[Politics] Brexit

[birthofanorange]

Maybe because no one knows exactly what will happen to us when and if Brexit happens? Winners? Losers?
Or do you know? If so, do tell......

I'll be happy to ask him/her/it on 1st November, when we're still in the EU. Before that, he/she/it gets no response from me.

 

[dingodan]

If it did pass a HoC indicative type vote (50/50 IMO) it would apply some political pressure on the EU to accept, but I think only a negligible amount.

I think the 'Malthouse Compromise' had a majority but that meant didly squat as from the EU's perspective it solved nothing.

I can't see a deal being agreed with the EU in the next two weeks, let alone then agreed in Parliament, so yes interesting times ahead...

Yes the Malthouse Compromise is what I was talking about. I think the pressure would be more given that we are basically at the end of the line now.

It's this deal or very similar, otherwise it's going to be no deal.

Even another delay wouldn't change the situation, it would just end up being no deal at the end of January.

 

[Lever]

Winning or losing doesn't come into it , life will.still go on or are you going to give up.and sit in the corner sulking ??
regards
DF

No winners and losers? I think you need to reflect more deeply - but I suppose that's a bit optimistic of me.
No sulking from me but do carry on being patient if and when it affects you adversely; you cannot unwish the things you have hoped for.

 

[birthofanorange]

Yes the Malthouse Compromise is what I was talking about. I think the pressure would be more given that we are basically at the end of the line now.

It's this deal or very similar, otherwise it's going to be no deal.

Even another delay wouldn't change the situation, it would just end up being no deal at the end of January.

There won't be either a deal or leaving with no deal, come 31st Oct.

There will be another extension.....and another....

 

[dingodan]

It LOOKS like we have moved but the sting is in the tail. Effectively a small party in NI can set it all back to square one. It's complete hypocrisy to vote against Mays deal on the basis that only the EU can decide when the border "is ok" and then effectively give that power to the DUP in this proposal.

The only solution is to start from a position where the border is open. Then work out can be done.

Not work out how you want to leave the EU and worry about the border at the end.

That's been the problem from day one



Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk

The power would be with both sides, neither side want a border, neither side have any objection to alignment in certain areas. The objection was always to the EU deciding unilaterally.

I don't see how the EU can argue that they don't want one of the interested parties in Ireland to have a say, but it should accepted that the EU will decide. Like I said, the EU have to move, this is compromise, their previous suggestion wasn't compromise. It's time for them to move if they are serious about a deal.

 

[dingodan]

Grey area. I'm not sure the House will vote unless the EU have reached an agreement though. In which case an extension is the next stage. That's what the legislation seems to indicate.

An extension until Jan 31, when we leave without a deal.

Or are we supposed to play this game forever and never leave?

 

[dingodan]

There won't be either a deal or leaving with no deal, come 31st Oct.

There will be another extension.....and another....

You think that's good? You are talking about remain by obstruction? Think that will heal divisions, remove uncertainty and let us get on with our lives?

 

[Lever]

You think that's good? You are talking about remain by obstruction? Think that will heal divisions, remove uncertainty and let us get on with our lives?

... and what do you think will heal divisions? Genuine question.

 

[dingodan]

... and what do you think will heal divisions? Genuine question.

Respecting the ref result and leaving and then moving on with a positive relationship with our friends in Europe.

Unless what you are saying is that remainers will never accept the result and will never allow the vote to be respected. I don't agree with that, there are more people who respect the vote win or lose than there are who are willing to sacrafice the principle of democracy to get their own way, those are a minority, and their soreness will heal in time, once this is over and done with. It's only their hope that they can change the result which is aggravating the situation, and that is being caused by all of this delay.

 

[Lever]

Respecting the ref result and leaving and then moving on with a positive relationship with our friends in Europe.

Unless what you are saying is that remainers will never accept the result and will never allow the vote to be respected. I don't agree with that, there are more people who respect the vote win or lose than there are who are willing to sacrafice the principle of democracy to get their own way, those are a minority, and their soreness will heal in time, once this is over and done with. It's only their hope that they can change the result which is aggravating the situation, and that is being caused by all of this delay.

Simplistic.
I respected the referendum result and waited for Parliament to forge a compromise that recognised the 52%/48% breakdown. In practice there was no agreement on the way forward; the options were not palatable for a majority of MPs who represent us.
Now an understanding that 'none of the above' needs to be an option and we forget the whole thing.....
If you tell me what in practice (rather than just in your head) will find 50% + acceptance, then it's worth considering, the rest is Leaver rhetoric... and if you think it is 'over and done with' with the Brexit vote, you should recognise that Brexit is the start, not the end of negotiations and in my opinion (and many of those who know more about it than I do) we will be in a weaker position to negotiate once we are out.

