Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[Lowbankclaret]

And your not stupid, it’s a bloody complex situation

[claretonthecoast1882]

The intelligent will fix the mistakes of the stupid.
.

You won't be fixing anything then

[AndyClaret]

All about stopping anymore defections.

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/11 ... 3325241344" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[nil_desperandum]

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 believe you've misread or misunderstood
1 MPs vote on her deal on March 12th
If this defeated, another vote the following day in which Parliament will be asked whether the UK can leave with no deal.
(This is how it is worded : ".... only leave without a deal on 29 March if there is explicit consent in the House for that outcome")
Parliament won't consent, as surely you must acknowledge, so that's surely an end to no deal.

[RingoMcCartney]

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.

Marty. Asking the same question again and again simply because you don't like the answer you receive will not change that answer if you continue to ask it again and again.

"Massive cross-party consensus"

Remoaner speak for " we're all working tirelessly, regardless of party, to stop Brexit and help to save those uneducated plebs from themselves"

[RingoMcCartney]

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.

I don't think they should support Mays brexit in name only.

"Labour very clearly promised to leave the EU"

They should stop trying to renege on that promise.

It's not about what you or I feel, but its something that , listening to the radio ,many many , soon to be former Labour voters , feel.

[KateR]

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.

Thank you, so the extension comes in to play when MayDeal is not accepted and MP's vote against a no deal, triggering said extension, I think we agree on this

Next step, there is an extension, let's say 3 months but really does not matter, May is still trying to negotiate a deal with the EU but the EU now knows UK will not leave with a no deal, and May also knows this, so what benefit is the extension in terms of getting a deal. Will something fundamentally change in the extension period which would bring no deal back on the table in a meaningful way? The negotiating dynamics have swung wildly in favour of the EU, so why would they change anything that is in the deal she will present on the 12th of March?

EU have continually said this is it, I really don't think it's going to change whether you have a 3/1/12/24 month extension, however it might have done on the 28th March if no deal was on the table and was voted to stay there, but I am betting it wont and therefore it is off the table for good and about as good as a chocolate fireguard when voted off on the 13th March.

All just my opinion of course, however you should note that it is an expert opinion.

[Lowbankclaret]

I believe you've misread or misunderstood
1 MPs vote on her deal on March 12th
If this defeated, another vote the following day in which Parliament will be asked whether the UK can leave with no deal.
(This is how it is worded : ".... only leave without a deal on 29 March if there is explicit consent in the House for that outcome")
Parliament won't consent, as surely you must acknowledge, so that's surely an end to no deal.

I will repeat what’s on the news, it’s what they are saying.
12 th March vote on her deal, if rejected a vote on a no deal exit the same day.

Extension vote the following day.

Mrs May said in the house that no deal would not be taken off the table and would still be a possible outcome at the end of June.

I hopefully am not mis interpreting what they said.

It maybe the end of no Deal, but not in Mrs May eyes.

What is interesting is what different so called experts think.

One saying Mrs Mays Deal is now more likely to pass.
One saying no Deal more likely.
One saying Article 50 will be withdrawn and Brexit will not happen.

So the outcome is as clear as mud.

I certainly don’t really understand which one might be more likely

[RingoMcCartney]

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?

1 did the vast majority of labour MPs vote to have an eu referendum.

Yes or no?

2. Did all Labour MPs stand on an manifesto pledge to respect the referendum ?

Yes Or no.?

3. Did the vast majority of labour MPs vote to trigger article 50. WHICH MEANS, IN LAW, WE LEAVE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE HAVE A DEAL OR NO DEAL?

Yes or no?

4 When the vast majority of labour MPs voted to trigger article 50. Did they know what they were voting for?

Yes or no?

[KateR]

OHHHHH and I love Corbynistas new stance, "If MayDeal is passed by parliament it needs to go to the peoples vote in a new referendum just to be sure, lol

What a man, single handedly trying to bring the Tories and Labour down in one movement, just need Abbott to chime in now for it to be pure comedy gold.

British politics at it's lowest that I've ever seen it, surely globally it's even worse than US politics with Trump conducting "The mad men have taken over the asylum"

[Lowbankclaret]

Thank you, so the extension comes in to play when MayDeal is not accepted and MP's vote against a no deal, triggering said extension, I think we agree on this

Next step, there is an extension, let's say 3 months but really does not matter, May is still trying to negotiate a deal with the EU but the EU now knows UK will not leave with a no deal, and May also knows this, so what benefit is the extension in terms of getting a deal. Will something fundamentally change in the extension period which would bring no deal back on the table in a meaningful way? The negotiating dynamics have swung wildly in favour of the EU, so why would they change anything that is in the deal she will present on the 12th of March?

