[Politics] Brexit

[Kinky Gerbil]

Funnily enough, we already had a parliamentary consensus for Brexit and that was the Brady amendment - the current deal but ditch the backstop which appears to be government policy. Unsurprisingly the EU rejects this and sticks to its position because it knows parliament won't sanction a no-deal so they can get whatever they want.

No concessions for those evil Tory voters then

The ERG still said they wouldn’t vote for it.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Care to explain then, why your immediate response to the sight of anti-Jewish graffiti, was to point out how wealthy the road in question is?

What was the relevance?

the Avenue is an expensive road fits well with the liberal elite that populate it , is the person who lives at that property even Jewish Gwylan just trying to fit an agenda on me ,hope that helps
Regards
DF

 

[Triggaaar]

Leaving with *no deal* is the cataclysmic outcome.

Agreed.

Maybe he'll notice the deal on the table ?

What deal on the table? The one that May put forward and saw rejected several times?

What I'd like is to have a PM go to the EU, and negotiate a deal with them while having the power to leave without a deal if needed. That way, the EU would at least feel some pressure to agree to a deal that's fair for both sides.

The problem is that we have a PM who is completely untrustworthy, so understandably, the rest of the house don't want him to have that power. Which means there's no chance of him getting a deal that's worth the MPs voting for.

 

[Triggaaar]

Parliament in its infinite wisdom has decided that must be our negotiating position

If you know that 'no deal' would be terrible for our country, why on earth would give a loose canon like Boris the power to enact it?

I think the way forward should be:
The Tories start by agreeing a deal amongst themselves, which they believe should (not would) be supported by the house. They should then discuss that deal with other parties, and tweak it if necessary. That deal should then go to the house, with the idea being that if it gets through, it becomes law that it is put to the EU, and the EU either accept it, or we leave with no deal. If it's a fair deal (which it needs to be), the EU would be mad not to accept it.

If the deal is a fair one, and Labour reject it, we should then have another general election, and if the people believe the deal was fair, then the Tories should get a majority and be able to go again without Labour's backing.

 

[Grombleton]

Has any man single handed done more to stop the Tories achieving a deal with Brexit than this man?

Blame Bercow
Blame Corbyn
Blame the EU
Blame The Lib Dems/Anyone opposing Brexit

Blame literally everyone.

 

[Bodian]

What I'd like is to have a PM go to the EU, and negotiate a deal with them while having the power to leave without a deal if needed. That way, the EU would at least feel some pressure to agree to a deal that's fair for both sides.

To be honest, it strikes me that the deal May got was as fair as it could have been given her red lines. She got most of what she wanted, out of the customs union, free movement, and so on. The EU would far rather we kept both these aspects whilst still leaving (EFTA / Norway, etc). So, most of the 'give' was on their side anyway - all they really held out for was no hard border in Ireland, and May's answer to this was the backstop. So, when you say that the EU would be pressured into agreeing a deal that's fair for both sides, implicitly implying that we were getting the worst of the deal - what do you actually mean? Honest question, not having a dig.

 

[Gwylan]

the Avenue is an expensive road fits well with the liberal elite that populate it , is the person who lives at that property even Jewish Gwylan just trying to fit an agenda on me ,hope that helps
Regards
DF

Now you're rewriting things: you didn't say that you weren't surprised to see anti-semitic slogans in the Avenue because the inhabitants were liberal, but it was because they were wealthy,

 

[Gwylan]

What I'd like is to have a PM go to the EU, and negotiate a deal with them while having the power to leave without a deal if needed. That way, the EU would at least feel some pressure to agree to a deal that's fair for both sides.

The problem is that we have a PM who is completely untrustworthy, so understandably, the rest of the house don't want him to have that power. Which means there's no chance of him getting a deal that's worth the MPs voting for.

That's what May should have done in the first place. The trouble with this as an approach is that Johnson has gone for a full-frontal assault on the opposition, rendering almost impossible for there to be a compromise. Hell, he couldn't even get them to agree to a recess, something that is usually fairly standard.

 

[Bodian]

If you know that 'no deal' would be terrible for our country, why on earth would give a loose canon like Boris the power to enact it?

I think the way forward should be:
The Tories start by agreeing a deal amongst themselves, which they believe should (not would) be supported by the house. They should then discuss that deal with other parties, and tweak it if necessary. That deal should then go to the house, with the idea being that if it gets through, it becomes law that it is put to the EU, and the EU either accept it, or we leave with no deal. If it's a fair deal (which it needs to be), the EU would be mad not to accept it.

