Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

[Errol]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-17/no-deal-brexit-odds-greater-you-may-think

[copydude]

There are some specific deals which are certainly better than May's deal . . . and that's never going to fly anyway.

I think a 2nd Ref now is a cop out . . .  I do think a cross party or free vote should try and find some consensus . . . that's what they were tasked with. I rather think the largest obstacles to this are the leaders of both major parties.

There's not a lot wrong with Canada + free trade . . . whatever, the Gov - or House - should at least propose a specific deal which can be implemented. 

I have no problem if the Gov then go back to the electorate for ratification. 

[GrizzlyDave]

37 minutes ago, kzb said:

You've got 10 weeks to arrange it.  After we gave notice of quitting the EEA just before Christmas.

I doubt the EU will extend A50 just to give us more time to join EFTA ?

If parliment decides that the end state is EFTA then we can either extend A50 (subject to EU27) or enter the WA.

25 minutes ago, kzb said:

Not according to that Hammond conversation or that Yvette Cooper conversation.  Revocation will be triggered automatically before no deal exit happens.

Having got this in place, remainers now are best keeping out of it, and just let the bus roll on....

Keep that flame of hope going by all means, but an arctic wind is bringing no deal brexit in 71 days.

tick tock.

[pig]

3 hours ago, thehowler said:

I see no consensus emerging among MPs, just the usual bickering and long-held fixed positions. And the debate/vote in the HoC on May's next move has been pushed back to 29th Jan, (deft play by Leadsom on the scheduling), which suggests to me that May is still hoping to present Parliament with a time-running-out tweaked deal or no deal.

I still think the 2nd ref idea is 'for the birds', as does Bercow according to some quotes back from 2017.

That means that when the crunch comes (when May's deal falls again) it will be another delay and tweaked deal or a GE. It's still possible that Boles, Grieve or another rebel will devise a means to attach a binding amendment or new bill that forces an Art 50 extension to end of the year to govt business, in event of no deal passing the House - though again, I see that Leadsom has delayed readings for Finance/Immigration bills to thwart such a move. But they might add several motions on 2nd ref etc to the May motion next week. If they succeed I imagine May would duck anything binding and go for a GE. I'm just not convinced that she will ever change her mind or deviate from her deal. If she can't get end to FOM she'll resign - GE. And she has nothing to gain from an extension - it just takes her up to another deadline and she has one of those already.

She also has precedent for calling an unexpected snap GE.

Once the rebels (or Corbs) make their move, they can take the blame for May calling the GE. They will be 'betraying' Brexit in the govt narrative. Then all the complexity of May's deal can be sold on the doorstep as 'it takes us out of the SM and ends FOM'.

Gove was really going for it with his speech to the House yesterday. The Tories loved it.

 

The consensus is to remove ‘no deal’ - the how is open to question.

I think both leaders are trying to max out their leave credibility and trying to manoeuvre the other into blame position if it all goes pear shaped.

However, it does look like Maybot is stuck in my deal or no deal mode which is either politically deranged or legally covered or both.

[cock-eyed octopus]

 

From the ZeroHedge link above:

Eurointelligence: Pro-Remain UK commentators have marveled at the unity of the EU during the negotiations, but this unity was critically premised on the assumption that the UK would never crash out of the EU without a deal. Once the realization sets in that this may not be so, expect divergent interests to come to the surface. From a simple perspective of political risk management, Germany has no interest in exposing its car industry to tariffs from the UK as well as to tariffs from the US, especially when the Germany economy may be on the verge of a recession.

Mish: No matter how one twists and turns, a no-deal Brexit is the default option. The only wildcard left is the EU. If the EU offered a hard guarantee there would be no permanent backstop, May's deal could potentially garner enough support. A no deal Brexit is the most likely state of affairs, one way or another. Many paths lead to a no-deal outcome. There are too many possibilities to say no-deal is likely. Rather, it's the most likely option of the bunch.

Edited January 17, 2019 by cock-eyed octopus

[copydude]

2 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:

Keep that flame of hope going by all means, but an arctic wind is bringing no deal brexit in 71 days.

Brexiteers are outnumbered 1 - 4 in the House. I think this is simply May trying blackmail and coercion. A mechanism will be found.

[Arpeggio]

On 15/01/2019 at 23:59, Dorkins said:

Sure, there was no referendum on the Maastricht Treaty. That's just historical fact. I have no idea why you started ranting about the lack of a referendum on the Maastricht Treaty in reply to me as it wasn't in my post.

