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

[saaby93]

don'tbesilly said:

saaby93 said:

don'tbesilly said:

Had the vote on the WA gone ahead on Tuesday 11th Dec many well respected commentators had May losing the vote by up to 200, May never went ahead with the vote, and it was for the very reason and as admitted by May that the vote would have been voted down.

or pushed the wire both remainers and leavers may have gone for the deal rather than seeing ERG have its way
As there was no vote we'll never know

Based on 117 MP's voting against her last night, and would have no doubt voted against her deal on the Tuesday had it happened makes your point a tad nonsensical.

Do you really think there are 117 members of the ERG? If you do you are probably the only who does.

That wasnt a vote on the deal
Youre also excluding which way members of other parties would have voted, push come to shove JRM or TM

[The Dangerous Elk]

saaby93 said:

Parliament is there to save the people from themselves
The people could vote to give themselves £1000 per year Christmas bonus.
They might like the £1010 increase in tax to pay for it

bks, just how do the people do that then ?

[don'tbesilly]

saaby93 said:

don'tbesilly said:

saaby93 said:

don'tbesilly said:

Had the vote on the WA gone ahead on Tuesday 11th Dec many well respected commentators had May losing the vote by up to 200, May never went ahead with the vote, and it was for the very reason and as admitted by May that the vote would have been voted down.

or pushed the wire both remainers and leavers may have gone for the deal rather than seeing ERG have its way
As there was no vote we'll never know

Based on 117 MP's voting against her last night, and would have no doubt voted against her deal on the Tuesday had it happened makes your point a tad nonsensical.

Do you really think there are 117 members of the ERG? If you do you are probably the only who does.

That wasnt a vote on the deal
Youre also excluding which way members of other parties would have voted, push come to shove JRM or TM

Do you think May's deal if if as looks likely remains unchanged (no change to the legal text of the WA) from what it was on Monday 11th December will go through when it's finally presented to the HoC?

Simple yes/no will suffice.

[saaby93]

don'tbesilly said:

Do you think May's deal if if as looks likely remains unchanged (no change to the legal text of the WA) from what it was on Monday 11th December will go through when it's finally presented to the HoC?

Simple yes/no will suffice.

No idea - thats the joy of UK politics
In theory after the current leadership vote all her MPs should be rallying behind her, so it should be a done deal
In practice some will rebel. As it's a HoC vote other MPs who also think it's the best deal possible ought to come on side
If they could get it done and dusted we can move onto the next stage 'implementation' where the real work happens
this was all just a worse case backstop

[don'tbesilly]

saaby93 said:

don'tbesilly said:

Do you think May's deal if if as looks likely remains unchanged (no change to the legal text of the WA) from what it was on Monday 11th December will go through when it's finally presented to the HoC?

Simple yes/no will suffice.

No idea
In theory after the current leadership vote all her MPs should be rallying behind her, so it should be a done deal
In practice some will rebel. As it's a HoC vote other MPs who also think it's the best deal possible ought to come on side

There are 317 Tory MP's who could vote for May's deal.

117 MP's have no confidence in her as our PM, and have no obligation to vote for a deal that they don't believe in, nor do any of her other 200 MP's.

The DUP who prop up the Tory Party are in effect Tories for the purpose of the vote, and May relies on everyone of their 10 MP's voting in favour of her deal.

Do you think the vote for May's deal will be successful in the HoC when it does come before the House?

Still no idea, or not even an educated guess?

[anonymous-user]

don'tbesilly said:

There are 317 Tory MP's who could vote for May's deal.

117 MP's have no confidence in her as our PM, and have no obligation to vote for a deal that they don't believe in, nor do any of her other 200 MP's.

The DUP who prop up the Tory Party are in effect Tories for the purpose of the vote, and May relies on everyone of their 10 MP's voting in favour of her deal.

Do you think the vote for May's deal will be successful in the HoC when it does come before the House?

Still no idea, or not even an educated guess?

We will just have to wait and see. They have some time to think about it.

We need to remember that if they reject Mays deal they could end up with no Brexit. (Mays words, not mine)

[saaby93]

don'tbesilly said:

There are 317 Tory MP's who could vote for May's deal.

117 MP's have no confidence in her as our PM, and have no obligation to vote for a deal that they don't believe in, nor do any of her other 200 MP's.

youve misunderstood the point of the vote
It was to decide whether or not they need a new leader
They decided keep with her - job done
There's little point having collective decision making otherwise

don'tbesilly said:

The DUP who prop up the Tory Party are in effect Tories for the purpose of the vote, and May relies on everyone of their 10 MP's voting in favour of her deal.

youre trying to make the vote party political
Instead think of it as who is going to vote for the deal rather than going for no deal
It wont divide on Brexit vs remain lines but some of each

As I said - no idea - but the 117 vs 200 is little to do with it

[anonymous-user]

pgh said:

Ghibli said:

We will just have to wait and see. They have some time to think about it.

