The fact he had a meeting with him yesterday where they agreed the principles of a deal ?
Last edited:
Out of intrest is there any reason that Varadkar saying Johnson wants a deal carries more weight than those involved who have said he doesn't want a deal?
I wouldn’t be so sure Steve. I think Parliament has forced his hand and made him do his job and the best (if the reports are true) he can do is resurrect a deal that’s already been rejected. If I was being cynical I would say it suits his real strategy of taking us out without a deal by presenting a deal he cast iron knows will be rejected so he can move onto doing what he wants to do.
Of course the reports could be wrong and he has actually thrashed out a new deal but I’ll believe that when I see it.
I guess because deep down he (like many others) was concerned about the indefinite nature of the backstop
I’m talking about post becoming PM and then again after his first proposal, when many suggested he was pursuing a No Deal as his primary option.
Why people don’t just hold their hands up say, fair play, don’t like him, don’t like Brexit at all but i was wrong, I don’t know.
Fair point, it is cynical but could be right (I doubt it). I guess we won’t know until we hear DUP/ERGs position on the new proposal
In response to DJR, I believe the progression of No Deal plans and a lot of the noise made by the government (normalisation) MAY have just about convinced enough labour MPs to vote through a deal rather than risk the alternative.
I said at the time my gut was that the No Deal stuff was as much about forcing parliament to (finally) make a decision as much as leverage over EU. I might still be proved wrong but that seemed logical to me.
I guess because deep down he (like many others) was concerned about the indefinite nature of the backstop
I’m talking about post becoming PM and then again after his first proposal, when many suggested he was pursuing a No Deal as his primary option.
Why people don’t just hold their hands up say, fair play, don’t like him, don’t like Brexit at all but i was wrong, I don’t know.
Indeed, I was about to pose the question if there’s been a breakthrough who has he thrown under the bus.
I guess we won’t know until we hear DUP/ERGs position on the new proposal
I guess because deep down he (like many others) was concerned about the indefinite nature of the backstop
I’m talking about post becoming PM and then again after his first proposal, when many suggested he was pursuing a No Deal as his primary option.
Why people don’t just hold their hands up say, fair play, don’t like him, don’t like Brexit at all but i was wrong, I don’t know.
Why wouldn't the backstop be indefinite? It wouldn't be a backstop if it wasn't and regardless would be irrelevant if the sort of technology the Brexiteers say exist is likely to deployed asap.
I wasn’t talking about the rights or wrongs of the backstop, just responding to why Johnson didn’t vote for the WA first and second time of asking.
However, to answer the point, the concern was that EU wouldn’t accept viable alternatives and therefore keep us in the CU indefinitely (I was never convinced about this as I’m also aware of the disincentives for the EU in keeping us in the backstop)
Article 15 Subsequent agreement
Should a subsequent agreement between the Union and the United Kingdom which addresses the unique circumstances on the island of Ireland, avoids a hard border and protects the 1998 Agreement in all its dimensions, become applicable after the entry into force of the Withdrawal Agreement, this Protocol shall not apply or shall cease to apply, as the case may be, in whole or in part, from the date of application of such subsequent agreement and in accordance with that agreement
We obviously aren't otherwise they wouldn't have come up with the first WA...& finally found something Eire at least appear willing to explore.
And they HAVE played hardball in many people's opinion. They want to send subtle warnings to other nations not to do the same. Whether they will or not at some future point we shall have have to wait and see.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
I wasn’t talking about the rights or wrongs of the backstop, just responding to why Johnson didn’t vote for the WA first and second time of asking.
However, to answer the point, the concern was that EU wouldn’t accept viable alternatives and therefore keep us in the CU indefinitely (I was never convinced about this as I’m also aware of the disincentives for the EU in keeping us in the backstop)
Why the EU would want to keep someone in the backstop against their will is beyond me, but even if they did we’d just take it to international court that we have a reasonable solution that meets our requirements and crack on. Though the EU wouldn’t do that because reneging on treaties is a quick way to stop others trading with you.
Both Mays deal and this version of Mays deal with a check on the backstop require a border in the Irish Sea or the entire UK in a CU. We have known about this from the start. We have decided to drop one of our contradictory red lines, which is what everyone who isn’t a Brexit cultist has been saying was the sticking point from the start.
Both Mays deal and this version of Mays deal with a check on the backstop require a border in the Irish Sea or the entire UK in a CU. We have known about this from the start. We have decided to drop one of our contradictory red lines, which is what everyone who isn’t a Brexit cultist has been saying was the sticking point from the start.
As I said Shmmeee, i never saw it as likely either. There were significant disincentives for the EU to do this, one of which, from memory, was the UK remaining in the CU without paying into the pot !
Unfortunately that wasn’t sufficient for all MPs ie ERG !
The compromise is surely to pass it, with an amendment tabled for it to be taken to a referendum?I suspect the ERG, being the tax dodging disaster capitalists they are, want No Deal.
DUP are mental ideologues and won’t accept the Irish Sea border. Let’s just hope they can be convinced or sidelined. I think the Labour Leave bunch are twitchy enough to vote for any deal and sideline them. I wonder what the Tory rebels will do.
The compromise is surely to pass it, with an amendment tabled for it to be taken to a referendum?
Surely that'd sideline the extreme mentalists and make them irrelevant?
I suspect the ERG, being the tax dodging disaster capitalists they are, want No Deal.
