Firstly, there wasn’t a parliamentary majority for a second referendum. Secondly, ignoring the ERG and the extreme Brexiteers (weirdos as I’ve said before !) I’d imagine most of the Leavers don’t want a No Deal. Thirdly, give the man a chance, Boris has not even had the opportunity to see if any improvements could be made to the withdrawal agreement.
If you want to pick referendum extremes you could offer No Deal v Revoke article 50 and accept a more closely integrated Europe (which will undoubtedly happen).
That’s the problem with a lot of the No Deal talk, it’s not No Deal that most people are trying to stop, it’s still Brexit altogether.
I respect your view and honesty on the subject Brighton, it’s more than most of the staunch Remainers in the public eye.
No deal vs remain at the current terms? So if anything changes in terms of further integration you would accept a breach of that is not what many remainers want? You can’t just pigeon hole one side of the argument.
Even if Brexit stand down? Johnson would have 42% if they did on latest polling and the labour and Lib Dem’s are divided so I think he will have a real chance of a majority
Vs Remain and reform. Wanting to remain a member doesn't equate the belief that it's a perfect organisation. You keep telling us how 'Leave means Leave'-if you're a man of your convictions you will have no issue putting that on the ballot paper, and nor will anyone who really wants out at all costs.
Dumb and Dumber on either side of the Atlantic. You decide who's who
Vs Remain and reform. Wanting to remain a member doesn't equate the belief that it's a perfect organisation. You keep telling us how 'Leave means Leave'-if you're a man of your convictions you will have no issue putting that on the ballot paper, and nor will anyone who really wants out at all costs.
Who said remain at the current terms for eternity or else it doesn’t count? Remain assumes the EU will evolve as it always has done and would not be fit for purpose if it did not deal with challenges. We have vetos and we have article 50 if the EU actually does something terrible like becoming governed by a far right government.
So those who vote remain now have to sign in blood. So if we have the veto removed and then say our vat rate is set at Brussels at 30% you are saying that’s life chap you need to be a slave and democracy no longer exists
Wow
your jew hating IRA mate
Do you even think before you type?
Everything he’s said so far is campaigning bollocks. If you think it’ll survive past an election I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
Oh I think the UK will decide and whatever one says about Mr Johnson he’s a lot smarter than your jew hating IRA mate
Is that why the government in the original 1970’s referendum stopped the publication of cabinet minutes as it felt the true intent of the Eu would not sit well with the British public?
So those who vote remain now have to sign in blood. So if we have the veto removed and then say our vat rate is set at Brussels at 30% you are saying that’s life chap you need to be a slave and democracy no longer exists
Wow
Do you even think before you type?
I’m not sure from what Geoffrey Cox recently said that parliament can stop No Deal, certainly not without an election, however, even if that happens it might not stop Brexit. I’m saying this without wanting a No Deal (as I have said many times before)
So, it comes back to whether the withdrawal agreement be amended sufficiently to get it through parliament. Without it being changed it can’t get through parliament. Mays tried as we know !
I say misjudged the situation as in this could end up being an accidental No Deal ie where neither side wants it but hasn’t got the will or the ability to move sufficiently to avoid it.
Ps I honestly can’t get my head around why the WA can’t be reopened/amended (when it obviously can’t get through parliament as it stands) ?
Because 28 countries agreed to it. Now one of them wants to start again. No. We had a couple of years discussing it. The back stop was a UK request. It was granted and the WA was agreed in order to progress. The red lines were set by the UK, not the EU. That’s it. Take it or leave it.
I’m just highlighting the reality of the situation ie the WA cannot pass through parliament as it stands. As we all know, the government has tried three times !
And it’s ironic that the likes of ERG have managed to stop Brexit from happening!
Parliament needs a break to the deadlock and it has needed one for months. I would be very glad to have an end to the dithering one way or the other and the country can have some certainty. It is also nothing to be ashamed of to admit a mistake. Some are under the impression that we want Brexit to fail-wrong, I live in this country and voted to preserve it in 2014. But if enough people still want it to go through, and that 'Leave means Leave', then it should be decided by the electorate with a legal bind on the result. The politicians, especially those entrusted to execute this process, have proven incapable.
Exactly.So, no deal it is then. Which no one wants.
Exactly.
As I said from the start the EU will push for what is best for them. That is their right. May bowed down to them and tried to push through what they wanted. But as we all know it failed miserably. If BJ keeps to what he is saying the choice will be down to the EU. Let us leave without a deal or finally negotiate.
The so called divorce payment would have kept the finances going from what they would have taken from us for years. And in this time a deal would be agreed. But now with BJ saying that the divorce payment wouldn't be made they have the choice. The billions we hand over would have to be covered in some way.
So where would it come from? Cuts to funding? Better off countries handing over billions more?
Barnier has been telling all the leaders they have to stand firm. But of course the other countries in the EU are getting worried. Less funding/higher payments isn't what was promised. The deadline has been set. Another extension of the deadline has been offered. What more can be offered?
I am in France visiting my wife and kids. A French bloke brought up the subject with me in the pub. They dislike Macron but dislike the EU even more. Most of the money that goes to France goes to those who don't need it. Their PM does nothing for the poorer people. And they don't want to be pulled closer to Germany. Top priority is the church and religion. Then it is a dislike and mistrust of Germany.
Time heals. But so much happened that the healing process will take many years. And us being British makes us welcome just about everywhere. Many parts of France will be devastated with a no deal. Brits play a big part in France. They think Macron is just dancing to whatever tune Germany plays.
