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

[woodview 10]

19 minutes ago, Obelix said:

We cannot revoke Art 50 without there being a meaningful process followed. The EU have said that we have to make a constitutionally valid decision to revoke art 50 before they acept it. Thats either a referendum or a GE, neither of which can be done in time.

Am act of parliament is constitutionally valid.

If they don't like that then March 29 happens before a gm or a referendum.

[El Cid 213]

32 minutes ago, Fudbeer said:

it probably won't happen then but the fact is the result was leave so thats what should happen imo.

But they have the option of a deal which is quite close to the EU, or no deal; a pro-EU MP would surely choose the deal.

[L00b 441]

33 minutes ago, woodview said:

I don't know if they need to allow it.

We can revoke A50 , do what we want on whatever timescale then resubmit if and when the outcome is known.

But also I don't think saying 'no' to an extension but dictating the terms would be a wise move either.

They need to allow an Art.50 extension. Unanimously, moreover. Else there is no extension, even if requested.

 

The UK can only revoke Art.50 by following due constitutional process, meaning a Parliament vote at the very least (much in the same way Article 50 was deemed validly triggerred under UK due constitutional process, once Parliament had voted to approve it), on a motion to bin Brexit and remain in the EU (do you remember the CJEU judgement?)

 

The EU wouldn't be dictating any terms, by the way: it would approve or reject an extension request.

 

It might hurt some posters' sensibilities to say it, but it's worth reminding that the UK is not the EU27's equal in these negotiations, never has been. You need to factor that fact in your political analysis

Edited January 16, 2019 by L00b

[tinfoilhat 11]

5 minutes ago, L00b said:

They need to allow an Art.50 extension. Unanimously, moreover. Else there is no extension, even if requested.

 

What do you think the chances are that won’t happen? I know the eu are painted as this perpetually united front but are some countries prepared to give us more time and others getting more fed up? 

[L00b 441]

Just now, tinfoilhat said:

What do you think the chances are that won’t happen? I know the eu are painted as this perpetually united front but are some countries prepared to give us more time and others getting more fed up? 

It's not a painted view, the EU27 are united on the Brexit issue: what they want most at this late stage, is to end the prevalent uncertainty, one way or the other. After 2 years and crumbs, an extension just to allow the UK to continue agonising over what Brexit means, is ever diminishing returns territory for them.

 

So chances are you won't be getting any extension, unless the action proposed by the UK within the extended period yields a definite outcome one way or the other for them. Basically, that's a referendum (or Parliament debate and vote) with a remain option. Depending on the manifestos in play, a new GE would not yield that definite outcome, since the new government could end up being the same as the current one, or a Labour (or coalition) government just as divided as the current one.

[Obelix 11]

38 minutes ago, woodview said:

Am act of parliament is constitutionally valid.

If they don't like that then March 29 happens before a gm or a referendum.

Do you see one of those happening without a GE or a referendum?

35 minutes ago, L00b said:

It might hurt some posters' sensibilities to say it, but it's worth reminding that the UK is not the EU27's equal in these negotiations, never has been. You need to factor that fact in your political analysis

Weve been saying that for two years. All you get back is hot air about "german cars" and "we are needed more" and so forth. I can't see that level of malovolent ignorance changing soon...

[ez8004 10]

1 hour ago, Obelix said:

We cannot revoke Art 50 without there being a meaningful process followed. The EU have said that we have to make a constitutionally valid decision to revoke art 50 before they acept it. Thats either a referendum or a GE, neither of which can be done in time.

No we don’t. The European courts have already stated that we can unilaterally revoke A50. We need no confirmation from the EU whatsoever to do this. However we will need a new piece of legislation to invoke it again. 

[woodview 10]

Well let's see what happens tonight, but I don't think there'll be a ge.

Hopefully the no-confidence vote will be defeated, which might mean some kind of cross party discussion can begin, after 2 years of headbutting.

Some heads need a serious banging together and quick.

Most people in the street are sick of the politicking that is going on.

Also TM has to propose the plan b.

Our president Mr junker has cancelled some other engagement to be available, so will that throw something else into the mix?

 

 

Edited January 16, 2019 by woodview

[Top Cats Hat 10]

2 hours ago, Fudbeer said:

We voted to leave so maybe a second referendum without the remain option but just hard Brexit or soft Brexit options might help sort this out.

With over 50% of the population supporting Remain, you can't have a second referendum without Remain being one of the options.

 

Without Remain on the ballot paper, it would simply be a poll of leave supporters and not a second referendum on the matter.

[RJRB 688]

1 hour ago, Fudbeer said:

I voted remain but you have to respect the result, can not accept a second referendum  with remain as an option.I think if we can not agree terms then much as I  have concerns about it then certainly initially we may have to leave without a deal. 

And the result of this would be that we already have a majority against a No Deal Brexit,and this disquiet would be added to by some Brexiteers saying “This is not what I meant by Brexit”.

The only sensible way forward is for those fighting for Brexit to unite or attain substantial backing from their own ranks for an agenda that can be negotiated.

May has lost the backing of her own party and should hand the reins to an acknowledged pro Brexit leader.

[I1L2T3 10]

2 hours ago, NERVY-OWL said:

No chance we would get anything like that from the EU anyway, the only deal we'd get is one that favours them not us. We'll see if out really means out now, I know if they try to wriggle out of leaving it will make me think twice about voting for anything in the future

We can already do all of what I described. The EU rules completely allow for it, and what I’ve described is basically how the Dutch run their immigration controls currently.

2 hours ago, Fudbeer said:

I voted remain but you have to respect the result, can not accept a second referendum  with remain as an option.I think if we can not agree terms then much as I  have concerns about it then certainly initially we may have to leave without a deal. 

We can’t destroy the economy on a point of principle mate

 

People need to get some perspective 

[Bargepole23 337]

2 hours ago, Fudbeer said:

I voted remain but you have to respect the result, can not accept a second referendum  with remain as an option.I think if we can not agree terms then much as I  have concerns about it then certainly initially we may have to leave without a deal. 

Why not? People are entitled to change their mind, they do so in GE's, and they are less permanent.