We need to remember that if they reject Mays deal they could end up with no Brexit. (Mays words, not mine)

But you're clinging on to them all the same

Nope, I'm just pointing out what she has said.

[JuanCarlosFandango]

I would like to see May pressed a bit more on what she meant by no Brexit if the deal was rejected. Is she really going to fully and unconditionally revoke Article 50 (as per the recent ECJ ruling)? After "no deal is better than a bad deal" and "Brexit means Brexit" she would be committing political suicide not just for herself but for her party for a generation.

And that's assuming she even could get such a move through parliament dominated by MPs from both major parties who are committed to withdrawal.

A referendum would at least maintain the pretence of caring what people think even if it would be a complete sham. Simply saying we are staying in would be out and out dictatorship.

[saaby93]

JuanCarlosFandango said:

I would like to see May pressed a bit more on what she meant by no Brexit if the deal was rejected. Is she really going to fully and unconditionally revoke Article 50 (as per the recent ECJ ruling)? After "no deal is better than a bad deal" and "Brexit means Brexit" she would be committing political suicide not just for herself but for her party for a generation.

And that's assuming she even could get such a move through parliament dominated by MPs from both major parties who are committed to withdrawal.

A referendum would at least maintain the pretence of caring what people think even if it would be a complete sham. Simply saying we are staying in would be out and out dictatorship.

well it would if that happened
But it would need to be backed by MPs most of whom are remain
Given a choice of remain or ERGs style of brexit wouldnt most MPs go for Remain?

[don'tbesilly]

saaby93 said:

don'tbesilly said:

There are 317 Tory MP's who could vote for May's deal.

117 MP's have no confidence in her as our PM, and have no obligation to vote for a deal that they don't believe in, nor do any of her other 200 MP's.

youve misunderstood the point of the vote
It was to decide whether or not they need a new leader
They decided keep with her - job done
There's little point having collective decision making otherwise

don'tbesilly said:

The DUP who prop up the Tory Party are in effect Tories for the purpose of the vote, and May relies on everyone of their 10 MP's voting in favour of her deal.

youre trying to make the vote party political
Instead think of it as who is going to vote for the deal rather than going for no deal
It wont divide on Brexit vs remain lines but some of each

As I said - no idea - but the 117 vs 200 is little to do with it

I am only too well aware of what the vote was about last night, whilst some of the 117 might change their minds, I don't think enough will make the difference.

You can keep on clinging to the hope it will go through, but the simple arithmetic doesn't add up.

Tell me based on the latest reports from the EU commission/Merkel/Macron other EU27 leaders, have they indicated that they are prepared to change the legal text of the WA?

May said that's what she'd achieve on this latest jaunt, she said it before the confidence vote to her MP's and subsequently following the vote?

[JuanCarlosFandango]

saaby93 said:

ell it would if that happened
But it would need to be backed by MPs most of whom are remain
Given a choice of remain or ERGs style of brexit wouldnt most MPs go for Remain?

They might, but it would be pretty cavalier to assume it knowing that about 2/3rds of them represent constituencies which voted Leave. If they did it would put parliament in direct opposition to the wishes of the public expressed in the biggest vote in British political history and 2 general elections (the 2015 GE included a pledge for a vote that would be heeded, not a state run opinion poll).

I'm not sure about "ERG style" Brexit. Leaving on WTO terms could have been done in a planned and orderly way. If it does lead to chaos at the border then it is entirely the fault of the government May has led since 2016.

If plan B if/when her useless "deal" is kicked out is to stick 2 fingers up to the electorate and stay in she's even stupider than I thought.

[saaby93]

JuanCarlosFandango said:

They might, but it would be pretty cavalier to assume it knowing that about 2/3rds of them represent constituencies which voted Leave. If they did it would put parliament in direct opposition to the wishes of the public expressed in the biggest vote in British political history and 2 general elections (the 2015 GE included a pledge for a vote that would be heeded, not a state run opinion poll).

I'm not sure about "ERG style" Brexit. Leaving on WTO terms could have been done in a planned and orderly way. If it does lead to chaos at the border then it is entirely the fault of the government May has led since 2016.

If plan B if/when her useless "deal" is kicked out is to stick 2 fingers up to the electorate and stay in she's even stupider than I thought.

Are you sure that Mays deal isnt what the public asked for ( it is after all Brexit) and the issue is just about getting it past MPs particularly the DUP?

[JuanCarlosFandango]

saaby93 said:

Are you sure that Mays deal isnt what the public asked for ( it is after all Brexit) and the issue is just about getting it past MPs particularly the DUP?

