Hampster Gull
Well-known member
- Dec 22, 2010
- 13,465
Didn’t see that but not surprised deep down, just shows how poor the Momentum opposition is. The political class have hit an all time low
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Brexit
- Thread starter KingstonSeagull
- Start date
Didn’t see that but not surprised deep down, just shows how poor the Momentum opposition is. The political class have hit an all time low
Lower West Stander
Well-known member
But the reason they can’t is because there are so many variations on what Brexit actually means.
Ok, so the majority voted to leave but did 5hat mean hard Brexit?, soft Brexit? During the campaign I don’t recall the Irish border issue being mentioned once.
I honestly believe leavers have absolutely no idea what they voted for....
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
portslade seagull
Well-known member
After a year of Corbyn government most will be saying how good it was under May
nicko31
Well-known member
Complete piss take on C4 News tonight with a Montague of the last 2 years of TM's government to Abba's Waterloo
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
Things are interesting now.
A deal could be agreed I think, with one simple move by the EU. Put a legal time limit on the backstop. They may not want to do something which they said they wouldn't, but TM has done that a fair bit herself, so they should be willing to move themselves. Not to mention, if they really don't want the backstop and they are sincere about that, then a time limit in law would cost them nothing.
But, they may be quite happy with the situation as it is. They could refuse to budge at all, knowing that we will now face significant challenge, the ways out of which include having no Brexit, which is what they really want. But they would risk a No Deal Brexit. If things go that way, then it will be the ultimate test for the PM. She will have two options. Since the majority of the house would express it's will to avoid No Deal at all costs (meaning at the cost of Brexit), she can either a) respect the will of the House and defy the will of the people. Or b) respect the will of the people and defy the will of the House.
People are saying that she ruled out No Deal. She didn't, she said the way to avoid No Deal is to have a deal, and to have a deal you need to vote for a deal. Hilary Benn just said on BBC News that she said she wouldn't run down the clock. She didn't say that, she said she isn't trying to run down the clock. Big difference, not sure if HB wasn't listening or is being a little dishonest, but No Deal is what will happen unless the EU can agree to a deal which Parliament can also agree to. If either side decide to dig in their heels in the hope that Brexit will be derailed, they may be pushing us towards No Deal. Assuming TM has the will to honour the result of the referendum.
A deal could be agreed I think, with one simple move by the EU. Put a legal time limit on the backstop. They may not want to do something which they said they wouldn't, but TM has done that a fair bit herself, so they should be willing to move themselves. Not to mention, if they really don't want the backstop and they are sincere about that, then a time limit in law would cost them nothing.
But, they may be quite happy with the situation as it is. They could refuse to budge at all, knowing that we will now face significant challenge, the ways out of which include having no Brexit, which is what they really want. But they would risk a No Deal Brexit. If things go that way, then it will be the ultimate test for the PM. She will have two options. Since the majority of the house would express it's will to avoid No Deal at all costs (meaning at the cost of Brexit), she can either a) respect the will of the House and defy the will of the people. Or b) respect the will of the people and defy the will of the House.
People are saying that she ruled out No Deal. She didn't, she said the way to avoid No Deal is to have a deal, and to have a deal you need to vote for a deal. Hilary Benn just said on BBC News that she said she wouldn't run down the clock. She didn't say that, she said she isn't trying to run down the clock. Big difference, not sure if HB wasn't listening or is being a little dishonest, but No Deal is what will happen unless the EU can agree to a deal which Parliament can also agree to. If either side decide to dig in their heels in the hope that Brexit will be derailed, they may be pushing us towards No Deal. Assuming TM has the will to honour the result of the referendum.
ManOfSussex
We wunt be druv
They'd be saying the same about EU membership a lot quicker after a no deal Brexit.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
[tweet]1085265429407457282[/tweet]
It's still a possibility. For a number of reasons :
1. May now has 3 sitting days to come back with 'another' plan.
2. If that plan is rejected she then has 3 weeks to come up with plan C.
3. If that plan is rejected then the committee chairs have to come up with a plan.
As things stand, the law says we will leave on the 29th. Legislation needs passing to stop that - time is running out. And of course any new plan needs EU agreement. And all this requires some sort of majority. Oh, and there's no time for a 2nd referendum.
portslade seagull
Well-known member
Maybe, maybe not. Everything has been so muddied with umpteen scare stories I'm not sure many know how it will play out
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,772
You and your 'no deal' friends have just stopped Brexit and you still haven't realised
Raleigh Chopper
New member
A plan B would help to get things 'on their way'
Thats if they had one in place that is.