If the deal is a fair one, and Labour reject it, we should then have another general election, and if the people believe the deal was fair, then the Tories should get a majority and be able to go again without Labour's backing.

Or of course, you could miss the election bit out, and have a second referendum on the deal. Trouble is, I think the Tories would have a problem agreeing amongst themselves in the first place now. But secondly - the deal that is most likely to get the support of the house is something like Norway - customs union, etc. But as this is effectively what Labour have said would be acceptable, no Tory is going to support it.

 

[ManOfSussex]

It's possible the member that would be most affected by Brexit might be more flexible if it thought no deal, the outcome it least wanted, was an almost certain outcome if they didn't change position.

Given The UK's red lines, The EU's (single market integrity) The Good Friday Agreement, that the backstop was formulated by The UK and now dropped with no alternative proposal and the fact this whole nostalgic, cluster**** of Brexit, born of delusions of grandeur was a British idea, how should the Irish be more flexible?

 

[Gwylan]

But as this is effectively what Labour have said would be acceptable, no Tory is going to support it.

The Tories don't have to support it: if Labour and other parties could agree such a deal, it would get passed - even if every Tory voted against

 

[Bodian]

The Tories don't have to support it: if Labour and other parties could agree such a deal, it would get passed - even if every Tory voted against

I agree - but I was following on from Triggaaar's suggestion that the Tories agree something amongst themselves that they feel would get the support of the house. The point I was making was that the Tories wouldn't agree amongst themselves to something they themselves wouldn't support.

 

[Triggaaar]

To be honest, it strikes me that the deal May got was as fair as it could have been given her red lines.

But we shouldn't be taking her red lines as a given. They were her red lines, and they've now gone, so it's not really relevant.

She got most of what she wanted, out of the customs union, free movement, and so on.

That's not true, we'd still have been in the customs union while we continued to negotiate, whilst having the backstop, which we couldn't leave without the EU's consent.

The EU would far rather we kept both these aspects whilst still leaving (EFTA / Norway, etc). So, most of the 'give' was on their side anyway

They didn't give anything.

all they really held out for was no hard border in Ireland

Which meant us staying in the customs union, which you just said we'd have left.

So, when you say that the EU would be pressured into agreeing a deal that's fair for both sides, implicitly implying that we were getting the worst of the deal - what do you actually mean? Honest question, not having a dig.

I mean that I disagree with you about how good the original was, which is why it was rejected every time.

 

[Triggaaar]

Or of course, you could miss the election bit out, and have a second referendum on the deal.

It would be difficult to put the specifics of the deal to the public, but I guess you could. If the public voted to leave again, on a specific deal, it would be difficult for MPs to then reject it.

Trouble is, I think the Tories would have a problem agreeing amongst themselves in the first place now.

I'm not so sure. Mog and co were against the first deal, but now they're concerned they'll lose Brexit altogether, so they're more likely to accept something soft.

But secondly - the deal that is most likely to get the support of the house is something like Norway - customs union, etc.

Agreed.

But as this is effectively what Labour have said would be acceptable, no Tory is going to support it.

What if they tweak it to make it sound like it was their idea? I think that's the best way forward.

 

[vegster]

That's what May should have done in the first place. The trouble with this as an approach is that Johnson has gone for a full-frontal assault on the opposition, rendering almost impossible for there to be a compromise. Hell, he couldn't even get them to agree to a recess, something that is usually fairly standard.

The problem was that May decided the " red lines" she thought the country wanted and, negotiated from that position. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but, wouldn't it have been a lovely idea to decide what we were demanding and what we were willing to sacrifice before locking the door and closing the curtains and starting negotiations ?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I'm not so sure. Mog and co were against the first deal, but now they're concerned they'll lose Brexit altogether, so they're more likely to accept something soft.

I really doubt it.

 

[Bakero]

Sussex Express now reporting on the various unfortunate goings on in Lewes - https://www.sussexexpress.co.uk/new...nti-semitic-graffiti-found-in-lewes-1-9087835

View attachment 115669

I'm not sure about their definition of a DFL. People are more concerned about house price rises, not their "city ways".

 

[Triggaaar]

I really doubt it.

Why? He voted for May's deal the last time.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Why? He voted for May's deal the last time.

JRM did?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Farage: “If someone makes you a promise and knowingly breaks it I think that is betrayal and we should call it what it is...The real surrender would not be the Hillary Benn Act, the real surrender would be to sign us up to a terrible deal, with no voice, no vote, no veto.”


Boris is not brexity enough for Farage now....