delay Brexit has no material impact on how we leave, however it does provide some time for various ministries and civil servants to get their house in order, which up to date has been sadly lacking in nearly all if not all areas.

It is the length of delay to the actual leaving date that is fundamental as to whether it is good or not, bit like the Goldilocks story.

Billy Balfour · Post by **Billy Balfour** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:41 pm

It's a pincer movement on the ERG and she did this to hold her govt together. The ERG either suck up to May's deal or risk an extension to A50. They'll be after blood, but make no mistake, they've been done up like a kipper and they know it.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:43 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:I've been listening all day. There are a lot of people just like you who like ringing up radio stations to vent their spleen.

The really interesting thing is they are all fixating on one particular thing (not the same thing) and ignoring everything else.

Widespread ignorance of experts, even when presented with the evidence

Inability to accept other points of view

So far I've heard

- army won't obey the government
- police will join in with the protestors
- mass civil (and uncivil disorder)

Bloke on LBC now is just repeating all the lies that have been debunked repeatedly on here and elsewhere.

Its enlightening if nothing else, but you would be mad to think they form anything other than a fringe opinion.

The problem we have Lancasterclaret is that the so called experts made claims before of the coming apocalypse if the vote was leave.

That leaves lots of people just not believing what they say, even if this time they have got it correct.

Whilst I don’t believe many of their statements, I do think in the short term it will be difficult for the UK. It is just my opinion we the UK will in time be better off outside the EU. Most of that is based on travelling abroad with work and having the benefit of seeing quotes from around the globe.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:48 pm

No, I understand that but the majority of those ringing up are talking about things like a "managed no deal" (ie a deal!)

We need a deal to leave, and that is the wish of the people and the parliament.

The deal on the table is the only one on the table, so you would hope that now passes.

If it doesn't, then its either a GE (unlikely because the Cons might lose and it doesn't solve anything) or another vote.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:52 pm

KateR wrote:to take "leave with no deal" off the table is sheer stupidity and shows a compete lack of negotiating knowledge for those demanding it, bit like having a bus driver taking us over the Alps with no prior driving experience or having passed a driving test ever.

To delay Brexit has no material impact on how we leave, however it does provide some time for various ministries and civil servants to get their house in order, which up to date has been sadly lacking in nearly all if not all areas.

It is the length of delay to the actual leaving date that is fundamental as to whether it is good or not, bit like the Goldilocks story.

The vote is not designed to take no Deal off the table, it is design to stop us crashing out with no Deal on the 29th. It will still be on the table, however to not crash out the EU 27 have to vote to allow an extension. That’s not certain either.

I have no idea what happens when Mays Deal is voted down again (probable). No deal voted down and an extension to article 50 requested and then one EU member votes No.

That’s the worst case situation I can see.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:53 pm

I do

Article 50 will be revoked

No one would want to do it, but that would be the only thing they could do after voting down everything else.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:54 pm

As others have pointed out today's announcement represents abandoning the game of chicken with the EU and strengthening her hand in the game of chicken with the ERG. If the ERG continue to reject May's deal (which the have been doing in the hope of getting a 'no deal' Brexit) then Brexit will be delayed, increasing the chances of their being no Brexit at all.

That said, it could also be a way of blaming the EU in the event of no deal. As it stands there are a lot of EU members who won't be keen on an extension unless it's likely to yield something new and isn't just another can kicking exercise. So unless May can offer the prospect of something new it may well be that the EU won't let us have a short extension, even if parliament wants one. If that's the case it'll either be a no deal Brexit with the finger pointed at the EU or taking the only way we can stop a no deal Brexit, which is unilaterally withdrawing article 50.

Edit - others have made the same point while I was typing.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:56 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:No, I understand that but the majority of those ringing up are talking about things like a "managed no deal" (ie a deal!)

We need a deal to leave, and that is the wish of the people and the parliament.

The deal on the table is the only one on the table, so you would hope that now passes.

If it doesn't, then its either a GE (unlikely because the Cons might lose and it doesn't solve anything) or another vote.

As I have mentioned a GE could see the biggest shift away from the Tories and Labour.

The Brexit Party would get a lot of votes.
The TIG could also become a major player unless as I have just read they join the Liberals.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:59 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:I do

Article 50 will be revoked

No one would want to do it, but that would be the only thing they could do after voting down everything else.

Yep good point. That’s the probable outcome.

