How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 7)
Discussion
mx5nut said:
ITP said:
Luckily remain lost, but sadly I fear remain will ‘win’ in the end because of our remainer House of Parliament.
You are aware that those MPs are elected, right? If we have a Remainer HOP, it was the will of the people and you should respect democracy.Of all the Leaver inconsistencies, the annoyance that our parliament might exercise the sovereignty they insisted they should have is probably the best.
Parliament agreed to allow the populace to decide. You seem to have forgotten.
cookie118 said:
I’m rambling now but final point-a lot is talked about the political consequences of ignoring the 17 million leave voters, but there are 16 million remain voters who can inflict nearly as much electoral damage as those who voted leave if they are ignored.
So what would 16 million Remain voters do if they find that their minority view is on the losing side? Again.
I find it difficult to see what electoral damage a minority of voters can do when the majority of Conservative and Labour constituencies actually voted Leave. No MP will be petrified of Remainers when their constituency is solid Leave.
The home of Remainers would therefore be the Lib-Dems as neither the Conservative or Labour party would really want their ranks full of splitter Remainers when both parties have bandaids holding ther fractures together as it is.
This I think would be an excellent result as a decent third party may bring some sense to British politics. Its in any event way better than the rise of the anti-establishment far right which would undoubtedly be the result of a Brexit Betrayal.
Cheers,
Tony
davepoth said:
If we have a common external tariff (as in a customs union or the backstop), we can't have tariff rates that are different in any way to the EU, otherwise the UK would be a cheap back door into the EU. That means that we can't reduce our own tariffs as part of an FTA that we sign while in a customs union or the backstop.
https://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/2018/03/29/what-c...
If you use that argument for the proposed UK:EU free trade area then the same rule must apply equally to the EU surely?https://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/2018/03/29/what-c...
Yes we voted out and don't want another Referendum , but hypothetically speaking who apart from Germany and a load of
bureaucrats hangers on who is the EU benefiting and why do people support it against so much evidence that it isn't willing to change or is doing the best for all europeans ?
Just because it started with noble aims or because they can't see the wood for the trees or what ??
The fable of the emperor's new clothes seems so apt ....
bureaucrats hangers on who is the EU benefiting and why do people support it against so much evidence that it isn't willing to change or is doing the best for all europeans ?
Just because it started with noble aims or because they can't see the wood for the trees or what ??
The fable of the emperor's new clothes seems so apt ....
powerstroke said:
Yes we voted out and don't want another Referendum , but hypothetically speaking who apart from Germany and a load of
bureaucrats hangers on who is the EU benefiting and why do people support it against so much evidence that it isn't willing to change or is doing the best for all europeans ?
Just because it started with noble aims or because they can't see the wood for the trees or what ??
The fable of the emperor's new clothes seems so apt ....
Why should everyone else hate the EU just because you do?bureaucrats hangers on who is the EU benefiting and why do people support it against so much evidence that it isn't willing to change or is doing the best for all europeans ?
Just because it started with noble aims or because they can't see the wood for the trees or what ??
The fable of the emperor's new clothes seems so apt ....
Ridgemont said:
It’s worth considering that we’re now in a rolling situation from here until the end of March thus creating a heightened sense of crisis which will build with every single day. The ultimate game of Texas Hold em.
But it is possible to break it down a little:
Consider the various positions where all actors are now in hardball territory.
The gov are still holding a middle line attempting to beguile simultaneously brexiteers+duppers to support a deal none of them will accept, while hoping labour will blink. Lots of ‘no brexit’ briefings. Apparently 200 odd votes off from a majority. I wonder about that: due to summary below.
The ERG+duppers have given up on any other options and are happy to let the clock tick down. Probably 90 odd (80 ERG + 10 DUP)
Remain tories prepared to bale on Brexit in event of current or nondeal: 20 in last vote.
That gives the gov around 200 potential votes. Still well shy of a majority by 125 votes.