 

[GrizzlingGammon]

It is if you're a liberal Democrat , are you ready for Brexit?

I'm not sure why I need to be ready.

 

[Eeyore]

An extension until Jan 31, when we leave without a deal.

Or are we supposed to play this game forever and never leave?

Seems that way. Unless a General Election breaks the deadlock. But then there might not be a majority.

 

[dingodan]

Simplistic.
I respected the referendum result and waited for Parliament to forge a compromise that recognised the 52%/48% breakdown. In practice there was no agreement on the way forward; the options were not palatable for a majority of MPs who represent us.
Now an understanding that 'none of the above' needs to be an option and we forget the whole thing.....
If you tell me what, in practice (rather than just in your head) will find 50% + acceptance, then it's worth considering, the rest is Leaver rhetoric... and if you think it is 'over and done with' with the Brexit vote, you should recognise that Brexit is the start, not the end of negotiations and in my opinion (and many of those who know more about it than I do) we will be in a weaker position once we are out.

This deal on the table now, I believe, is palatable for a majority of MPs. Will need to be demonstrated, but it seems that way.

I don't understand what your "none of the above" thing means? You mean we need to consider overturning the result of the ref? I thought you were interested in healing divisions? Sore losers are one thing, sore winners denied would be quite something else.

What will find 50%+ acceptance? The ref we held resulted in a 50%+ result. For leaving.

The argument will be over and done with when we have left. Sure there will still be things to sort out, but knowing how that will go isn't really possible while people are still playing the "should we, shouldn't we leave" game. That discussion is over, it was over as soon as the votes were cast and counted. Once we are out in practice there will no longer be a political incentive to try to make future negotiations difficult in order to facilitate the overturning of the result. Future negotiations will become current negotiations and that is when we will find out what is what, and when pragmatism and mutual interest will finally win the day, as it always should have.

 

[WATFORD zero]

This deal on the table now, I believe, is palatable for a majority of MPs. Will need to be demonstrated, but it seems that way.

I don't understand what your "none of the above" thing means? You mean we need to consider overturning the result of the ref? I thought you were interested in healing divisions? Sore losers are one thing, sore winners denied would be quite something else.

What will find 50%+ acceptance? The ref we held resulted in a 50%+ result. For leaving.

The argument will be over and done with when we have left. Sure there will still be things to sort out, but knowing how that will go isn't really possible while people are still playing the "should we, shouldn't we leave" game. That discussion is over, it was over as soon as the votes were cast and counted. Once we are out in practice there will no longer be a political incentive to try to make future negotiations difficult in order to facilitate the overturning of the result. Future negotiations will become current negotiations and that is when we will find out what is what, and when pragmatism and mutual interest will finally win the day, as it always should have.

I love the way you keep referring to this supposed 'deal'.

You do realise that this 'deal' that is on the table is not a 'deal', it is a proposal.

When I write to Kylie Minogue suggesting that I give her a good seeing to every Saturday night, that doesn't constitute a deal, it's simply a proposal. Only when she agrees, does it cease to become a proposal and actually becomes a deal. Up until it's agreed by the other party, it remains a proposal

And, I think, there is more chance of Ms Minogue saying yes than there is that Johnson's proposal becomes a deal

And I don't think the backing of the HOC makes any difference to either proposal whatsoever

 

[clapham_gull]

Simplistic.
I respected the referendum result and waited for Parliament to forge a compromise that recognised the 52%/48% breakdown. In practice there was no agreement on the way forward; the options were not palatable for a majority of MPs who represent us.
Now an understanding that 'none of the above' needs to be an option and we forget the whole thing.....
If you tell me what in practice (rather than just in your head) will find 50% + acceptance, then it's worth considering, the rest is Leaver rhetoric... and if you think it is 'over and done with' with the Brexit vote, you should recognise that Brexit is the start, not the end of negotiations and in my opinion (and many of those who know more about it than I do) we will be in a weaker position to negotiate once we are out.

And the bonkers this is - a solution that STARTS with the border being left open would be that compromise.

We've then got years to make the divorce harder ( or softer ) depending who wins the retrospective general election and the mood of the people at the time. It's unlikely we'd rejoin in a lifetime.