Burnley Ace · Post by **Burnley Ace** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:59 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:The vast majority of majority of ALL MPs voted to trigger article 50. That meant , in law, we leave the European Union WITHOUT a deal if none has been agreed.

Where in the labour manifesto does it see " We respect the referendum result but will only honour it if a withdrawal deal is negotiated"

You're using YOUR own personal interpretation of what the labour manifesto said and assuming millions of labour leave voters understood it the same way as you.

Listening to callers on the radio today. You're wrong to do so.

It’s the second time the manifesto link has been posted
https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/negotiating-brexit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No where does it say “respect” it says “accept the result “
Where does it say or even imply that they would agree to or accept no deal? What do you think it meant?

KateR · Post by **KateR** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:01 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:No, I understand that but the majority of those ringing up are talking about things like a "managed no deal" (ie a deal!)

We need a deal to leave, and that is the wish of the people and the parliament.

The deal on the table is the only one on the table, so you would hope that now passes.

If it doesn't, then its either a GE (unlikely because the Cons might lose and it doesn't solve anything) or another vote.

I agree with your assessment

However given what you have wrote, do MP's vote against the deal on the table because:

A) They really believe it's not a good deal for Britain

B) They really believe it's not a good deal for NI

C) They want to for May/Tories in to the best of the two options, either GE or another referendum, ignoring what is best for Britain and what the majority of people already voted for in order to meet there personal objectives

Obviously there will be numerous permutations of the above, but I believe many will vote for C for personal reasons and in many instances against there own constituents wishes.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:03 pm

You'd hope they would vote on what is best for the country.

Whatever that is, its certainly not a "No Deal"

KateR · Post by **KateR** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:03 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:The vote is not designed to take no Deal off the table, it is design to stop us crashing out with no Deal on the 29th. It will still be on the table, however to not crash out the EU 27 have to vote to allow an extension. That’s not certain either.

I have no idea what happens when Mays Deal is voted down again (probable). No deal voted down and an extension to article 50 requested and then one EU member votes No.

That’s the worst case situation I can see.

I might be wrong but I think you are wrong, from what I understand it will be vote for May's deal, assuming and most likely it is voted down then MP's will be given two votes, 1) to delay Brexit and 2) to take no deal off the table all together

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:07 pm

It’s just been on the news again.
1 Vote for her Deal
2 vote to leave with no Deal.
3 extension of article 50

But she again said no deal had to remain on the table.

KateR · Post by **KateR** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:08 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:You'd hope they would vote on what is best for the country.

Whatever that is, its certainly not a "No Deal"

It all depends on whether individuals all over the country think that any deal is better than no deal, you have to remember just because you do it does not mean everyone does.

The biggest issue is that the MP's will vote first, they will not vote on anything meaningful because no one knows the outcome of either option but clearly there appears to be a majority that think any deal is better than no deal, I am personally not convinced. I would add that the government has done an extremely poor job of convincing no deal would be better even though they knew it was an option from day one.

KateR · Post by **KateR** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:11 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:It’s just been on the news again.
1 Vote for her Deal
2 vote to leave with no Deal.
3 extension of article 50

But she again said no deal had to remain on the table.

I am obviously stupid so please explain to me in very simplistic terms: How does "no deal" stay on the table if 2) has a majority vote against leaving with "no deal"

Maybe I am missing something glaring obvious

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:11 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:I've not heard that from anyone else.

Not even the ERG.

She's trying to get her deal through,and to do that she has to compromise and give parliament a chance to reject "No Deal"

by giving that to parliament, she cuts the ERG off at the knees as they know parliament will never vote for a "No Deal"

Me neither, but reporters are now slowly catching on and beginning to tweet that “no deal” is in a sense more likely now. I don’t think or hope this is the case, it just occurred to me that could be her ploy.

https://twitter.com/samcoatestimes/stat ... 67809?s=21

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:18 pm

KateR wrote: I am obviously stupid so please explain to me in very simplistic terms: How does "no deal" stay on the table if 2) has a majority vote against leaving with "no deal"

Maybe I am missing something glaring obvious

They would vote on not allowing a no deal exit on the 29th March. Some MP’s might try to amend that vote to take it off the table completely but that’s not what the government is going to put forward.

They are saying a vote on Mays Deal on the 13th and if it’s voted down then vote the same day on no deal. If parliament votes to reject allowing a no deal exit on the 29th March . Then on the 14th they will vote for an extension.

A EU legal expert has stated today if her deal is voted down the UK must ask for an extension.