EU have continually said this is it, I really don't think it's going to change whether you have a 3/1/12/24 month extension, however it might have done on the 28th March if no deal was on the table and was voted to stay there, but I am betting it wont and therefore it is off the table for good and about as good as a chocolate fireguard when voted off on the 13th March.

All just my opinion of course, however you should note that it is an expert opinion.

That could certainly be the case.

I watched a select committee questioning one of the ex Brexit secretaries. He was under oath as well. The EU offered us several of the things we wanted and he wanted to put these major milestones in his speech to the house. No 10 made him take it out and the negotiating committee rejected these offers so he quit.
He believed we were offered a better deal than we have but we rejected it.

Is it all a ploy to end up staying in as I believe it is after watching some of these select committees. They can be brutal with the question but it also gives ex ministers the ability to say what’s gone on and it’s unlikely to be lies as they are under oath and can be charged.

[aggi]

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

I reckon the bit that says We will reject ‘no deal’ as a viable option

[Lowbankclaret]

OHHHHH and I love Corbynistas new stance, "If MayDeal is passed by parliament it needs to go to the peoples vote in a new referendum just to be sure, lol

What a man, single handedly trying to bring the Tories and Labour down in one movement, just need Abbott to chime in now for it to be pure comedy gold.

British politics at it's lowest that I've ever seen it, surely globally it's even worse than US politics with Trump conducting "The mad men have taken over the asylum"

I can 100% agree with that

[nil_desperandum]

I will repeat what’s on the news, it’s what they are saying.
12 th March vote on her deal, if rejected a vote on a no deal exit the same day.

Extension vote the following day.

Mrs May said in the house that no deal would not be taken off the table and would still be a possible outcome at the end of June.

I hopefully am not mis interpreting what they said.

It maybe the end of no Deal, but not in Mrs May eyes.

What is interesting is what different so called experts think.

One saying Mrs Mays Deal is now more likely to pass.
One saying no Deal more likely.
One saying Article 50 will be withdrawn and Brexit will not happen.

So the outcome is as clear as mud.

I certainly don’t really understand which one might be more likely

All fair enough, but surely no one actually believes that if "no deal" is no longer the default position, and we don't leave on March 29th that it will ever be back on the table?.
One has to assume that once MPs have taken it off the table a "no deal" would only be a possibility if a party won a Gen Election with "no deal" in its manifesto.
Of course some might argue that we might get a "managed no deal" at a later date, but there's no such thing. A managed "no deal" is by definition a deal.

[martin_p]

Marty. Asking the same question again and again simply because you don't like the answer you receive will not change that answer if you continue to ask it again and again.

"Massive cross-party consensus"

Remoaner speak for " we're all working tirelessly, regardless of party, to stop Brexit and help to save those uneducated plebs from themselves"

The reason I don't like the answer is that it isn't an answer the question I asked.

If it's not the ERG, who are the MPs stopping a deal being done? And given I know you're not a supporter of the current Withdrawal Agreement, which MPs are stopping us coming to a deal that respects both the PMs and EUs red lines?

If Carlsberg did slippery slopes.....

[Burnley Ace]

1 did the vast majority of labour MPs vote to have an eu referendum.

Yes or no?

2. Did all Labour MPs stand on an manifesto pledge to respect the referendum ?

Yes Or no.?

3. Did the vast majority of labour MPs vote to trigger article 50. WHICH MEANS, IN LAW, WE LEAVE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE HAVE A DEAL OR NO DEAL?

Yes or no?

4 When the vast majority of labour MPs voted to trigger article 50. Did they know what they were voting for?

Yes or no?

1. No
2. No
3. yes
4. No

[martin_p]

I don't think they should support Mays brexit in name only.

"Labour very clearly promised to leave the EU"

They should stop trying to renege on that promise.

It's not about what you or I feel, but its something that , listening to the radio ,many many , soon to be former Labour voters , feel.

So what exactly is on offer from the government that they can support?

[AndyClaret]

All fair enough, but surely no one actually believes that if "no deal" is no longer the default position, and we don't leave on March 29th that it will ever be back on the table?.
One has to assume that once MPs have taken it off the table a "no deal" would only be a possibility if a party won a Gen Election with "no deal" in its manifesto.
Of course some might argue that we might get a "managed no deal" at a later date, but there's no such thing. A managed "no deal" is by definition a deal.

Lowbank is correct, you can't take no deal off the table,only delay it, you either leave with a deal, or revoke article 50 via a referendum.