Non Tory votes:
Core Labour are doubling down on a confidence vote hoping that enough tories scared of no deal will flip. The leadership aren’t bothered by no deal. Their eyes are on a bigger prize: a labour gov unfettered by EU rules. 225?
The remain non Corbyn wing are desperate to avoid no deal and are playing cross party remain comms. Possibly 25.
A few odds and sods labour brexiteers. No more than 5..
Plus other parties - 50 odd.
No one but no one knows how this plays out, which as a history and politics nut makes it hugely exciting, but I willing to bet that no matter what config you put on it you cannot get a motion, ANY motion, through Parliament without core conservative and core labour working together. I’ve been playing with the numbers above and it can’t work out given the irreconcilables.
There are just too many splinter groups.
Which then comes down to 2 issues while the no deal scenario looms larger.
Which of the above is going to the first to break, as the no deal is the default scenario. Is it the Tory core to accept an extension, and likely no Brexit, or labour core to accept May’s deal and Brexit and no general election.
My bet, sadly as a leaver, is that core labour has currently no real interest in prioritising Brexit, or propping up a Tory gov and that no confidence will be triggered, and in all likelihood accepted, there will be a last minute diplomacy option that cobbles together a request to postpone A50, a time of extension for a second ref after a new government is in situ and no exit.
The second will be that it will ultimately a horrendous betrayal of democracy. A majority referendum result overturned by a parliament determined to stay in. That will have catastrophic implications for democracy going forward. If Cummings was able to tap into 3 million unengaged in the EU poll, imagine how many more will be inclined to give up on ‘democracy’ and go ‘off grid’ if this is the result. And the danger of just shutting down an awkward policy decision might seem insignificant re Europe, but all it takes is a populist with a message of anti democratic governance, with instructions ignored, and we are in a whole world of hurt.
I find it helpful to focus on the world after 30 March.But it is possible to break it down a little:
Consider the various positions where all actors are now in hardball territory.
The gov are still holding a middle line attempting to beguile simultaneously brexiteers+duppers to support a deal none of them will accept, while hoping labour will blink. Lots of ‘no brexit’ briefings. Apparently 200 odd votes off from a majority. I wonder about that: due to summary below.
The ERG+duppers have given up on any other options and are happy to let the clock tick down. Probably 90 odd (80 ERG + 10 DUP)
Remain tories prepared to bale on Brexit in event of current or nondeal: 20 in last vote.
That gives the gov around 200 potential votes. Still well shy of a majority by 125 votes.
Non Tory votes:
Core Labour are doubling down on a confidence vote hoping that enough tories scared of no deal will flip. The leadership aren’t bothered by no deal. Their eyes are on a bigger prize: a labour gov unfettered by EU rules. 225?
The remain non Corbyn wing are desperate to avoid no deal and are playing cross party remain comms. Possibly 25.
A few odds and sods labour brexiteers. No more than 5..
Plus other parties - 50 odd.
No one but no one knows how this plays out, which as a history and politics nut makes it hugely exciting, but I willing to bet that no matter what config you put on it you cannot get a motion, ANY motion, through Parliament without core conservative and core labour working together. I’ve been playing with the numbers above and it can’t work out given the irreconcilables.
There are just too many splinter groups.
Which then comes down to 2 issues while the no deal scenario looms larger.
Which of the above is going to the first to break, as the no deal is the default scenario. Is it the Tory core to accept an extension, and likely no Brexit, or labour core to accept May’s deal and Brexit and no general election.
My bet, sadly as a leaver, is that core labour has currently no real interest in prioritising Brexit, or propping up a Tory gov and that no confidence will be triggered, and in all likelihood accepted, there will be a last minute diplomacy option that cobbles together a request to postpone A50, a time of extension for a second ref after a new government is in situ and no exit.
