Brexit slowly becoming a Farce.

[Detournement]

1 minute ago, welshbairn said:

Where would they invest their money instead if they're looking for a low risk return? All Banks do this, including Central Banks.

They aren't looking for a low risk return. They are actually losing money by investing in dodgy companies.

The ECB are not investing for profit they are investing to inject liquidity into favoured corporations.

[Jacksgranda]

1 minute ago, welshbairn said:

It probably is the best deal possible given her red lines, which Corbyn shares.

Corbyn wears lipstick sensation!

[John Lambies Doos]

Britain didn’t ask for deal when our ancestors went across the channel and helped chase the Nazi’s out of France, Holland et all so what gives these fuckers the right to hold us to ransom now?
f**k yer deal and f**k yer EU. No deal is coming home!

Gammon incoming

[Detournement]

7 minutes ago, ICTJohnboy said:

So what is it is, and how will he be able to secure it?

 

 

He'll point out that the continent is fucked and help them figure out how to make a better society for all of us.

And if Merkel isn't up for that then #Lexit

[John Lambies Doos]

You're going to have to apologise to John Lambies Doos too, otherwise he'll be very annoyed. *
* I see you've already done that. Late to the party again!

Not at all, I'm in a festive mood!!! No apology was ever needed.

[Fullerene]

1 hour ago, RadgerTheBadger said:

Britain didn’t ask for deal when our ancestors went across the channel and helped chase the Nazi’s out of France, Holland et all so what gives these fuckers the right to hold us to ransom now?

f**k yer deal and f**k yer EU. No deal is coming home!

I think the idea was to defeat Germany and that would stop Germany bombing the UK and sinking ships and all that.
Liberating France, Belgium and Holland was a good way to gather up allies to fight the Germans.

Are they holding us to ransom?  Are we holding them to ransom?
They are simply saying "if you want to do business with us - here are our terms."
We are replying "we want to do business with you but our terms are simply a request for you to improve yours."

Doesn't seem to be working.

[Guest Jedi]

May obviously can't spin this out indefinitely..certainly not beyond January 21st, by which point her deal (with no amendments) will be voted down. Given it can then only be no deal or 2nd ref, I suppose that 2nd ref seems more likely in the Commons. Some Tories will vote for it, Labour have to at that stage, along with the SNP and Liberals. DUP will abstain. It would have to be legislated for quickly and held probably early March. The result of that, as said will define Scotland's future for some time to come-remain and there will be no Indy Ref 2...Leave and its game on.

Remaining in the EU would put Indy off the table for probably around 10 years I reckon. SNP are very unlikely to win a majority in 2021, (probably still the largest party but way short of a majority), so the 'mandate' for one will have passed. They are right to argue for a 2nd Ref, and staying in the customs union/single market, but ironically if it comes to pass, will kill off their main driving force. Without a Brexit, case for Independence diminished. 

'If' Labour finally call a no confidence vote after her deal is voted down, the Tories and DUP will vote together to block it, so the govt would limp on...no General Election.

[Pull My Strings]

13 minutes ago, Jedi said:

May obviously can't spin this out indefinitely..certainly not beyond January 21st, by which point her deal (with no amendments) will be voted down. Given it can then only be no deal or 2nd ref, I suppose that 2nd ref seems more likely in the Commons. Some Tories will vote for it, Labour have to at that stage, along with the SNP and Liberals. DUP will abstain. It would have to be legislated for quickly and held probably early March. The result of that, as said will define Scotland's future for some time to come-remain and there will be no Indy Ref 2...Leave and its game on.

Remaining in the EU would put Indy off the table for probably around 10 years I reckon. SNP are very unlikely to win a majority in 2021, (probably still the largest party but way short of a majority), so the 'mandate' for one will have passed. They are right to argue for a 2nd Ref, and staying in the customs union/single market, but ironically if it comes to pass, will kill off their main driving force. Without a Brexit, case for Independence diminished. 

'If' Labour finally call a no confidence vote after her deal is voted down, the Tories and DUP will vote together to block it, so the govt would limp on...no General Election.

Exit would be delayed in those circumstances. Indeed, I'd say the safest bet just now is that we're going to remain in the EU well after 29th March. Short of May's deal being agreed (which seems virtually impossible), there won't be a resolution before then, including a decision to leave without an agreement.

[Granny Danger]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

It probably is the best deal possible given her red lines, which Corbyn shares.

If you class an absolute shambles that has taken two years to cobble together and that no one wants in order to achieve an irreconcilable situation as ‘the best deal possible’ then you’re right.

 

[Pull My Strings]

Just watching last night's Question Time now: how the f**k did Davis manage to hold down a gig as Brexit secretary for two years? He's an absolute fantasist. It speaks poorly of him but worse of May keeping him in that job for so long. The whole thing is just one set of Tories playing silly buggers with another.

[welshbairn]

7 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

If you class an absolute shambles that has taken two years to cobble together and that no one wants in order to achieve an irreconcilable situation as ‘the best deal possible’ then you’re right.

 

If you start it by saying your red lines are Brexit means Brexit, no freedom of movement, no rule taking, no accepting ECJ judgements, frictionless Irish border and no different rules for Northern Ireland, then I am right. Corbyn's red lines are exactly the same, except for wanting more exceptions from Europe on state support for failing firms. 

Edited December 14, 2018 by welshbairn

[Granny Danger]

2 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

If you start it by saying your red lines are Brexit means Brexit, no freedom of movement, no rule taking, no accepting ECJ judgements, frictionless Irish border and no different rules for Northern Ireland, then I am right. Corbyn's red lines are exactly the same, except for wanting more exceptions from Europe.