[Lancasterclaret]

21 month long delay is the EU prefered option.

Got to admit we look all over the place at the moment so might not be the worst idea in the world.

[Lowbankclaret]

I think I need to state.

I do not have an opinion on wether no Deal is dead or not. I was trying to tell people what was said today in Parliament.

At least that’s what I think I was trying to do!!

[AndyClaret]

21 month long delay is the EU prefered option.

Got to admit we look all over the place at the moment so might not be the worst idea in the world.

That would mean a clean sweep for the brexit party in Euro elections.

[Lowbankclaret]

Just been on again, what she said was
“An extension cannot take No Deal off the table, the only way to do that is to revoke article 50, which I shall not do. Or agree a deal.”

Till her next u turn anyway.

[Lancasterclaret]

Andy, you are going to have to stop making statements you can't back up with facts. Maybe this time people will actually treat the European elections with the respect they deserve?

On this page alone, you've made a massive whopper in saying that Article 50 cannot be removed unless there is another referendum.

If everything fails to get through parliament, and we are on the verge of "No Deal", then MPs will vote to revoke Article 50.

[RingoMcCartney]

The reason I don't like the answer is that it isn't an answer the question I asked.

If it's not the ERG, who are the MPs stopping a deal being done? And given I know you're not a supporter of the current Withdrawal Agreement, which MPs are stopping us coming to a deal that respects both the PMs and EUs red lines?

If Carlsberg did slippery slopes.....

In 2016 Barnier said , " if I have negotiated a deal that is so bad, the British do not want to leave. I have done my job"

His Remoaner co-conspirators in parliament (of ALL PARTIES) have done everything in their grasp to frustrate , undermine and hinder the process of leaving the EU. Thats who.

Helped by a PM who's heart , as a remainer, has never been in it. Who's chief negotiating civil servant, olly Robins is a remainer. Financed by an unelected cabal of globalists, internationalist and transnational businesses , Tony Blair, Adonis, Campbell, miller , Clegg, Heseltine, Soros, EU money going into the so called "people's vote"

Any mp who claims there's a "Massive cross-party consensus against no deal.


"Massive cross-party consensus against a hard Brexit"

"Massive cross-party consensus against a cliff edge"

"Massive cross-party consensus against a Brexit that leave the poorest areas hard"

"Massive cross-party consensus against a tory brexit"

"Massive cross-party consensus against what would be economic self harm"

"Massive cross-party consensus to give the final decision back to the people"

When what they really mean is theres a Massive cross-party consensus thar has never accepted the result, despite the manifesto pledges we stood on.

A Massive cross-party consensus to stop Brexit and thwart democracy.

That's my answer. Don't like it? Tough .

[Billy Balfour]

By the end of today she'll have stumbled and backtracked so much that none of us will know WTF is going on.

[Billy Balfour]

Poor Ringo is having another meltdown. Time for me to leave this thread.

[RingoMcCartney]

1. No
2. No
3. yes
4. No

1 So the vast majority of labour MPs DIDN'T vote to have an eu referendum.  They did.



2 All Labour MPs DIDNT stand on an manifesto pledged to respect the referendum They did.



3 You agree - the vast majority of labour MPs DID vote to trigger article 50. WHICH MEANS, IN LAW, WE LEAVE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE HAVE A DEAL OR NO DEAL . One out of four!



4 And you say when the vast majority of labour MPs voted to trigger article 50. They DIDNT know what they were voting for? 

You clearly have a low opinion of the labour party and it's MPs!

Begs the question. Why do you support and presumably vote for MPs that are duplicitous , untrustworthy and don't know what they're doing!?

[RingoMcCartney]

Poor Ringo is having another meltdown. Time for me to leave this thread.

It's not me having a meltdown fella. Burnley Ace seems to be in a parallel universe.

[Rick_Muller]

It's not me having a meltdown fella. Burnley Ace seems to be in a parallel universe.

can you see them from yours then...?

[evensteadiereddie]

Christ on a bike, Ringo, you'll have a heart attack or another ban by the end of the night.

[aggi]

That would mean a clean sweep for the brexit party in Euro elections.

It's weird how a lot of people think that 52% of the electorate (or very possibly a minority looking at the current polls) will have a huge impact but 48% (or very possibly a majority looking at the current polls) will have a tiny impact.