DUP are mental ideologues and won’t accept the Irish Sea border. Let’s just hope they can be convinced or sidelined. I think the Labour Leave bunch are twitchy enough to vote for any deal and sideline them. I wonder what the Tory rebels will do.
Well he was on a hiding to nothing on the looking strong point because he has had a minority government.It depends on what has unlocked the situation. If he’s gone for a border in the Irish Sea then he’s done what everyone has been saying for 3 years, made a compromise instead of pretending we can have it all our own way. It’s also the solution that was first proposed by the EU until we suggested the backstop.
We won’t know until we hear more. My point though was that he’ll most likely have to throw somebody under the bus and most likely it will be some version of a solution that was already known but be spun as something he’s achieved due to all the bravado since he came in.
All this noise they’ve made, all this show of strength is meaningless. It’s not there to create leverage or force the EU to make a concession. It’s there to make the public think that so BJ looks strong before an election takes place. People called this months ago.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There are some seriously clever people working on this. The proposal put forward just at the right time for Boris to get proper talks going...but little real time for either side to move very far. Then agreement made, Boris abides by the law & asks for a very short extension to a. Get it through parliament & b. Maintain that in principle we have left on 31st unless parliament decides to play silly buggers again.Probably won’t get through Parliament unless DUP agree to it so a long way to go.
For those Remainers in Parliament (and some of those on here) who insisted Johnson didn’t want a deal I hope they read the quote from Varadkar who was ‘absolutely convinced’ that Johnson wanted to strike a deal.
Doubt any humble pie will be eaten and theyll move away from the ‘he wants to take us out on a catastrophic no deal’ narrative onto something else
love him or hate him, and for all the flack he has taken, from day one the steps he has taken have been to try to get a deal agreed and through Parliament.....whether it can happen at this late hour remains to be seen
ps I hadn’t read all the posts but I see the narrative has changed already :emoji_joy:
There is a BIG difference between wanting to take us out without a deal, & being prepared to do so if necessary.Yes there were a range of opinions. Please note that the government has been saying they’re ready for no deal and saying they’d do it if they couldn’t get a deal so that’s a perfectly reasonable conclusion.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There are some seriously clever people working on this.
Yes...stories. They help sell papers they doIf the stories being reported are true all he’s done is come back with May’s Mk1 deal, which he himself didn’t want. Originally. In the words of May nothing has changed.
Like many - primarily because of the backstop...& the speculators are suggesting the details of the latest proposal on that part at least have changed. So it isn't the same deal & might become more accepted by the wider parliament.But if he was trying to get a deal through why didn't he vote for it the first time round when May presented it?
The Govt were criticised for unpreparedness. Next criticised for preparing for a no deal (which I believe has always & still is a remote possibility). In other words for the Tory-bashers it has been open season. Meanwhile those that matter have & will remain impervious to such criticisms & just get on with the job in hand.Its not really nonsense though is it, the government has gone out of its way to normalise no deal.
Anyway, there seems to be progress towards a deal of some kind which is great news.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That reads like some of conspiracy theory Tony. TouchèI wouldn’t be so sure Steve. I think Parliament has forced his hand and made him do his job and the best (if the reports are true) he can do is resurrect a deal that’s already been rejected. If I was being cynical I would say it suits his real strategy of taking us out without a deal by presenting a deal he cast iron knows will be rejected so he can move onto doing what he wants to do.
Of course the reports could be wrong and he has actually thrashed out a new deal but I’ll believe that when I see it.
Well for one he has spoken to Boris & gone on public record, rather than just throwing accusations based on either nothing or basic gossip like a good many haveOut of intrest is there any reason that Varadkar saying Johnson wants a deal carries more weight than those involved who have said he doesn't want a deal?
The Govt were criticised for unpreparedness. Next criticised for preparing for a no deal (which I believe has always & still is a remote possibility). In other words for the Tory-bashers it has been open season. Meanwhile those that matter have & will remain impervious to such criticisms & just get on with the job in hand.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
'Normalise no deal' - or just emphasise their (untrue) willingness to do so if necessary?Again they’ve gone out of their way to normalise no deal. It’s just crazy to criticise people for suspecting he wants no deal. Plus most people saying that openly admit they think he’s a charlatan and a complete turd.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Do they "seem to feel that way"? Or do they just disagree with him on the issue?Personally it’s a case of don’t trust him and given that his own brother and sister seem to also feel that way on this matter I think my feelings towards him are justified.
Why "May's deal"? Accept it for what it is, like the referendum result! Most MPs had issue with the backstop in that deal. If the backstop has changed, it isn't "May's deal" anymore is it. The main stumbling block has changed.Both Mays deal and this version of Mays deal with a check on the backstop require a border in the Irish Sea or the entire UK in a CU. We have known about this from the start. We have decided to drop one of our contradictory red lines, which is what everyone who isn’t a Brexit cultist has been saying was the sticking point from the start.
If you believe that...that is your choiceThere isn’t.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No, it's because the Peime Minister deserves no credit for being a bungling untruthful divisive shambolic incompetent.Why "May's deal"? Accept it for what it is, like the referendum result! Most MPs had issue with the backstop in that deal. If the backstop has changed, it isn't "May's deal" anymore is it. The main stumbling block has changed.
You just abhor the idea of giving Boris ANY credit for anything, possibly out of some spitefulness because the referendum didn't go the way you wanted.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
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?