 

2 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

If you start it by saying your red lines are Brexit means Brexit, no freedom of movement, no rule taking, no accepting ECJ judgements, frictionless Irish border and no different rules for Northern Ireland, then I am right. Corbyn's red lines are exactly the same, except for wanting more exceptions from Europe.

I’m happy to criticise Corbyn but he’s not PM and he’s not the one who has got the country into this mess and is still denying Parliament the right to vote on a proposal that is two years in the making and will not be further amended.

May and her government’s problems are of their own making.  They have refused to make clear that leaving the EU is irreconcilable with avoiding a hard border in Ireland.  That admission should have been made some time ago rather than trying to be all things to all people.

 

[welshbairn]

8 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

 

I’m happy to criticise Corbyn but he’s not PM and he’s not the one who has got the country into this mess and is still denying Parliament the right to vote on a proposal that is two years in the making and will not be further amended.

May and her government’s problems are of their own making.  They have refused to make clear that leaving the EU is irreconcilable with avoiding a hard border in Ireland.  That admission should have been made some time ago rather than trying to be all things to all people.

 

Totally agree, it all started from total ignorance or who gives a f**k and the only aim was reconciling the utterly irreconcilable wings of the Tory Party.  f**k national interest or stability in Europe.

Edited December 14, 2018 by welshbairn

[Guest Jedi]

Agree that a 2nd Ref would require an extension of Article 50. My timeline of a vote in early March is obviously the very earliest it could be held, after a potential 6 week campaign. However, the ramifications of the Commons voting to hold one would probably drag it out for longer. No doubt the EU would agree to an extension with the chance that the UK would then choose to Remain. A second campaign will certainly be more bitter than the first, with a lot of shouting about lack of democracy etc from the Leave side. Of course if they had been honest about the difficulties of leaving a union from which around 53,000 laws have been incorporated into the UK legislature (albeit many of them don't really affect day to day life) then we woudn't be in this position in the first place. It would, realistically, according to lawyers, take years to even begin to untangle the ways in which the UK is linked to the EU. The single market, customs unions, Irish borders, trade, security, freedoms of movement of goods, capital, services, and people, are only the headlines.....there have been some cracking phone ins in the last two years (mostly on LBC) when Leave voters have been asked to name one, just one, EU law which they can't wait to get rid of...and they can't even come up with a single one (other than mentions of bendy bananas of course).

Corbyn's problem meanwhile remains that he wants us to Leave, so can't been seen to be too enthusiastic about a 2nd Ref.Only his backbenchers will eventually drag him into it, if we get there.

Edited December 14, 2018 by Jedi

[welshbairn]

13 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Agree that a 2nd Ref would require an extension of Article 50. My timeline of a vote in early March is obviously the very earliest it could be held, after a potential 6 week campaign.

It would probably take till March for Parliament and the Electoral Commission to agree what question to ask. Then we have the Euro Parliament Elections in May which brings whole new complications. Would we take part in an election that it's been assumed that we wouldn't be? And who are going to be the new people in the EU to negotiate with? I'm out of solutions other than realism kicking in and understanding that May's deal just kicks decisions into the future while keeping things going pretty much as they are now in the meantime. 

[Pull My Strings]

5 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

It would probably take till March for Parliament and the Electoral Commission to agree what question to ask. Then we have the Euro Parliament Elections in May which brings whole new complications. Would we take part in an election that it's been assumed that we wouldn't be? And who are going to be the new people in the EU to negotiate with? I'm out of solutions other than realism kicking in and understanding that May's deal just kicks decisions into the future while keeping things going pretty much as they are now in the meantime. 

Tbf, none of those factors are really relevant. The EU would surely allow an extension of the article 50 notice period. Thereafter it's down to the UK deciding whether or not to revoke the withdrawal notice. Once the extension is granted it's got f**k all to do with the EU if the UK decides to stay.

[welshbairn]

1 minute ago, Pull My Strings said:

Tbf, none of those factors are really relevant. The EU would surely allow an extension of the article 50 notice period. Thereafter it's down to the UK deciding whether or not to revoke the withdrawal notice. Once the extension is granted it's got f**k all to do with the EU if the UK decides to stay.

That assumes a willingness of Westminster to revoke A50 or ask for an extension. And ignores the problem of the Euro Parliament elections. There's no majority for anything at the moment and Nick Clegg made it really hard to force a General Election, which would be my favoured path to sanity.

[Bedford White]

VONC incoming

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/14/jeremy-corbyn-urged-call-vote-no-confidence-theresa-may-next/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwjikLKBt6DfAhW3UBUIHewIB3IQiJQBMAB6BAgHEAQ&usg=AOvVaw26So08kmLdUh-z7MBKzvWQ&ampcf=1

[juansanchezbrotosbrother]

10 minutes ago, Bedford White said:

VONC incoming

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/14/jeremy-corbyn-urged-call-vote-no-confidence-theresa-may-next/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwjikLKBt6DfAhW3UBUIHewIB3IQiJQBMAB6BAgHEAQ&usg=AOvVaw26So08kmLdUh-z7MBKzvWQ&ampcf=1

Calling one before the commons vote will only strengthen May's hand in my opinion and make Labour look like Brexit saboteurs. Can't guarantee that DUP or enough Tories will vote her down. ERG are off their nuts but actively bringing down a Tory government might be too much for them to stomach the now. 

[Bedford White]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

Totally agree, it all started from total ignorance or who gives a f**k and the only aim was reconciling the utterly irreconcilable wings of the Tory Party.  f**k national interest or stability in Europe.

It was all that and more. It was to halt the rise of a party with 1 MP taking votes from the Tories in 2015 GE.