The whole debating tactic of asking a closed question and demanding that other posters answer it as if it's anybody's job to jump through your hoops is pretty tiresome. If you have a point to make just make it, if other people want to reply they will.

My point is this.

You are concerned about the details of Leaving and are not bothered how joining was never democratically decided in the first place let alone the details.

So when it is something you like, you don't mind it being imposed with a lack of democracy. When it is something you oppose you not only prefer it being voted on, you also lecture others that they should know the exact details and vote on the details.

The moral position on Democracy you try to portray is inconsistent.

[thehowler]

1 hour ago, kzb said:

Smoggy ?

But yes, I really thought they would need the cover of a 2nd ref. to justify withdrawing article 50.

But it seems a parliamentary vote alone is enough to do it.

Hammond says they will pass legislation that makes the revocation automatic before No Deal happens.

Since we are currently on the bus heading straight for the "crash out" over the "cliff edge", all the EU has to do is make sure they do absolutely nothing towards a better deal, and revocation is then inevitable.

Job done.

There was never no deal. There was never WTO.

There is the WA and the fluid negotiations thereafter.

There is remain.

And there is a FTA with some bolt-ons and a dollop of fudge for Ireland.

All of the above will likely require an extension of Art 50 - if the EU don't refuse and force us to revoke. MPs who want to leave the EU should back May's deal. MPs who want the softest possible Brexit should back May's deal. MPs who want to remain...should join the Lib Dems.

[kzb]

10 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:

If parliment decides that the end state is EFTA then we can either extend A50 (subject to EU27) or enter the WA

Keep that flame of hope going by all means, but an arctic wind is bringing no deal brexit in 71 days. *

tick tock.

* I was highlighting that they are moving to stop this.  The true meaning is being masked, by giving it the narrative of "taking no deal off the table".

When what it really means is, if we can't have something like May's deal, and we are then heading for No Deal, we will Revoke.

Once they have this in place, there is no incentive for EFTA, Canada+ or anything else you could name, because the true goal is Revoke.

 

[kzb]

3 minutes ago, thehowler said:

There was never no deal. There was never WTO.

There is the WA and the fluid negotiations thereafter.

There is remain.

And there is a FTA with some bolt-ons and a dollop of fudge for Ireland.

All of the above will likely require an extension of Art 50 - if the EU don't refuse and force us to revoke. MPs who want to leave the EU should back May's deal. MPs who want the softest possible Brexit should back May's deal. MPs who want to remain...should join the Lib Dems.

But the WA (May's deal) was voted down in the biggest government defeat in history.

The FTA with the dollop of fudge depends on the WA being agreed.

So according to this analysis we are left with repeating the WA vote until they get the right answer, or Remain?

They have been very clever I give them that.

[cock-eyed octopus]

11 minutes ago, thehowler said:

There was never no deal. There was never WTO.

There is the WA and the fluid negotiations thereafter.

There is remain.

And there is a FTA with some bolt-ons and a dollop of fudge for Ireland.

All of the above will likely require an extension of Art 50 - if the EU don't refuse and force us to revoke. MPs who want to leave the EU should back May's deal. MPs who want the softest possible Brexit should back May's deal. MPs who want to remain...should join the Lib Dems.

I assume you are saying there was never no deal or WTO because MPs wouldn't allow it? Rather than being a logical impossibility.

 

[dances with sheeple]

Funniest outcome would be parliament over-turning the whole thing, then the EU collapsing anyway

[localhero1983]

4 hours ago, kzb said:

I don't disagree with what you say here.  From JC's point of view the best thing is to keep quiet and watch the Tories stuff up in front of the world's media.

But I do wish that media would expose Labour's position on the EU for what it is:  waffle.  Labour have got away with waffling for too long on this question.

He is the worlds biggest hypocrite, his now famous mantra  as he sat with some of the worst terrorists and most evil men in modern times, and even praised them at times,  was "to get around the table and talk". Somehow he thinks it more distasteful to sit with TM than a man whose hobby it was blowing peoples knee caps out with a Browning.

[Dorkins]

3 hours ago, thehowler said:

Then all the complexity of May's deal can be sold on the doorstep as 'it takes us out of the SM and ends FOM'.

May's WA doesn't do those things, it extends UK participation in the single market (including FOM) for another 2.5-3.5 years.

[GrizzlyDave]

37 minutes ago, copydude said:

Brexiteers are outnumbered 1 - 4 in the House. I think this is simply May trying blackmail and coercion. A mechanism will be found.