The second will be that it will ultimately a horrendous betrayal of democracy. A majority referendum result overturned by a parliament determined to stay in. That will have catastrophic implications for democracy going forward. If Cummings was able to tap into 3 million unengaged in the EU poll, imagine how many more will be inclined to give up on ‘democracy’ and go ‘off grid’ if this is the result. And the danger of just shutting down an awkward policy decision might seem insignificant re Europe, but all it takes is a populist with a message of anti democratic governance, with instructions ignored, and we are in a whole world of hurt.
Firstly I suspect a "no deal" exit is the only way any country will get to actually leave. A50 is in the legislation but the EU has no interests in making it actually possible.
Say we do manage to achieve this "no deal" Brexit because parliament is unable to achieve any other outcome and the clock runs out, what then?, we would still have a minority Tory government that contained the likes of Soubry, who would no doubt then go on to deliberately sabotaging their own government to create the conditions to reapply. Externally the world is moving back towards recession, the Eurozone is almost there and so is China (ignoring official data there), and the propaganda arm of Remain (BBC etc) would attribute any consequences for the UK as being due to "no deal".
It all looks a bit unenticing doesn't it and any potential for Brexit would likely be squandered.
Now what is the situation where Brexit is blocked?, millions of angry voters turning against the establishment, which seems to me to be far more favourable circumstances to build something new. In an ideal world they would be led by breakaway Tory Brexiteers, but who knows what new politicians could arise on the populist right that would also be an improvement.
My main concern is that May's deal never gets through, as it is truly awful and permanent.
Mrr T said:
cookie118 said:
I agree 100%
Personally I think the biggest mistake has been to try and do things too quickly. By trying to exit fully on a short timetable it has ended up in a situation where the government is simply running out of time which means we have a half and half deal.
If we want to exit fully to wto rules imo the best way is to take the so called flexcit route and withdraw steadily, disentangling ourselves in an orderly fashion over an extended period of time. Part of the issue with ‘no deal’ is not trading on wto rules in itself. It’s the transition between trading conditions on a very short timescale.
Now there are issues with flexcit (it would probably need to be implemented over several governments for a start!) but I think i would be much better than the current deal!
One of the frustrations here is that there is a lot of rhetoric from leave about leave being a forward looking decision, the EU economies falling and new economies rising etc, but then the demand seems to be to leave NOW. Not looking at a transition or playing any kind of long game.
I’m rambling now but final point-a lot is talked about the political consequences of ignoring the 17 million leave voters, but there are 16 million remain voters who can inflict nearly as much electoral damage as those who voted leave if they are ignored.
Agree 100%.Personally I think the biggest mistake has been to try and do things too quickly. By trying to exit fully on a short timetable it has ended up in a situation where the government is simply running out of time which means we have a half and half deal.
If we want to exit fully to wto rules imo the best way is to take the so called flexcit route and withdraw steadily, disentangling ourselves in an orderly fashion over an extended period of time. Part of the issue with ‘no deal’ is not trading on wto rules in itself. It’s the transition between trading conditions on a very short timescale.
Now there are issues with flexcit (it would probably need to be implemented over several governments for a start!) but I think i would be much better than the current deal!
One of the frustrations here is that there is a lot of rhetoric from leave about leave being a forward looking decision, the EU economies falling and new economies rising etc, but then the demand seems to be to leave NOW. Not looking at a transition or playing any kind of long game.
I’m rambling now but final point-a lot is talked about the political consequences of ignoring the 17 million leave voters, but there are 16 million remain voters who can inflict nearly as much electoral damage as those who voted leave if they are ignored.
To flexit was never ideal but it worked.
Cake was never an option.
JagLover said:
Ridgemont said:
It’s worth considering that we’re now in a rolling situation from here until the end of March thus creating a heightened sense of crisis which will build with every single day. The ultimate game of Texas Hold em.
But it is possible to break it down a little:
Consider the various positions where all actors are now in hardball territory.
The gov are still holding a middle line attempting to beguile simultaneously brexiteers+duppers to support a deal none of them will accept, while hoping labour will blink. Lots of ‘no brexit’ briefings. Apparently 200 odd votes off from a majority. I wonder about that: due to summary below.