Apparently they are going to listen ( yeah right) and cobble something together by Monday and take it to Brussels, but the EU have already said that with a massive defeat they are not even prepared to open it back up again.
Leave voters still hanging on to any last thread of comfort they can find.
Well, well, well. Leavers' options just got drastically reduced. You now only have two ways you can leave and both of those are unlikely to happen. And to think, you had it all 2.5 years ago. Well, you kidded yourselves you did. We all knew it was headed for this utter shambles. Well done, you have ****ed the country for generations.
At what point did i say the future starts here??
As i pointed out earlier i was undecided on the day of the vote and chose not to.
Also it's 48%.
After hearing all that crap from both parties before the vote i now think we should leave after that project fear shite.Not one single thing has happened well maybe the euro falling but that was over inflated before the vote.
We were told we are doomed if we don't join the Euro, we're not.
We were told only a few hundred thousand will come here when Poland etc could move here and work that didn't happen, ensuring our NHS is at stretching point.
I'm sure there is more others can add but for me there was a vote ( which i did not vote in ) then respect it. Simple.
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
View attachment 103800
You and your 'no deal' friends have just stopped Brexit and you still haven't realised
I don't see how Brexit can be stopped, there is a majority who don't want No Deal, but I'm not sure if there is a majority who are willing to vote to change the law to stop Brexit. It's possible, but I think pretty unlikely.
Without a change in the law, Brexit happens, deal or no deal.
Most of this depends of TM and her fortitude, assuming that the EU continue to be obtuse.
pastafarian
Well-known member
2016 was the only referendum we have ever had on the European Union
You have zero statistical analysis which tells you ALL in their 90`s are pro EU. Did twitter tell you?
But good old Churchill though, wanted a peaceful European organisation but wished to not be a part of it, merely an outsider looking in as a friend. He would have voted to Leave too if he had seen what his vision had morphed into by 2016
“In all this urgent work, France and Germany must take the lead together.Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America, and I trust Soviet Russia - for then indeed all would be well - must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine.”
“We see nothing but good and hope in a richer, freer, more contented European commonalty. But we have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked, but not comprised. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed.”
“It is only when plans for uniting Europe take a federal form that we ourselves cannot take part, because we cannot subordinate ourselves or the control of British policy to federal authorities”
Parliament gave us....sorry "inflicted" the Referendum. 544-53
AYES
Tory 320
Labour 206
Green 1
Independent 1
DUP 6
UKIP 1
Ulster Unionist 2
Lib Dem 7
NOES
SNP 53
Frankly its ludicrous to suggest in 1975 the general public had easy access to the treaty of Rome or even full parliamentary debates, it was not a 24hr news or click the mouse culture in 1975.
The Rome Treaty is irrelevant too, the vote was on the EU institution as it stood in 2016 not a vote on a different set up from 1957 or 1975
However….people were reliant on media and pamphlets.
One pamphlet even said English Common Law would NOT be affected by remaining in…..that was rather a large porky.
How many voters were informed in 1975 the European Communities would morph into the European Union in 1992
How many voters knew more powers would be lost by national parliaments and handed to EU with the Lisbon Treaty 2007
How many voters were informed that minus net migration in 1975 would change into inward European migration of 269,000 by 2015
How many voters knew in 1975 that membership of 9 would expand to East Germany,Greece.Spain,Portugal,Finland,Sweden,Austria,Slovenia,Czech R,Lithuania,Estonia,Latvia,Slovakia,Poland,Hungary,Malta,Cyprus,Bulgaria,Rumania,Croatia.
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
If the referendum result is overturned then we are **cked for generations.
If we have a No Deal Brexit then we will face some degree of challenge, which we are perfectly capable of rising to, for a year or so, maybe 18 months.
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,772
Give it a couple of weeks and the implications of what happened tonight will become very clear. Don't forget, patience is a virtue
Last edited:
ManOfSussex
We wunt be druv
Which is why if Article 50 isn't extended, it'll be unilaterally revoked via an act of parliament to allow time to come up with plan D or any plan. Never mind the time needed for another referendum, no deal requires a further 6 primary pieces of legislation and 800-1000 statuary ones, on top of everything else needed.
The Electoral Commission has £829k ring-fenced to hold The European Elections in May. The new Commission wont be appointed and in place until the autumn in anycase to begin to 'negotiate' something different too - I'm sure they'd welcome us back with open arms, even if we say it wont be for long.
Last edited:
Totally agree hence why i was undecided.
But i also think if there was a 2nd referendum leave might actually increase.