All this crap going on is really sad.
If the EU want a deal they just need to say let’s talk but they aren’t budging. I’m sure they’ve war gamed the scenarios but I think they might, for the first time in negotiations, have misjudged the situation, which isn't good for anyone. I think they hope parliament will be able to prevent a No deal and an extension will be required or an election will happen which may lead to us remaining - both currently appear unlikely.
!
It’s more complex than the EU just wanting to talk though. There are legal obstacles to reopening the WA and there doesn’t really seem to be the political will to reopen it (look at the comments coming from the EU). There’s also the time factor, it took 2 years to negotiate, it’s unlikely to be tweaked and signed of by 27 member states before the deadline.
Then there’s the fact the main issue is (supposedly) the back stop which was largely our creation that we now have a problem with. So it’s probably down to us to put forward an olive branch and hint at dropping one of our redlines and ask for a long extension to renegotiate. As both of those things have been ruled out by us you can only really conclude our government isn’t really being genuine. Whether that is to force us to no deal or try to play hardball and hope it changes the EU stance I’m not sure.
Even if we could rectify the above issues is there a solution to the backstop which would keep leavers happy and is even remotely feasible?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There’s also quite a bit of anti-British sentiment there due to houses in rural areas being bought as holiday homes
The problem with Johnson is that he is all hot air. What’s his solution for the Irish border?
Positive thinking.
He has no actual solutions and will end up taking the UK out without a deal, which is a hell of a long way from what he said back in 2016.
It’s time the UK took some responsibility and stopped trying to blame others for its problems.
If it wasn’t for the DUP then I think they’d have happily cut NI loose.
It’s more complex than the EU just wanting to talk though. There are legal obstacles to reopening the WA and there doesn’t really seem to be the political will to reopen it (look at the comments coming from the EU). There’s also the time factor, it took 2 years to negotiate, it’s unlikely to be tweaked and signed of by 27 member states before the deadline.
Then there’s the fact the main issue is (supposedly) the back stop which was largely our creation that we now have a problem with. So it’s probably down to us to put forward an olive branch and hint at dropping one of our redlines and ask for a long extension to renegotiate. As both of those things have been ruled out by us you can only really conclude our government isn’t really being genuine. Whether that is to force us to no deal or try to play hardball and hope it changes the EU stance I’m not sure.
Even if we could rectify the above issues is there a solution to the backstop which would keep leavers happy and is even remotely feasible?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There was something similar discussed in the Malthouse compromise which was raised earlier in the year (inc extended transition)
Look I’m not pointing the finger at the EU, they have negotiated how I would have expected, however, people on the remain side will always blame Mays ‘red lines’ people on the other side will point to the sequencing proposed by the EU (and wrongly accepted by May)
The backstop is an issue because people (wrongly in my view) believe we could be trapped in it forever and will have to follow new rules implemented during the backstop period that could damage us. This wouldn’t have been such a major issue if proper trade talks and general understanding of trade would have been discussed concurrently (this would also removed Labours only argument against the WA, a blind Brexit ! I’m sure they’d have found another reason to oppose though). Unfortunately, trade could only be discussed post backstop agreement etc....so everyone’s energies/bad will etc has been wasted on this.
I’ve never seen the split of the divorce settlement but let’s say around £24bn would be transitional period funding/contribution. I’ve always believed that a proposal whereby the balance is only payable subject to a free trade agreement being reached (incentivising the EU to do a quick deal - removing the arguments from the ERG etc) and/or agreement that no new EU trade laws which negatively impact the UKs trade could be brought in during the backstop period, then the backstop probably works and gets through parliament. During the transition period I’d be shocked if a technological solution couldn’t be found in conjunction with whatever trade agreement reached
I’m sure there are potential issues/challenges regarding the above however there are options/tweaks that might work....but it will need the WA to be reopened....albeit briefly !
And your point is?I've recently discovered that you're from the black country
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
What like you guys are suggesting? Some sort of stereotyping or discrimination might be in order or something?It explains a lot
I tend to agree. A solution would have to be found to the backstop anyway so, if they'd voted for the withdrawal agreement, they could have been looking for that solution having fulfilled their 'promise' to leave the EU. As it is... they're looking for the solution, having not left the EU. Ultimately the withdrawal agreement didn't shape the terms after either, they still need to be negotiated so... if it wasn't for the remainers that are the ERG, then the pledge to leave the EU would have happened.The backstop is an issue because people (wrongly in my view) believe we could be trapped in it forever and will have to follow new rules implemented during the backstop period that could damage us. This wouldn’t have been such a major issue if proper trade talks and general understanding of trade would have been discussed concurrently (this would also removed Labours only argument against the WA, a blind Brexit ! I’m sure they’d have found another reason to oppose though). Unfortunately, trade could only be discussed post backstop agreement etc....so everyone’s energies/bad will etc has been wasted on this.
What like you guys are suggesting? Some sort of stereotyping or discrimination might be in order or something?
Rich coming from ultra-pro-remain people given the slants thrown at leave voters over the last 3yrs or so isn't it?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Unless someone is banking on returning with more slight changes but a definitive & stark this is it no extensions, no remain, we leave 31/10 - so final answer...this deal or no deal!I’m just highlighting the reality of the situation ie the WA cannot pass through parliament as it stands. As we all know, the government has tried three times !
so final answer...this deal or no deal!
No that is clearly not an option. At the moment it is set that we are leaving 31/10.Or remain.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?