The ERG+duppers have given up on any other options and are happy to let the clock tick down. Probably 90 odd (80 ERG + 10 DUP)
Remain tories prepared to bale on Brexit in event of current or nondeal: 20 in last vote.
That gives the gov around 200 potential votes. Still well shy of a majority by 125 votes.
Non Tory votes:
Core Labour are doubling down on a confidence vote hoping that enough tories scared of no deal will flip. The leadership aren’t bothered by no deal. Their eyes are on a bigger prize: a labour gov unfettered by EU rules. 225?
The remain non Corbyn wing are desperate to avoid no deal and are playing cross party remain comms. Possibly 25.
A few odds and sods labour brexiteers. No more than 5..
Plus other parties - 50 odd.
No one but no one knows how this plays out, which as a history and politics nut makes it hugely exciting, but I willing to bet that no matter what config you put on it you cannot get a motion, ANY motion, through Parliament without core conservative and core labour working together. I’ve been playing with the numbers above and it can’t work out given the irreconcilables.
There are just too many splinter groups.
Which then comes down to 2 issues while the no deal scenario looms larger.
Which of the above is going to the first to break, as the no deal is the default scenario. Is it the Tory core to accept an extension, and likely no Brexit, or labour core to accept May’s deal and Brexit and no general election.
My bet, sadly as a leaver, is that core labour has currently no real interest in prioritising Brexit, or propping up a Tory gov and that no confidence will be triggered, and in all likelihood accepted, there will be a last minute diplomacy option that cobbles together a request to postpone A50, a time of extension for a second ref after a new government is in situ and no exit.
The second will be that it will ultimately a horrendous betrayal of democracy. A majority referendum result overturned by a parliament determined to stay in. That will have catastrophic implications for democracy going forward. If Cummings was able to tap into 3 million unengaged in the EU poll, imagine how many more will be inclined to give up on ‘democracy’ and go ‘off grid’ if this is the result. And the danger of just shutting down an awkward policy decision might seem insignificant re Europe, but all it takes is a populist with a message of anti democratic governance, with instructions ignored, and we are in a whole world of hurt.
I find it helpful to focus on the world after 30 March.But it is possible to break it down a little:
Consider the various positions where all actors are now in hardball territory.
The gov are still holding a middle line attempting to beguile simultaneously brexiteers+duppers to support a deal none of them will accept, while hoping labour will blink. Lots of ‘no brexit’ briefings. Apparently 200 odd votes off from a majority. I wonder about that: due to summary below.
The ERG+duppers have given up on any other options and are happy to let the clock tick down. Probably 90 odd (80 ERG + 10 DUP)
Remain tories prepared to bale on Brexit in event of current or nondeal: 20 in last vote.
That gives the gov around 200 potential votes. Still well shy of a majority by 125 votes.
Non Tory votes:
Core Labour are doubling down on a confidence vote hoping that enough tories scared of no deal will flip. The leadership aren’t bothered by no deal. Their eyes are on a bigger prize: a labour gov unfettered by EU rules. 225?
The remain non Corbyn wing are desperate to avoid no deal and are playing cross party remain comms. Possibly 25.
A few odds and sods labour brexiteers. No more than 5..
Plus other parties - 50 odd.
No one but no one knows how this plays out, which as a history and politics nut makes it hugely exciting, but I willing to bet that no matter what config you put on it you cannot get a motion, ANY motion, through Parliament without core conservative and core labour working together. I’ve been playing with the numbers above and it can’t work out given the irreconcilables.
There are just too many splinter groups.
Which then comes down to 2 issues while the no deal scenario looms larger.
Which of the above is going to the first to break, as the no deal is the default scenario. Is it the Tory core to accept an extension, and likely no Brexit, or labour core to accept May’s deal and Brexit and no general election.
My bet, sadly as a leaver, is that core labour has currently no real interest in prioritising Brexit, or propping up a Tory gov and that no confidence will be triggered, and in all likelihood accepted, there will be a last minute diplomacy option that cobbles together a request to postpone A50, a time of extension for a second ref after a new government is in situ and no exit.
