Jump to content


Consequences of Brexit [part 7] Read first post before posting

mort

 Let me make this perfectly clear - any personal attacks will get you a suspension. The moderating team is not going to continually issue warnings. If you cannot remain civil and post within forum rules then do not bother to contribute. 

Message added by mort

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, retep said:

That's the one.

If it is the one, what happens next?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Robin-H said:

Why did we trigger Article 50 when we did? 

Sheer incompetence!

 

Theresa May was advised at the time that setting the clock ticking without a plan, would give the EU a clear advantage in any negotiations that followed, as all the pressure would then be on the UK to not only come up with a deal, but also to get it through our Parliament.

 

This is what Sir Ivan Rogers said to a Treasury Select Committe:

 

“My advice, as a European negotiator, was that that was a moment of key leverage and if you wanted to avoid being screwed on the negotiations in terms of the sequencing, you had to negotiate with the key European leaders and the key people at the top of the institutions and say: 'I will invoke Article 50 but only under circumstances where I know exactly how it is going to operate and it's got to operate like this otherwise this is not going work for me.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leverage was something constantly trotted out as well, for those wanting to keep a no deal exit on the table.

 

The fact we had already given all leverage away before even starting was lost on many.

Share this post


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

Sheer incompetence!

 

Theresa May was advised at the time that setting the clock ticking without a plan, would give the EU a clear advantage in any negotiations that followed, as all the pressure would then be on the UK to not only come up with a deal, but also to get it through our Parliament.

 

This is what Sir Ivan Rogers said to a Treasury Select Committe:

 

“My advice, as a European negotiator, was that that was a moment of key leverage and if you wanted to avoid being screwed on the negotiations in terms of the sequencing, you had to negotiate with the key European leaders and the key people at the top of the institutions and say: 'I will invoke Article 50 but only under circumstances where I know exactly how it is going to operate and it's got to operate like this otherwise this is not going work for me.”

I seem to remember there was quite a bit of pressure to do so. People like Corbyn were saying that it should have been triggered straight away, back in June 2016 (a full 9 months before it was actually triggered). 

 

https://labourlist.org/2016/06/corbyn-article-50-has-to-be-invoked-now/

 

“The British people have made their decision. We must respect that result and Article 50 has to be invoked now so that we negotiate an exit from European Union.

“Obviously there has to be strategy but the whole point of the referendum was that the public would be asked their opinion. They’ve given their opinion. It is up for parliament to now act on that opinion." 

Share this post


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

Sheer incompetence!

 

Theresa May was advised at the time that setting the clock ticking without a plan, would give the EU a clear advantage in any negotiations that followed, as all the pressure would then be on the UK to not only come up with a deal, but also to get it through our Parliament.

 

This is what Sir Ivan Rogers said to a Treasury Select Committe:

 

“My advice, as a European negotiator, was that that was a moment of key leverage and if you wanted to avoid being screwed on the negotiations in terms of the sequencing, you had to negotiate with the key European leaders and the key people at the top of the institutions and say: 'I will invoke Article 50 but only under circumstances where I know exactly how it is going to operate and it's got to operate like this otherwise this is not going work for me.”

But what leverage would we have to make them negotiate before we trigger it? Either we don't trigger it and remain, or they insist we trigger it and then negotiate because the latter puts them in the stronger position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Robin-H said:

Why did we trigger Article 50 when we did? 

Because the MPs overwhelmingly voted in favour to Trigger Article 50,  in which doing so backed the UK leaving the EU with or without a deal making leaving the EU without a deal being the legal default position, if Parliament voted against the Withdrawal Agreement offered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

Because the MPs overwhelmingly voted in favour to Trigger Article 50,  in which doing so backed the UK leaving the EU with or without a deal making leaving the EU without a deal being the legal default position, if Parliament voted against the Withdrawal Agreement offered.

So, are you claiming that parliament voted to ignore the wishes of parliament?

 

Seems a bit odd.

 

But consistent with the leaver position of cherry picking which bit of democracy they agree with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lockdoctor said:

That is because the wrong people were doing the negotiating.

Indeed!

 

Arch-Brexiteer David Davis, entirely in charge for 18 months... mostly failed to turn up... lazy.

 

Then arch-Brexiteer Dominic Raab, another 3 months... failed to do the research... clueless.

 

Brexiteers were *fully* in charge of negotiations until it became apparent they were useless/lazy/incompetant... take your pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, nightrider said:

But what leverage would we have to make them negotiate before we trigger it? Either we don't trigger it and remain, or they insist we trigger it and then negotiate because the latter puts them in the stronger position.

That's precisely what they did say. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/03/eu-commission-still-refuses-uk-talks-before-article-50-triggered

 

"The European commission has rejected Theresa May’s call for preparatory talks on Brexit before the UK’s formal resignation from the EU." 

Share this post


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

So, are you claiming that parliament voted to ignore the wishes of parliament?

 

Seems a bit odd.

 

But consistent with the leaver position of cherry picking which bit of democracy they agree with.

Your post doesn't make any sense.  I clearly stated Parliament overwhelmingly voted to Trigger Article 50 which went along with our peoples democratic wishes which is to leave the EU.

 

As for cherry picking that can not be labelled against me because I voted to remain in the EU and accepted the democratic result.  The people who can fairly be labelled as cherry pickers are those who only accept democracy when the decision chosen is what they personally voted for which is how far too many remain voters here have behaved.

 

i

 

 

 

 

11 minutes ago, Magilla said:

Indeed!

 

Arch-Brexiteer David Davis, entirely in charge for 18 months... mostly failed to turn up... lazy.

 

Then arch-Brexiteer Dominic Raab, another 3 months... failed to do the research... clueless.

 

Brexiteers were *fully* in charge of negotiations until it became apparent they were useless/lazy/incompetant... take your pick.

Oliver Robbins and Theresa May were in charge for negotiating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Robin-H said:

I seem to remember there was quite a bit of pressure to do so. People like Corbyn were saying that it should have been triggered straight away, back in June 2016 (a full 9 months before it was actually triggered). 

That is because nobody really had a clue about what leaving the EU actually entailed.

 

Any senior politician who at the time, had stood up in Parliament during the Article 50 debate in 2016 and warned that this was very dangerous nonsense, would have a much greater political standing in August 2019.

 

I have always said that it was an act of great political cowardice by both Labour and the Conservatives to take a marginal and inconclusive referendum result as a mandate to do so much damage to the UK. Corbyn’s complicity in this makes him unfit to lead a Remain Labour Party in a general election. Labour’s party conference next month will undoubtedly make remaining in the EU, Labour policy for a general election, and once that is done the party needs to remove Corbyn within a very short time if it wants to win the coming general election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

Your post doesn't make any sense.  I clearly stated Parliament overwhelmingly voted to Trigger Article 50 which went along with our peoples democratic wishes which is to leave the EU.

Parliament voted to trigger article 50.

 

parliament also voted down the withdrawal agreement - the only option on the table.

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.

X