[CrosspoolClarets]

Now Peston is also starting to believe the ERG has benefitted with this move today.

https://twitter.com/peston/status/11004 ... 26785?s=21

My suspicion (this is also catching on but with a lesser number of Westminster reporters) is that this is a ploy to call an election as soon as an extension kicks in (claiming that no agreement can be reached otherwise). She will then get her deal through if she can win enough new seats (she will grab some from Labour in Leave focused area, and middle class Remain Tory marginals will be unlikely to swing the other way due to Corbyn’s other stances which could terrify them, and The Independent Group won’t have time to mobilise candidates).

[RingoMcCartney]

can you see them from yours then...?

No need.

I know the vast majority of labour MPs voted to have an eu referendum.  All Labour MPs stood on an manifesto pledge to respect the referendum. The vast majority of labour MPs voted to trigger article 50. WHICH MEANS, IN LAW, WE LEAVE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE HAVE A DEAL OR NO DEAL. I assumed When the vast majority of labour MPs voted to trigger article 50. They actually knew what they were voting for? 

Anybody denying any of the above is either a bare faced liar or living on planet Remoaner. Or both......

[Lancasterclaret]

He's like a dog with a bone, but its like that dog doesn't understand the bone is made of plastic.

[martin_p]

No need.

I know the vast majority of labour MPs voted to have an eu referendum.  All Labour MPs stood on an manifesto pledge to respect the referendum. The vast majority of labour MPs voted to trigger article 50. WHICH MEANS, IN LAW, WE LEAVE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE HAVE A DEAL OR NO DEAL. I assumed When the vast majority of labour MPs voted to trigger article 50. They actually knew what they were voting for? 

Anybody denying any of the above is either a bare faced liar or living on planet Remoaner. Or both......

Did the words 'We will reject ‘no deal’ as a viable option ' appear in the Labour manifesto that Labour politicians were elected on? Yes or No?

[RingoMcCartney]

He's like a dog with a bone, but its like that dog doesn't understand the bone is made of plastic.

When a poster whose yes/no answers fly in the face of reality , it's only fair it's highlighted.


This from a poster earlier said "I haven’t got the time to repeatedly correct you."


It's a matter of parliamentary record that the vast majority of labour MPs voted to have an eu referendum.  The vast majority of labour MPs voted to trigger article 50. WHICH MEANS, IN LAW, WE LEAVE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE HAVE A DEAL OR NO DEAL. Even Keir Starmer admitted All Labour MPs stood on an manifesto pledge to respect the referendum. !!!!!

I'm not correcting him. Keir Starmer is......

[Burnley Ace]

1 So the vast majority of labour MPs DIDN'T vote to have an eu referendum.  They did.

2 All Labour MPs DIDNT stand on an manifesto pledged to respect the referendum They did.

3 You agree - the vast majority of labour MPs DID vote to trigger article 50. WHICH MEANS, IN LAW, WE LEAVE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE HAVE A DEAL OR NO DEAL . One out of four!

4 And you say when the vast majority of labour MPs voted to trigger article 50. They DIDNT know what they were voting for? 

You clearly have a low opinion of the labour party and it's MPs!

Begs the question. Why do you support and presumably vote for MPs that are duplicitous , untrustworthy and don't know what they're doing!?

1. The bill was introduced to the House of Commons by Philip Hammond, Foreign Secretary on 28 May 2015.[3] The Act was subsequently passed by 316-53 votes (a turnout of 58.5%) on its third reading in the Commons on 7 September 2015 - how many Labour MPs voted for the referendum???

2. Labour ACCEPTS the result- where in their manifesto does it use the word “respect”?

3. Where is your evidence for this future event?? Lol

4. The majority of Labour MPs are against no deal ergo they didn’t consider all the consequences when they voted to trigger Article 50

Nice try Ringo but, as always, it’s your attention to detail that lets you down.

[Greenmile]

The university students stand to lose out with brexit so why would i take seriously a graph/chart compiled by them, it's akin to asking young girls ect if they think justin bieber is good looking or asking anjem choudary & abu hamza if they think sharia law is a good idea.

I’m pretty sure Devils Advocate was taking the p1ss but, true to form, you believed every word because it confirmed your biases.

[nil_desperandum]

Now Peston is also starting to believe the ERG has benefitted with this move today.

https://twitter.com/peston/status/11004 ... 26785?s=21

My suspicion (this is also catching on but with a lesser number of Westminster reporters) is that this is a ploy to call an election as soon as an extension kicks in (claiming that no agreement can be reached otherwise). She will then get her deal through if she can win enough new seats (she will grab some from Labour in Leave focused area, and middle class Remain Tory marginals will be unlikely to swing the other way due to Corbyn’s other stances which could terrify them, and The Independent Group won’t have time to mobilise candidates).