The second will be that it will ultimately a horrendous betrayal of democracy. A majority referendum result overturned by a parliament determined to stay in. That will have catastrophic implications for democracy going forward. If Cummings was able to tap into 3 million unengaged in the EU poll, imagine how many more will be inclined to give up on ‘democracy’ and go ‘off grid’ if this is the result. And the danger of just shutting down an awkward policy decision might seem insignificant re Europe, but all it takes is a populist with a message of anti democratic governance, with instructions ignored, and we are in a whole world of hurt.
Firstly I suspect a "no deal" exit is the only way any country will get to actually leave. A50 is in the legislation but the EU has no interests in making it actually possible.
Say we do manage to achieve this "no deal" Brexit because parliament is unable to achieve any other outcome and the clock runs out, what then?, we would still have a minority Tory government that contained the likes of Soubry, who would no doubt then go on to deliberately sabotaging their own government to create the conditions to reapply. Externally the world is moving back towards recession, the Eurozone is almost there and so is China (ignoring official data there), and the propaganda arm of Remain (BBC etc) would attribute any consequences for the UK as being due to "no deal".
It all looks a bit unenticing doesn't it and any potential for Brexit would likely be squandered.
Now what is the situation where Brexit is blocked?, millions of angry voters turning against the establishment, which seems to me to be far more favourable circumstances to build something new. In an ideal world they would be led by breakaway Tory Brexiteers, but who knows what new politicians could arise on the populist right that would also be an improvement.
My main concern is that May's deal never gets through, as it is truly awful and permanent.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't "the backstop" just kicking the Irish border "problem" down the road?
It hasn't been solved in two years and the EU could keep saying "non" ad infinitum, no matter what is suggested, hence keeping us under their legislation forever ( not withstanding a united Ireland or collapse of the EU)
It hasn't been solved in two years and the EU could keep saying "non" ad infinitum, no matter what is suggested, hence keeping us under their legislation forever ( not withstanding a united Ireland or collapse of the EU)
Tuna said:
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: Remind me when the Lancaster House speech was?
How can you have a referendum and then get to define what people voted for afterwards?
"You voted for this"... "this is how we're going to deliver it"How can you have a referendum and then get to define what people voted for afterwards?
It pretty much had to be that way... the vote card was too small to ask every last detail that had to go into negotiations.
What if some people think the way Teresa May decided to deliver it isn't what they had in mind?
We keep being told there's been no new information since the vote so suck it up.
You've just said we didn't know how we were going to implement Brexit until after the vote.
To me that's new information.
PositronicRay said:
Mrr T said:
cookie118 said:
I agree 100%
Personally I think the biggest mistake has been to try and do things too quickly. By trying to exit fully on a short timetable it has ended up in a situation where the government is simply running out of time which means we have a half and half deal.
If we want to exit fully to wto rules imo the best way is to take the so called flexcit route and withdraw steadily, disentangling ourselves in an orderly fashion over an extended period of time. Part of the issue with ‘no deal’ is not trading on wto rules in itself. It’s the transition between trading conditions on a very short timescale.
Now there are issues with flexcit (it would probably need to be implemented over several governments for a start!) but I think i would be much better than the current deal!
One of the frustrations here is that there is a lot of rhetoric from leave about leave being a forward looking decision, the EU economies falling and new economies rising etc, but then the demand seems to be to leave NOW. Not looking at a transition or playing any kind of long game.
I’m rambling now but final point-a lot is talked about the political consequences of ignoring the 17 million leave voters, but there are 16 million remain voters who can inflict nearly as much electoral damage as those who voted leave if they are ignored.
Agree 100%.Personally I think the biggest mistake has been to try and do things too quickly. By trying to exit fully on a short timetable it has ended up in a situation where the government is simply running out of time which means we have a half and half deal.
