How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)

[saaby93]

don'tbesilly said:

It was interesting and remarkable that Rees-Mogg gave May his full support earlier on today.

Missed that - linky?

[Helicopter123]

don'tbesilly said:

ash73 said:

Corbyn tables motion of no confidence in PM.

I think this will focus the minds of the Tories, and Corbyn will fail.

It was interesting and remarkable that Rees-Mogg gave May his full support earlier on today.

Tories will need to fall into line.

There are 650 seats in the House of Commons, although Sinn Fein's seven MPs do not sit in Parliament because they oppose the British government's jurisdiction in Northern Ireland and do not want to make an oath to the Queen. By convention, the speaker of the House of Commons and his three deputies do not vote.

This means there are 639 MPs considered to be active - so any government needs 320 votes for a simple majority.

There are 318 Tory MPs and 10 DUP MPs so should be 328 vs 311.

Might 18 Tory MPs abstain?

Would any vote against the government?

DUP massive in this.

[don'tbesilly]

saaby93 said:

don'tbesilly said:

It was interesting and remarkable that Rees-Mogg gave May his full support earlier on today.

Missed that - linky?

I watched it live, you'll have to find it:

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Commons

[nw942]

ITP said:

saaby93 said:

ITP said:

saaby93 said:

JagLover said:

saaby93 said:

Once youve discounted all the alternatives, you end up following the same decision tree that led to the negotiators agreeing the deal

For the purposes of the Tory party perhaps, and even then, only until more of the public figures out what has been signed up to. Certainly not a decision tree where you are assessing the national interest.

To recap the backstop, which is going to be the future relationship or form part of the future relationship, does nothing to safeguard British service exports to the EU, automatically grants third parties with whom the EU reaches a trade agreement access to the UK market with no reciprocal rights for the UK, binds the UK to EU regulations over which it has no say, and prevents any trade agreements being reached with the rest of the world. Finally to cap it all off we cannot legally escape from it.

You seem to think it is some form of compromise that part satisfies both Leavers and Remainers.

Nope
It's a deal that satisfies the border and trade issues on the day we exit the EU.

It satisfies the leave vote because it leaves the EU.

There'll be some leavers and remainers who wont be saitsfied with anything that isnt at one end of the scale or the other, but for everyone else it's a good deal that can be built on for the future outside the EU

It took 460 days to agree it. So far despite much posturing no-one has come up with a better alternative

Why do remainers keep saying may’s deal and the backstop ‘satisfies the leave vote’? It’s just weird.

It's nothing to do with remainers or leavers and if you read what was said there, it's not what you've said


'It satisfies the leave vote' means that when the UK leaves on March 29th, the leaving satisfies the outcome of the referendum to leave.

Does the logic in that make sense?
I cant think what else it can mean

So called Mays deal and the back stop are a separate process that comes into play on the same day
It's nothing to do with the referendum save for thered be no point if the outcome had been remain

No, I doesn’t make sense.
Because the backstop can, and probably will be triggered by the EU, still leaving us partly under their control. With no way out for us. So no, it’s not leave.
The referendum wasn’t remain or leave (but still with the EU having legal control over aspects of our country). It was remain or leave.

I thought that we had a transition period after 29 March until December 2020 during which we can negotiate the final agreement. there is FoM, we will remain in the CU and SM (but with no say/veto), but can also negotiate trade deals of our own.

If a final agreement has not been agreed then the backstop comes into force. Clearly parts of the backstop is a template for a future agreement, but I imagine it also contains things that are painful for both sides as each side needs equal leverage to conclude negotiations. But clearly there is a window here for the EU to favour themselves.

I terms of the WA, I'm not really sure what we can do ATM other than act in good faith. But clearly we need the option of leaving the backstop if the EU are unreasonable.

In the Commons, Sir Edward Leigh, a Tory Brexiter, "says he could be persuaded to vote for the deal if there were a legally binding protocol saying, that if the backstop ceased to be temporary, it would no longer be binding."