But she won't dare call an election because it's by no means clear that she will win, and on past evidence she appears to be a serial loser.
The only way she can justify calling an election is to make it a "brexit" referendum and that didn't turn out well for her last time.
Based on the result in 2017 there will arguably be far more people now than in 2017 who will vote tactically for a moderate "anti-no deal candidate" (of any political colour). There will also be a lot of additional young voters who've reached 18 since June 2017 - not in the main likely to vote pro-brexit.
I could see there being all sorts of pacts from pro-EU centre parties / groupings, to bring down extremist "no dealers", and unless the Tory manifesto is one that backs the hardest of brexits ("Bluekip"), then the Brexit party would most likely pinch a lot of Tory votes.
Which come to think of it takes us right back to where we were in January 2013, when Cameron casually, arrogantly and idiotically offered a binary referendum on leaving the EU - because he was concerned that UKip were pinching Tory votes. So Gen Election extremely unlikely.

[martin_p]

1. The bill was introduced to the House of Commons by Philip Hammond, Foreign Secretary on 28 May 2015.[3] The Act was subsequently passed by 316-53 votes (a turnout of 58.5%) on its third reading in the Commons on 7 September 2015 - how many Labour MPs voted for the referendum???

I'll answer that. It's about 20. The vast majority of Labour MPs abstained on the third reading (which is the one that passed it into law).

[Lancasterclaret]

Lancaster - I understand your glee, but please dont keep goading Ringo and others you're just inflaming the argument which creates a tit-for-tat scenario which is no fun to follow.

Not gleeful at all, just commenting on the Brexiteers losing their **** because they are not well informed enough about this.

Its better for Lab to back this for their own supporters, but it only matters if the ERG (in particular) change their stance.

Nothing has changed except that Labour have moved on to the next stage.

I mean, I'm listening to an ERG member waffle on about stuff that isn't going to happen as if it matters.

Its Mays deal, or no Brexit.

QUICK EDIT - He's just said he'd vote for a "No Deal", despite him, me, the whole world and the presenter that it would never pass. Its so disingenuous and so unhelpful.

[nil_desperandum]

I'll answer that. It's about 20. The vast majority of Labour MPs abstained on the third reading (which is the one that passed it into law).

Spoilsport. Ringo's only just getting into his stride.

[Lowbankclaret]

Andy, you are going to have to stop making statements you can't back up with facts. Maybe this time people will actually treat the European elections with the respect they deserve?

On this page alone, you've made a massive whopper in saying that Article 50 cannot be removed unless there is another referendum.

If everything fails to get through parliament, and we are on the verge of "No Deal", then MPs will vote to revoke Article 50.

I think that article 50 can be revoked by a vote of parliament, no need to go back to the people, so I agree Lancs.

[nil_desperandum]

I’m pretty sure Devils Advocate was taking the p1ss but, true to form, you believed every word because it confirmed your biases.

Only pretty sure?

[Lancasterclaret]

Yup Lowbank

People making stuff up, not accepting reality etc etc etc is why we are in this mess.

Its time to deal with the issues that actually exist, rather than pretending that they don't exist.

[Lancasterclaret]

No deal government papers published

Grim reading

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/ ... 7324854272" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Lowbankclaret]

I think Ringo is also correct that as it stands it is law we leave on the 29th Deal or no Deal.
However Ringo, parliament can change that law and most likely will.

My opinion is the political class are going to try to convince us it’s such a bad deal we need to stay in. Not sure on the next moves.

On the GE she promised she would not lead the Tories into the next election so may be she will resign once her deal is voted down and someone else can do the ultimate upturn and revoke Article 50.

One thing that’s also being overlooked is (I think) she has no majority since the defections to TIG.

[AndyClaret]

Andy, you are going to have to stop making statements you can't back up with facts. Maybe this time people will actually treat the European elections with the respect they deserve?

On this page alone, you've made a massive whopper in saying that Article 50 cannot be removed unless there is another referendum.

If everything fails to get through parliament, and we are on the verge of "No Deal", then MPs will vote to revoke Article 50.

" MP's will vote to revoke Article 50"

any evidence for this ?

[AndyClaret]

It's weird how a lot of people think that 52% of the electorate (or very possibly a minority looking at the current polls) will have a huge impact but 48% (or very possibly a majority looking at the current polls) will have a tiny impact.

UKIP won the last elections.

[Lancasterclaret]

None whatsoever!

The only solid thing at the moment is we leave on March 29th.

If everything is exhausted (ie Mays deal fails, No deal vote fails, extension fails) before then that would be the next logical step to stop us leaving with a "No Deal"