Jump to content

The Consequences of Brexit [Part 6] READ FIRST POST BEFORE COMMENTING

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, woodview said:

There should be no talk of either no-deal or Remain.

Locked in a room until they come out with a deal that they will vote for.

Only problem is, the U.K. is not negotiating a deal in a vacuum, there’s two sides to the table. And the other side pays the piper and names the tunes.

 

So unless May drops (some of) her red lines, resulting in a softer Brexiting withdrawal agreement (necessarily so, to remove a need for a backstop), that would be a pointless exercise in (yet more) time-wasting.

Edited by L00b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, woodview said:

There should be no talk of either no-deal or Remain.

Every major poll in the last two years has shown a growing majority in favour of remaining in the EU.

 

How can it possibly be left off the table?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, L00b said:

Only problem is, the U.K. is not negotiating a deal in a vacuum, there’s two sides to the table. And the other side pays the piper and names the tunes.

 

So unless May drops (some of) her red lines, resulting in a softer Brexiting withdrawal agreement (necessarily so, to remove a need for a backstop), a pointless exercise.

Well, a couple of points. We are actually paying the piper in this example, to the tune of £39bn , that little issue shouldn't be forgotten. So the tune calling isn't just one sided.

But, the WA negotiated with the eu was all well and good, but if it can't pass in Parliament it aint worth the paper it's written on.

So understanding clearly what can gain consensus in parliament is critical in going back to the eu to re-start discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, woodview said:

There should be no talk of either no-deal or Remain.

Locked in a room until they come out with a deal that they will vote for.

But ultimately that is the essence of the debate.

Somehow we need to get to a position which satisfies the majority of Brexit supporters or at least carries a majority of Brexit voters.

How this can be judged I have no idea other than that firstly this must be achieved within the Conservative Party and accepted by Parliament and the EU 27.

Failing this the only options on a People’s Vote are the two that you reject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Every major poll in the last two years has shown a growing majority in favour of remaining in the EU.

 

How can it possibly be left off the table?

Leave it on the table then. But there needs to be people sat round the table and actually have a discussion about what they are going to do.

No more who said what, 'remoaner' 'brextremist' cobblers. Discuss and come up with some proposals that can calm, the concerns of both sets of people.

Some will never be convinced. Mogg may be one, you may be another. But I'm sure there is a way that will satisfy the large and often silent majority that sit between the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RJRB said:

But ultimately that is the essence of the debate.

Somehow we need to get to a position which satisfies the majority of Brexit supporters or at least carries a majority of Brexit voters.

How this can be judged I have no idea other than that firstly this must be achieved within the Conservative Party and accepted by Parliament and the EU 27.

Failing this the only options on a People’s Vote are the two that you reject.

It needs to satisfy a majority, they may be mix of leave and remain supporters.

It can be the 60% in the middle. 30% mild Leavers and 30% mild remainers. The others were never going to be satisfied with one of the outcomes.

I'm not rejecting any ideas. Put it all on the table for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, woodview said:

Well, a couple of points. We are actually paying the piper in this example, to the tune of £39bn , that little issue shouldn't be forgotten. So the tune calling isn't just one sided.

But, the WA negotiated with the eu was all well and good, but if it can't pass in Parliament it aint worth the paper it's written on.

So understanding clearly what can gain consensus in parliament is critical in going back to the eu to re-start discussion.

There’s been much talk of the £39bn, but has anyone on the Leave side ever acknowledged posts that placed this sum in its proper context, the EU28 multiannual financial framework Regulation?

 

Didn’t think so either (I made such context-setting posts, time and again for the last 2+ years, so I should know 😉). A £39bn write-off is already long priced in a no deal Brexit situation by the EU27.

 

On the topic of reaching a domestic consensus, you are of course correct on a point of logic. The fly in the ointment is that, factually and pragmatically, it is too little far too late: unless that eventual/hypothetical consensus is a softer exit relative to the current terms of the WA, advantageous to the EU whence an extension of time sufficient to cross the Ts and dot the Is would likely be consented, they’re not bothered about it and are ready to let you crash out (or exit on the current terms) for the sake of finality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RJRB said:

But ultimately that is the essence of the debate.

Somehow we need to get to a position which satisfies the majority of Brexit supporters or at least carries a majority of Brexit voters.

How this can be judged I have no idea other than that firstly this must be achieved within the Conservative Party and accepted by Parliament and the EU 27.

Failing this the only options on a People’s Vote are the two that you reject.

My fear is with a people’s vote is what will be on the ticket. Remain, hard brexit and what’s? Mays deal? Nope. Whatever deal we can work out on the back of a fag packet but without the input of labour? Or, god forbid, just the two options - hard brexit or remain? I wouldn’t bet against  the country shooting itself in the head again.

 

so we leave it to our elected representives. If I was May I’d be giving starmer a ring and least get somebody Red(ish) in there. Heck, even Tom Watson, I thought he came across quite well in the commons yesterday. Corbyn needs to realise that his absence will make a no deal more likely. Give his head a wobble!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, L00b said:

There’s been much talk of the £39bn, but has anyone on the Leave side ever acknowledged posts that placed this sum in its proper context, the EU28 multiannual financial framework Regulation?

 

Didn’t think so either (I made such context-setting posts, time and again for the last 2+ years, so I should know 😉). A £39bn write-off is already long priced in a no deal Brexit situation by the EU27.

 

On the topic of reaching a domestic consensus, you are of course correct on a point of logic. The fly in the ointment is that, factually and pragmatically, it is too little far too late: unless that eventual/hypothetical consensus is a softer exit relative to the current terms of the WA, advantageous to the EU whence an extension of time sufficient to cross the Ts and dot the Is would likely be consented, they’re not bothered about it and are ready to let you crash out (or exit on the current terms) for the sake of finality.

Cool, so we can forget the £39bn, that's good news!

I imagine the consensus will be softer in some respect. I don't know. But with no consensus we leave in March, unless consensus is found to withdraw A50.

But, after all that, it seems very strange that I'm proposing dialogue, consensus, listening to Remain supporters concerns, but batting back contradictory replies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

And if that is not possible then we go for the solution which does least harm to the people of the UK, ie remain in the EU.

Leave voters and pro Brexit MPs didn't fall off Christmas trees and know, that if the default position was that the UK remain in the EU in the event of no agreement for a solution in Parliament, because they know there would be zero chance of Parliament supporting any agreement supporting the UK leaving the EU.  

 

You continue to ignore the fact the democratic people voted to leave the EU which means the default position  has to be the UK leave the EU without a deal on the 29th March, if Parliament don't agree on any Withdrawal Agreement on offer.

Edited by Lockdoctor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless that is ruled out permanently, as Corbyn and many others have already called for.

 

Then you can shove your default position where the sun don't shine.

 

17 minutes ago, Magilla said:

"lacking a basic grasp of economics":

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/you-are-embarrassing-tony-abbott-slapped-down-over-brexit-claim-20190117-p50rtw.html

Abbott is on the advisory board of a pro-Brexit think tank in the UK, the Initiative for Free Trade.

Boggles the mind how these people get to where they are, why he's been employed in that think tank I've no idea.

Edited by geared

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.