If we want to exit fully to wto rules imo the best way is to take the so called flexcit route and withdraw steadily, disentangling ourselves in an orderly fashion over an extended period of time. Part of the issue with ‘no deal’ is not trading on wto rules in itself. It’s the transition between trading conditions on a very short timescale.
Now there are issues with flexcit (it would probably need to be implemented over several governments for a start!) but I think i would be much better than the current deal!
One of the frustrations here is that there is a lot of rhetoric from leave about leave being a forward looking decision, the EU economies falling and new economies rising etc, but then the demand seems to be to leave NOW. Not looking at a transition or playing any kind of long game.
I’m rambling now but final point-a lot is talked about the political consequences of ignoring the 17 million leave voters, but there are 16 million remain voters who can inflict nearly as much electoral damage as those who voted leave if they are ignored.
To flexit was never ideal but it worked.
Cake was never an option.
digimeistter said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't "the backstop" just kicking the Irish border "problem" down the road?
It hasn't been solved in two years and the EU could keep saying "non" ad infinitum, no matter what is suggested, hence keeping us under their legislation forever ( not withstanding a united Ireland or collapse of the EU)
No need to be corrected as you are spot on.It hasn't been solved in two years and the EU could keep saying "non" ad infinitum, no matter what is suggested, hence keeping us under their legislation forever ( not withstanding a united Ireland or collapse of the EU)
Indeed, the backstop arrangement also applies pressure on the UK during the negotiation of the final trade deal to the advantage of the EU over and above the advantages to the EU already built into May’s deal. May’s overall deal is a complete disaster for the UK.
There are some here who have intimated it would be OK if the backstop was time limited but then run away when it is clear that it is not and they have no idea how it could be made so. They also claim that the EU does not want to be locked into such arrangemeent and would negotiate in ‘good faith’ to reach a truly mutually acceptable deal whilst ignoring the EU approach so far and ignoring any sensible reason as to why the EU have insisted on the backstop. The naivety of these types is truly staggering and I wonder what must be circulating around the obvious emptiness of their heads.
Edited by Garvin on Sunday 13th January 08:56
PurpleMoonlight said:
powerstroke said:
I think despise would be a better word ,
That's sad.What harm has the EU done to your life?
How about despising the EU because of...
...it's handling of the migrant crisis (and all the knock-on effects of that across Europe)?
...the way it has ridden roughshod over democracy in Italy
...and over any other country that dares question it (Ireland (twice), Netherlands, France...)
...the way it has condemned Greece to financial crisis
...the way it has overseen massive youth unemployment across southern europe
...the way it is pursuing a policy of closer fiscal and military union despite the former being foolhardy, the latter being potentially dangerous and both being unpopular
...the way it's arrogance will not allow it to reform despite the call for reform getting louder by the day
There are many reasons to despise the EU. But I'm sure you know that already...
Appears that the planning of a plot has been overhead in the HoC cloakrooms. WTF, worse than school.
Apparently a plot involving Grieve, Boles, anti Brexit MPs in various parties intend, in the event of the deal not being approved, to submit motions with the intent ultimately of reaching the position where motions by MPs would take precedence over government business. It requires the connivance of the speaker, but seeing as written advice given to Bercow last week was taken away and deliberately destroyed his cooperation probably a given.
If so then it would remove the ability of government, and not just this one, but future ones, to govern.
Shambles. Possibly going to a very bad place.
Apparently a plot involving Grieve, Boles, anti Brexit MPs in various parties intend, in the event of the deal not being approved, to submit motions with the intent ultimately of reaching the position where motions by MPs would take precedence over government business. It requires the connivance of the speaker, but seeing as written advice given to Bercow last week was taken away and deliberately destroyed his cooperation probably a given.
If so then it would remove the ability of government, and not just this one, but future ones, to govern.
Shambles. Possibly going to a very bad place.