Strikes me as some wording the EU could just about go along with as they wish it to be temporary too. In which case the worst-case scenario is we have 1-2 extra years stuck in the backstop before we can pull the plug.

[don'tbesilly]

Helicopter123 said:

don'tbesilly said:

ash73 said:

Corbyn tables motion of no confidence in PM.

I think this will focus the minds of the Tories, and Corbyn will fail.

It was interesting and remarkable that Rees-Mogg gave May his full support earlier on today.

Tories will need to fall into line.

There are 650 seats in the House of Commons, although Sinn Fein's seven MPs do not sit in Parliament because they oppose the British government's jurisdiction in Northern Ireland and do not want to make an oath to the Queen. By convention, the speaker of the House of Commons and his three deputies do not vote.

This means there are 639 MPs considered to be active - so any government needs 320 votes for a simple majority.

There are 318 Tory MPs and 10 DUP MPs so should be 328 vs 311.

Might 18 Tory MPs abstain?

Would any vote against the government?

DUP massive in this.

Hardly likely.

DUP could and probably will demand changes to May's plan, no changes, they will probably demand May's replacement with an MP with a more defined approach to achieving a 'proper' Brexit.

The demands from the DUP will probably run along the lines of maintaining their current agreement with the Tories.

Speculation, but based on what Dodds has said in the past, the speculation is far from fancy.

[ITP]

saaby93 said:

ITP said:

The referendum wasn’t remain or leave (but still with the EU having legal control over aspects of our country). It was remain or leave.

ok well thats good at least youve got that bit right
and the outcome of the referendum was leave and thats happening on the 29th March

Now on that date the UK is going to begin trying to put together various trade deals together with countries around the world,
One of the biggies- is the rest of the EU
The good fellows in the UK and the EU have been piecing together a trade deal which has the same general affect as the current customs arreangement.
It's a new deal because the current arrangements end on March 29th.
It'll mean business in the UK and the EU can continue to trade as they do now.
Parliament is going to decide in January whether or not it thinks thats beneficial for the country

But if the WA, with the backstop, is signed into law for the 29th March this then gives the EU legal control over us in the future.

What is your proposal to get out of this situation, where the EU has no legal control over us to allow us to actually leave, and enact trade deals ourselves without the EU?

Edited by ITP on Monday 17th December 18:24

[saaby93]

nw942 said:

I thought that we had a transition period after 29 March until December 2020 during which we can negotiate the final agreement. there is FoM, we will remain in the CU and SM (but with no say/veto), but can also negotiate trade deals of our own.

No we dont remain in the CU and SM thats one of the points of leaving the EU on the 29th March

What happens is there's a new agreement which generally has the same effect as current customs arrangements. It begins on March 29th if the Government decides to sign up to it

[Jonesy23]

Helicopter123 said:

don'tbesilly said:

ash73 said:

Corbyn tables motion of no confidence in PM.

I think this will focus the minds of the Tories, and Corbyn will fail.

It was interesting and remarkable that Rees-Mogg gave May his full support earlier on today.

Tories will need to fall into line.

There are 650 seats in the House of Commons, although Sinn Fein's seven MPs do not sit in Parliament because they oppose the British government's jurisdiction in Northern Ireland and do not want to make an oath to the Queen. By convention, the speaker of the House of Commons and his three deputies do not vote.

This means there are 639 MPs considered to be active - so any government needs 320 votes for a simple majority.

There are 318 Tory MPs and 10 DUP MPs so should be 328 vs 311.

Might 18 Tory MPs abstain?

Would any vote against the government?

DUP massive in this.

You do understand this particular vote has zero meaning? It's not that sort of confidence vote.

The maths doesn't matter beyond the symbolic.

[Helicopter123]

don'tbesilly said:

Helicopter123 said:

don'tbesilly said:

ash73 said:

Corbyn tables motion of no confidence in PM.

I think this will focus the minds of the Tories, and Corbyn will fail.

It was interesting and remarkable that Rees-Mogg gave May his full support earlier on today.

Tories will need to fall into line.