Labour would have gone for that and I suspect many Tories since it becomes the start of the process that either have to argue for.

Unfortunately the ERG (and now it appears most the Tories) want to leave the EU in way that stops any future debate ever.

That isn't politics, it's a fundamentalist religion that is driven more by a hatred of the EU and then the love of this country.

 

[Lever]

This deal on the table now, I believe, is palatable for a majority of MPs. Will need to be demonstrated, but it seems that way.

I don't understand what your "none of the above" thing means? You mean we need to consider overturning the result of the ref? I thought you were interested in healing divisions? Sore losers are one thing, sore winners denied would be quite something else.

What will find 50%+ acceptance? The ref we held resulted in a 50%+ result. For leaving.

The argument will be over and done with when we have left. Sure there will still be things to sort out, but knowing how that will go isn't really possible while people are still playing the "should we, shouldn't we leave" game. That discussion is over, it was over as soon as the votes were cast and counted. Once we are out in practice there will no longer be a political incentive to try to make future negotiations difficult in order to facilitate the overturning of the result. Future negotiations will become current negotiations and that is when we will find out what is what, and when pragmatism and mutual interest will finally win the day, as it always should have.

Again, simplistic....
Maybe the proposal on the table will be palatable
Maybe it won't.
In my opinion (and those in Ireland adversely affected) it is unacceptable. We will see - and no doubt as you are championing democracy you will accept the majority opinion.
'None of the above' is clear. For 'No deal' enthusiasts it means forget trying to negotiate further if there is no majority for a deal, just leave; for others like me, it means forget Brexit if there is no majority that respects the 52%/48% split. Neither option is very satisfactory but your breezy acceptance of the proposal on the table does not have a majority yet.... and may not be acceptable to our European friends for strong reasons.

 

[dingodan]

Again, simplistic....
Maybe the deal on the table will be palatable
Maybe it won't.
In my opinion (and those in Ireland adversely affected) it is unacceptable. We will see - and no doubt as you are championing democracy you will accept the majority opinion.
'None of the above' is clear. For 'No deal' enthusiasts it means forget trying to negotiate further if there is no majority for a deal, just leave; for others like me, it means forget Brexit if there is no majority that respects the 52%/48% split. Neither option is very satisfactory but your breezy acceptance of the deal on the table does not have a majority yet.... and may not be acceptable to our European friends for strong reasons.

No sure if you've heard but the results of the Brexit ref are in. Leave won.

None of the above can only mean No Deal.

I mean you could try to overturn Brexit, but supporters of Brexit would simply try to reinstitute it at the earliest opportunity. You could hold another ref, and remain could win. But the result wouldn't matter, because results of refs would no longer matter.

In reality the only options are this deal (sorry, proposal), no deal or a perpetual (political) war forever, likely result at least in part and at some point, in a hard line right wing insurgency at a future election, as has happened elsewhere in europe. I think we should try to avoid that if we can.

 

[Lever]

No sure if you've heard but the results of the Brexit ref are in. Leave won.

None of the above can only mean No Deal.

I mean you could try to overturn Brexit, but supporters of Brexit would simply try to reinstitute it at the earliest opportunity. You could hold another ref, and remain could win. But the result wouldn't matter, because results of refs would no longer matter.

In reality the only options are this deal (sorry, proposal), no deal or a perpetual (political) war forever, likely result at least in part and at some point, in a hard line right wing insurgency at a future election, as has happened elsewhere in europe. I think we should try to avoid that if we can.

But what in practice did Leave win?
In reality, Conservative MPs have changed their minds in droves but are not allowing the voting public to demonstrate a change of mind. Democracy? I don't believe it is......

 

[dingodan]

I don't know if you noticed but the referendum result was ****ing YEARS ago! It is hardly relevent anymore.

Ok fine. Joining the EU was even more years ago than that. What's your point? Want a vote on EU membership every 4 years? Join and leave and join and leave over and over again?

I don't think they want that, and neither do we. How about we decide once and we stick to it. We can even tell people, this is a once in a lifetime decision and we are going to respect it.

Oh wait, we already have.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I know both sides might fall foul of Selective Memory Syndrome but as we totter towards the edge of a cliff largely because of the Irish border issue, I'm trying to recall anyone in the 2016 campaign spending a second yet alone a minute on this. Did no-one see this coming? I can see why the Brexit camp might have been happy for this to escape the radar, but surely someone from the Remain camp might have anticipated such an enormous issue?

Remain were asleep. After all, why present a reasoned argument against the existence of ghosts?