FiF said:
Thing is, whatever happens, there is a reservoir of political energy to be tapped in future. Again folks will think of that in terms of their own bias, but in reality both sides. Remainers are presenting the opinion that hordes would go out campaigning in the event of this future referendum they're not going to get. Leavers, quiet leavers never very motivated previously, are quietly unamused at the machinations and behaviour of the politicians. Whether one or both of those can be motivated into boots on the street, door knockers, campaign activists I don't know, but they can be motivated into where they put their X.
Yes agreedEnergy and passion on both sides. Which is fine I have no problem with a party for Remainers and, if they win an election, they forming a government. What I want is an open contest at the ballot box, not voting for a party whose members feel entitled to ignore their main manifesto commitment because that was "just something to trick stupid leavers".
I think future historians will look back on this as one continuous period from the late 1980s to now. The move toward a federal Europe which Thatcher opposed and was therefore deposed, Major forcing us in without giving the British people a say, the long Tory civil war and then these final acts which may well lead to the Tory party finally splitting.
ITP said:
I don’t think any leave voters expect their lives to get ‘suddenly’ better. That’s nonsense. The vote to leave is so it doesn’t get worse long term, with no control over doing anything about it.
I personally don’t agree with the federal dream of the EU parliament going forward, with more and more power leaving state governments, financial and legal, into the hands of Brussels. That is my view, so I think it’s best to leave and actually have a vote that counts. As whatever anyone says, even when in the EU as we are now the UK has little or no real influence. All this ‘we can reform from within’ talk is just nonsense.
It’s nothing to do with the people of the EU, or any far right flag waving, I have lived and worked in Europe and have friends and family there. It’s purely the political path of Brussels I disagree with. Remainers seem unconcerned about closer union and ultimately no financial and legal control. This will be set to suit only the eurozone/schengen members. We will just pay.
Luckily remain lost, but sadly I fear remain will ‘win’ in the end because of our remainer House of Parliament. If it ends that way the next GE here is going to be interesting to say the least!
Well, maybe it won’t, because no one will bother voting. Awesome.
Good post, thank you.I personally don’t agree with the federal dream of the EU parliament going forward, with more and more power leaving state governments, financial and legal, into the hands of Brussels. That is my view, so I think it’s best to leave and actually have a vote that counts. As whatever anyone says, even when in the EU as we are now the UK has little or no real influence. All this ‘we can reform from within’ talk is just nonsense.
It’s nothing to do with the people of the EU, or any far right flag waving, I have lived and worked in Europe and have friends and family there. It’s purely the political path of Brussels I disagree with. Remainers seem unconcerned about closer union and ultimately no financial and legal control. This will be set to suit only the eurozone/schengen members. We will just pay.
Luckily remain lost, but sadly I fear remain will ‘win’ in the end because of our remainer House of Parliament. If it ends that way the next GE here is going to be interesting to say the least!
Well, maybe it won’t, because no one will bother voting. Awesome.
Edited by ITP on Sunday 13th January 01:12
FiF said:
Appears that the planning of a plot has been overhead in the HoC cloakrooms. WTF, worse than school.
Apparently a plot involving Grieve, Boles, anti Brexit MPs in various parties intend, in the event of the deal not being approved, to submit motions with the intent ultimately of reaching the position where motions by MPs would take precedence over government business. It requires the connivance of the speaker, but seeing as written advice given to Bercow last week was taken away and deliberately destroyed his cooperation probably a given.
If so then it would remove the ability of government, and not just this one, but future ones, to govern.
Shambles. Possibly going to a very bad place.
IndeedApparently a plot involving Grieve, Boles, anti Brexit MPs in various parties intend, in the event of the deal not being approved, to submit motions with the intent ultimately of reaching the position where motions by MPs would take precedence over government business. It requires the connivance of the speaker, but seeing as written advice given to Bercow last week was taken away and deliberately destroyed his cooperation probably a given.
If so then it would remove the ability of government, and not just this one, but future ones, to govern.
Shambles. Possibly going to a very bad place.
History doesn't end on March 30th we will still live in a world where the establishment have discredited all the institutions they control to win what might prove to be a temporary victory over Brexit.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff