[Politics] Brexit

[pb21]

speaking of definition, Corbyn says the deal is worse than May's. how so, and what should be done differently isnt said. one thing consistent in this saga is politicians not telling anyone what they mean, sticking to vague terms to speak to multiple groups at once.

IMO its fairly easy to see how this deal is worse from a labour POV, just look at the increasing support from the right of the Tory party.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

If the ERG don't vote for the deal, will they be expelled from the party?

The ERG ARE the Tory Party - the rest of them jut don't know it yet.

 

[dingodan]

Have a read of the withdrawal agreement. It's worth the time.

The original issues raised were about more than the NI arrangements.

I won't go into it here. Just read the Act.

The government is working on everyone having had enough. Reading Twitter folk are saying how pleased they are whilst knowing nothing about the original Act.

People don't need facts. We live in a post truth world. They just need managing.

I support it because I supported May's deal. But I prefer May's deal. Again, it would take ages to explain.

The original issues which prevented a deal passing have been addressed.

I know you said you "won't go into it here". But humor me.

 

[dingodan]

Not a cats chance in hell that this will go through.

Wonder how Boris will enact a no deal extract from Europe with the benn law.

Interesting times.

Sounds like he is going to ask the EU to state that there will be no extension now.

It's this deal or none, and that isn't going to change with an extension anyway. The purpose of an extension was to give time for the UK and EU to find a deal. Well they have found one.

If the EU agree to say there will be no extension, then the squeeze is on.

A vote against this deal could in effect be a vote for no deal.

That might focus some minds.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

Is it your intention to occasionally come across as a nasty piece of work, or is this just a new thing?

I can't say I've noticed before, so am now wondering what I missed.

No, not at all, things can be read in different ways, I was only pulling your leg.

I like to call in banter, but soooooooooo many get upset with that term on here.

Friends again

 

[Eeyore]

The original issues which prevented a deal passing have been addressed.

I know you said you "won't go into it here". But humor me.

I'm not going to spend time writing an essay of explanation to humour someone's cognitive bias. The original issues have not been addressed, if you read what was said by those in opposition at the time. Then there is the question of whether people actually like it in the first place.

Any compromise is to suit political agenda, deliver by the 31st, and win an election. There will effectively be a border in the Irish Sea. This was anathema a few months back- an absolute abomination.

It's fine now though.

 

[dingodan]

I'm not going to spend time writing an essay of explanation to humour someone's cognitive bias. The original issues have not been addressed, if you read what was said by those in opposition at the time. Then there is the question of whether people actually like it in the first place.

Any compromise is to suit political agenda, deliver by the 31st, and win an election. There will effectively be a border in the Irish Sea. This was anathema a few months back- an absolute abomination.

It's fine now though.

What did you say about cognitive bias?

The objection was to the UK being split up into two different customs unions. That is no longer part of the deal.

I'm not asking for an essay. But as I see it, the problem with a deal before was the backstop and the prospect of leaving part of the UK in the EU Customs Union.

That has been addressed.

Please correct me if you feel I am wrong.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

He has just said "It's not Brexit" What a surprise.

What a tosser.

It is absolutely Brexit - we lose our MEPs, are no longer prevented by the rules from joining EFTA, and we will be eligible to start a process to join the EU if we wish.

Brexit In Name And Reality.

 

[dingodan]

Junker: "This deal means that there is no need for any kind of prolongation."

I.e. No need for an extension as far as the EU are concerned.

 

[Eeyore]

Sounds like he is going to ask the EU to state that there will be no extension now.

It's this deal or none, and that isn't going to change with an extension anyway. The purpose of an extension was to give time for the UK and EU to find a deal. Well they have found one.

If the EU agree to say there will be no extension, then the squeeze is on.

A vote against this deal could in effect be a vote for no deal.

That might focus some minds.

I refer the honourable NSCer to the The European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 6) Bill 2019 section 1 (1a) which basically says that the House of Commons has to approve it.

It's a two step process.

 

[Dr Bandler]

Over the years Farage has been parachuted in to 5 or 6 GE or By-Election seats in supposedly prime Brexit areas, he has never come close to winning one. Not expecting our one trick pony to break that run of ducks.