There are 650 seats in the House of Commons, although Sinn Fein's seven MPs do not sit in Parliament because they oppose the British government's jurisdiction in Northern Ireland and do not want to make an oath to the Queen. By convention, the speaker of the House of Commons and his three deputies do not vote.

This means there are 639 MPs considered to be active - so any government needs 320 votes for a simple majority.

There are 318 Tory MPs and 10 DUP MPs so should be 328 vs 311.

Might 18 Tory MPs abstain?

Would any vote against the government?

DUP massive in this.

Hardly likely.

DUP could and probably will demand changes to May's plan, no changes, they will probably demand May's replacement with an MP with a more defined approach to achieving a 'proper' Brexit.

The demands from the DUP will probably run along the lines of maintaining their current agreement with the Tories.

Speculation, but based on what Dodds has said in the past, the speculation is far from fancy.

I agree with you (for once...) re the Tory MPs.

The power in the hands of the DUP is now almost complete. They can extract as much as they want with the genuine threat to bring down the government. Will they ask the PM to go? Another £1bn?

[don'tbesilly]

Helicopter123 said:

don'tbesilly said:

Helicopter123 said:

don'tbesilly said:

ash73 said:

Corbyn tables motion of no confidence in PM.

I think this will focus the minds of the Tories, and Corbyn will fail.

It was interesting and remarkable that Rees-Mogg gave May his full support earlier on today.

Tories will need to fall into line.

There are 650 seats in the House of Commons, although Sinn Fein's seven MPs do not sit in Parliament because they oppose the British government's jurisdiction in Northern Ireland and do not want to make an oath to the Queen. By convention, the speaker of the House of Commons and his three deputies do not vote.

This means there are 639 MPs considered to be active - so any government needs 320 votes for a simple majority.

There are 318 Tory MPs and 10 DUP MPs so should be 328 vs 311.

Might 18 Tory MPs abstain?

Would any vote against the government?

DUP massive in this.

Hardly likely.

DUP could and probably will demand changes to May's plan, no changes, they will probably demand May's replacement with an MP with a more defined approach to achieving a 'proper' Brexit.

The demands from the DUP will probably run along the lines of maintaining their current agreement with the Tories.

Speculation, but based on what Dodds has said in the past, the speculation is far from fancy.

I agree with you (for once...) re the Tory MPs.

The power in the hands of the DUP is now almost complete. They can extract as much as they want with the genuine threat to bring down the government. Will they ask the PM to go? Another £1bn?

As I said I was speculating, but I don't think they'll go overboard on their demands, demanding a 2nd referendum won't be one of the demands, that I am fairly certain of, sorry

[thetrickcyclist]

Jonesy23 said:

You do understand this particular vote has zero meaning? It's not that sort of confidence vote.

The maths doesn't matter beyond the symbolic.

Eh? so a load of hot air from Jeremy [who]?

[Helicopter123]

Jonesy23 said:

Helicopter123 said:

don'tbesilly said:

ash73 said:

Corbyn tables motion of no confidence in PM.

I think this will focus the minds of the Tories, and Corbyn will fail.

It was interesting and remarkable that Rees-Mogg gave May his full support earlier on today.

Tories will need to fall into line.

There are 650 seats in the House of Commons, although Sinn Fein's seven MPs do not sit in Parliament because they oppose the British government's jurisdiction in Northern Ireland and do not want to make an oath to the Queen. By convention, the speaker of the House of Commons and his three deputies do not vote.

This means there are 639 MPs considered to be active - so any government needs 320 votes for a simple majority.

There are 318 Tory MPs and 10 DUP MPs so should be 328 vs 311.

Might 18 Tory MPs abstain?

Would any vote against the government?

DUP massive in this.

You do understand this particular vote has zero meaning? It's not that sort of confidence vote.

The maths doesn't matter beyond the symbolic.

Can you explain please?

Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act 2011, Section 2, the Act also provides for two ways in which a general election can be held before the end of this five-year period:

If the House of Commons resolves "That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government", an early general election is held, unless the House of Commons subsequently resolves "That this House has confidence in Her Majesty's Government". This second resolution must be made within fourteen days of the first.