Well I don't suppose I can be 100% sure but I don't see it generating much enthusiasm, and it fails on most of Theresa May's own red lines. In fact I'm fairly confident it wasn't much more than an attempt to make leave look unattractive.

You could put it to a referendum versus WTO if you want to be sure, but since she wouldn't even put it to her own MPs I don't see that happening.

[Nickgnome]

saaby93 said:

JuanCarlosFandango said:

They might, but it would be pretty cavalier to assume it knowing that about 2/3rds of them represent constituencies which voted Leave. If they did it would put parliament in direct opposition to the wishes of the public expressed in the biggest vote in British political history and 2 general elections (the 2015 GE included a pledge for a vote that would be heeded, not a state run opinion poll).

I'm not sure about "ERG style" Brexit. Leaving on WTO terms could have been done in a planned and orderly way. If it does lead to chaos at the border then it is entirely the fault of the government May has led since 2016.

If plan B if/when her useless "deal" is kicked out is to stick 2 fingers up to the electorate and stay in she's even stupider than I thought.

Are you sure that Mays deal isnt what the public asked for ( it is after all Brexit) and the issue is just about getting it past MPs particularly the DUP?

She may well have done some scenario planning. By early next year with little sign of the economy going anywhere the markets may pursuade MPs that her deal may not be so bad.

It’s a very slim chance but if it gets through there will be some disgruntled leavers matched with a similar bunch of remainers. The rest will get on with their hum-drum lives and the civil service allowed to get on with the more important deal with the Eu. The long term FTA.

If it gets rejected another referendum is far more likely as the ERG, DUP become irrelavent and parliament will get behind another referendum. It”simple numbers game. Probably 60:40 in favour of a Referendum

Eu will naturally play ball and give an A50 extension.

Edited by Nickgnome on Thursday 13th December 21:44

[Derek Smith]

JuanCarlosFandango said:

I would like to see May pressed a bit more on what she meant by no Brexit if the deal was rejected. Is she really going to fully and unconditionally revoke Article 50 (as per the recent ECJ ruling)? After "no deal is better than a bad deal" and "Brexit means Brexit" she would be committing political suicide not just for herself but for her party for a generation.

And that's assuming she even could get such a move through parliament dominated by MPs from both major parties who are committed to withdrawal.

A referendum would at least maintain the pretence of caring what people think even if it would be a complete sham. Simply saying we are staying in would be out and out dictatorship.

If the elected MPs decided to pull A50 and so have the UK remain in the EU it would be them complying with their duty if they felt that was in the best interests of the UK. We live in a democracy and not a dictatorship. We vote in MPs to make our decisions for us. There is a majority of MPs who think it is best for the UK to remain.

You might not like it, and the tone of your posts hints that you don't, but it is what we've got.

[alfie2244]

Derek Smith said:

If the elected MPs decided to pull A50 and so have the UK remain in the EU it would be them complying with their duty if they felt that was in the best interests of the UK. We live in a democracy and not a dictatorship. We vote in MPs to make our decisions for us. There is a majority of MPs who think it is best for the UK to remain.

You might not like it, and the tone of your posts hints that you don't, but it is what we've got.

Except they bottled out of making the decision themselves and delegated to us to decide.....and we did....you may not like it but we voted to leave the EU and all it entails and it would be undemocratic not to do so.

[braddo]

Derek Smith said:

If the elected MPs decided to pull A50 and so have the UK remain in the EU it would be them complying with their duty if they felt that was in the best interests of the UK. We live in a democracy and not a dictatorship. We vote in MPs to make our decisions for us. There is a majority of MPs who think it is best for the UK to remain.

You might not like it, and the tone of your posts hints that you don't, but it is what we've got.

Representative democracy.

[popeyewhite]

Ghibli said:

popeyewhite said:

Nope - I thought 'leave' meant to go away from, exit, quit, pull out etc - as do most others. That's what the word means. May's deal doesn't do that.

How do you know what most others think?

Re-read my post. I said most others know what 'leave' means. Perhaps, like May, you have a further definition?

[JuanCarlosFandango]

Derek Smith said:

If the elected MPs decided to pull A50 and so have the UK remain in the EU it would be them complying with their duty if they felt that was in the best interests of the UK. We live in a democracy and not a dictatorship. We vote in MPs to make our decisions for us. There is a majority of MPs who think it is best for the UK to remain.

You might not like it, and the tone of your posts hints that you don't, but it is what we've got.

We elect MPs to represent our views and our interests.

We elected them to hold a referendum on EU membership on the basis they would implement the result, held the referendum and then elected MPs who promised to implement it.

Yes they would be legally entitled to revoke Article 50 but as I said in doing so they would be reneging on two general elections and the largest vote for anything in British political history. I don't consider that their duty, I consider it a complete betrayal of their duty, and one which the electorate will punish them for.