That is not strictly true. He came close in South Thanet, and there were accusations that electoral fraud had robbed him.

 

[dingodan]

I refer the honourable NSCer to the The European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 6) Bill 2019 section 1 (1a) which basically says that the House of Commons has to approve it.

It's a two step process.

Yes, you are 100% correct.

If the HoC don't agree the deal, then there will be no deal.

The extension was put forward as a way to secure a deal with the EU if none had been agreed by the 19th. But that was none having been agreed with the EU.

Yes, technically the Benn bill will still apply if the HoC vote down the deal, but the Benn bill wasn't designed to give an extension for the HoC to agree a deal, it was meant to give more time for negotiations between the EU and UK. Well negotiations are concluded. We may still be forced to ask for an extension, but the purpose it was meant to serve is no longer there. The deal is the deal, it's not changing over the next 3 months. Why should the EU agree to extend? Will MP's change their minds over the next 3 months?

Unlikely.

The extension had a point while there was no deal agreed between the UK and the EU.

Now it has no point.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

No, and I think most remainers knew we were going to leave after the result.
The question is how we leave to the benefit of the country.
What we definitely didn't want is no deal, only a total lunatic would want no deal when a deal was always on offer.
Obviously I would rather we didn't leave but as I have said many times many leavers knew sod all about the EU, or didn't want to know, they certainly didn't care that much before the referendum and a huge amount voted on immigration only.
You only have to walk down any high street to see the 'types' I am talking about.
Thick as shit, ignorant and racist.
But it is what it is, let's hope we get a deal that keeps us as close as possible to the EU.

Do you need a cuddle , FFS talk about a wet lettuce
Regards
DF

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Yes, you are 100% correct.

If the HoC don't agree the deal, then there will be no deal.

The extension was put forward as a way to secure a deal with the EU if none had been agreed by the 19th. But that was none having been agreed with the EU.

Yes, technically the Benn bill will still apply if the HoC vote down the deal, but the Benn bill wasn't designed to give an extension for the HoC to agree a deal, it was meant to give more time for negotiations between the EU and UK. Well negotiations are concluded. We may still be forced to ask for an extension, but the purpose it was meant to serve is no longer there. The deal is the deal, it's not changing over the next 3 months. Why should the EU agree to extend? Will MP's change their minds over the next 3 months?

Unlikely.

The extension had a point while there was no deal agreed between the UK and the EU.

Now it has no point.

Just like all the same old tiresome remainer spin on here
regards
DF

 

[Dick Swiveller]

Jus

Surely you want to call it gravy now we are "Taking Back Control"

 

[Gwylan]

If the EU agree to say there will be no extension, then the squeeze is on.

A vote against this deal could in effect be a vote for no deal.

The EU won't say no to an extension though - that's been said time and time again,

It's almost the exact opposite of what you're saying, a vote against this deal would guarantee an extension (and possibly a referendum)

 

[dingodan]

The EU won't say no to an extension though - that's been said time and time again,

It's almost the exact opposite of what you're saying, a vote against this deal would guarantee an extension (and possibly a referendum)

Wait, what is the point of an extension?

The extension was designed to give the EU and UK more time to negotiate. It was designed to avoid no deal by default, in the absence of a deal.

As Junker said, "there is no need for any kind of prolongation".

How can the EU justify agreeing to an extension, when nothing will materially change over the next 3 months. The deal won't change. Views in the HoC won't change. MP's need to get the message, which I hope the EU will send even more explicitly than Junker just did, vote for this deal, or be voting of no deal.

More MP's are more against no deal than anything else. If they understand the choice before them, they will vote against no deal.

By voting for this one.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

Parliament has to get behind this to reunite the country, it's a win-win surely even liberals would not risk taking a good spanking by the Brexit Party at a GA.


Boris, May, just have saved blood on the streets of London on Saturday.

I may have been premature on that one, there is always a first.

 

[dingodan]

Junker has just explicitly ruled out an extension.

There will be no extension.

We might be forced to ask for one, but according to Junker, the EU will say no.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Do you need a cuddle , FFS talk about a wet lettuce
Regards
DF

Didnt you vote for no deal?