This is a serious situation for May and the government.

[bitchstewie]

AIUI this is in May herself not the government.

Not good but nothing like as serious (though don't ask me why, just going off the news).

[anonymous-user]

Helicopter123 said:

Can you explain please?

Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act 2011, Section 2, the Act also provides for two ways in which a general election can be held before the end of this five-year period:

If the House of Commons resolves "That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government", an early general election is held, unless the House of Commons subsequently resolves "That this House has confidence in Her Majesty's Government". This second resolution must be made within fourteen days of the first.

This is a serious situation for May and the government.

He hasn't called for a vote against the government. Just the prime minister.
Totally different kettle of fish and of no importance beyond tactics.

[Tuna]

saaby93 said:

It's nothing to do with remainers or leavers and if you read what was said there, it's not what you've said


'It satisfies the leave vote' means that when the UK leaves on March 29th, the leaving satisfies the outcome of the referendum to leave.

Does the logic in that make sense?
I cant think what else it can mean

So called Mays deal and the back stop are a separate process that comes into play on the same day
It's nothing to do with the referendum save for thered be no point if the outcome had been remain

Can we please not go down semantic rabbit holes. It's pointless, wastes yet more time and doesn't reflect well on you.

The idea that May's deal would satisfy anybody is risible. If you don't understand just how damaging it is, please re-read Rogers' speech (he's a Remainer, he's not going to hurt you). Of all the options that would do long term economic harm to the UK, May's deal is by far the worst. Not just because of the backstop, not just because of the obfuscation between the agreement and the declaration and not just because of the omission of services in the deal.

We seem to have got to the point where some posters on here are so unable to move from their point of view, that they're flat out refusing to take in new information. This isn't controversial, nor is it dependent on whether you're a Remainer or a Leaver. Objectively, May's deal is the worst of all worlds.

[Helicopter123]

desolate said:

Helicopter123 said:

Can you explain please?

Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act 2011, Section 2, the Act also provides for two ways in which a general election can be held before the end of this five-year period:

If the House of Commons resolves "That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government", an early general election is held, unless the House of Commons subsequently resolves "That this House has confidence in Her Majesty's Government". This second resolution must be made within fourteen days of the first.

This is a serious situation for May and the government.

He hasn't called for a vote against the government. Just the prime minister.
Totally different kettle of fish and of no importance beyond tactics.

I understand that Labour chief whip Nick Brown told PLP if the government doesn’t grant time for Jeremy Corbyn’s no confidence motion in Theresa May then Labour will escalate: no confidence motion in government as a whole under Fixed Term Parliaments Act. That has to be granted time

Looks like they are trying to remove May.

[Tuna]

Tony427 said:

loafer123 said:

pgh said:

Did all of those worries about queues at Dover just get swept away?

https://order-order.com/2018/12/17/uk-eu-agree-mai...

Big news, if true.

Uses the TIR system just like 50 odd other countries so electronically logged/ listed/ no customs requirements at points of entry.

As you say big news, if true. Throws project Fear V2 under a bus. A big red one.

Cheers,

Tony

It's funny how the one thing Mr T has been saying is impossible might have just been done, whereas the one thing he's now saying is possible (unilateral A50) has just taken a step further back.

[Tuna]

Helicopter123 said:

I agree with you (for once...) re the Tory MPs.

The power in the hands of the DUP is now almost complete. They can extract as much as they want with the genuine threat to bring down the government. Will they ask the PM to go? Another £1bn?

The power in the hands of the DUP is rather like the power of a parasite - it can't actually afford to kill the host organism, or it's going to die itself. The DUP cannot really afford to bring down the government, though of course they can threaten to do so.

[loafer123]

don'tbesilly said:

I think this will focus the minds of the Tories, and Corbyn will fail.

It was interesting and remarkable that Rees-Mogg gave May his full support earlier on today.

He was on telly saying he would back May’s deal if they had a backstop exit.

Their positions are really surprisingly close.

[Helicopter123]

Do the DUP have confidence in the PM?