Perhaps. I put £25 on a no deal exit yesterday at 7:1.

it’s 6:1 now...

tick tock.

[dances with sheeple]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46906046

 

tick tock

Edited January 17, 2019 by dances with sheeple

[Dorkins]

25 minutes ago, Arpeggio said:

My point is this.

You are concerned about the details of Leaving and are not bothered how joining was never democratically decided in the first place let alone the details.

So when it is something you like, you don't mind it being imposed with a lack of democracy. When it is something you oppose you not only prefer it being voted on, you also lecture others that they should know the exact details and vote on the details.

The moral position on Democracy you try to portray is inconsistent.

You know absolutely nothing about my "moral position on democracy" so please stop lecturing me. If you care what I actually think about democracy you can read all about it here on this very thread:

https://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?/topic/210294-brexit-what-happens-next-thread-multiple-merged-threads/&do=findComment&comment=1103431498

In short I would like the UK to have radically more democracy than the current system of X in a box every 5 years.

[thehowler]

21 minutes ago, kzb said:

But the WA (May's deal) was voted down in the biggest government defeat in history.

The FTA with the dollop of fudge depends on the WA being agreed.

So according to this analysis we are left with repeating the WA vote until they get the right answer, or Remain?

They have been very clever I give them that.

I think all routes to a close trading relationship with the EU are going to be easier/best done through a WA. Though there is the chance of a hard liner Tory asking for a FTA only after a GE win - they'd have to cut NI loose though, or take a risk that ROI would allow checks from their borders into the rest of EU.

[thehowler]

26 minutes ago, ****-eyed octopus said:

I assume you are saying there was never no deal or WTO because MPs wouldn't allow it? Rather than being a logical impossibility.

 

Aye, not with current Parliament, it wears its remain heart on its sleeve.

[kzb]

17 minutes ago, localhero1983 said:

He is the worlds biggest hypocrite, his now famous mantra  as he sat with some of the worst terrorists and most evil men in modern times, and even praised them at times,  was "to get around the table and talk". Somehow he thinks it more distasteful to sit with TM than a man whose hobby it was blowing peoples knee caps out with a Browning.

No this is different.  He would be paraded in front of the media circus and May would be in charge.  She'd pat him on the head like a little poodle.

Anyhow she's never taken any notice of anyone outside her bubble any time previously, so why would she now?  He's just be there to take the blame.   His job is to win elections for Labour, that's all.

[thehowler]

24 minutes ago, Dorkins said:

May's WA doesn't do those things, it extends UK participation in the single market (including FOM) for another 2.5-3.5 years.

But it promises so much more...and they've got another doorstep carrot to dangle, "you will be OUT of the EU".

[kzb]

8 minutes ago, thehowler said:

I think all routes to a close trading relationship with the EU are going to be easier/best done through a WA. Though there is the chance of a hard liner Tory asking for a FTA only after a GE win - they'd have to cut NI loose though, or take a risk that ROI would allow checks from their borders into the rest of EU.

But there is no WA.

Back again on 21 Jan, but what of any substance can change?

So the plan is to keep making them vote repeatedly until they bleed?

What is more, if they get the No Deal = Revoke vote through, all they have to do is keep voting the WA down until 29 March, then they get Revoke.  Which is what they wanted all along.

Edited January 17, 2019 by kzb

[thehowler]

25 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:

Perhaps. I put £25 on a no deal exit yesterday at 7:1.

it’s 6:1 now...

tick tock.

That's another pony you might well lose in the woods, Grizzly.

[localhero1983]

1 hour ago, IMHAL said:

You come here out of nowhere, start referring to me as Hairy (your 'mates' have miss informed you) when I don't have a clue as to who you are, start accusing me of calling you a racist (when I haven't). AND I'M THE STRANGE ONE 

Your views are RW, probably to the further end of the right, I don't agree with them, but it's a free country (still) thankfully. So fill your boots. I simply quizzed you regarding them, as I explained in the post, because you thought that that is what the country needed - that's what we do here.... 

Regarding my asking you if you belonged to a group - it's a fair question and you have (only now) answered it and not as you have implied above, answered it before. You could have said it's none of my business....again, there is no obligation to reveal anything...it's a public forum. All that matters is the subject under discussion.

I agree with you re needing a swing between left and right to get a good balance. I prefer milder swings to either side. 

 

I am so tempted to just let it go now and let you hang yourself, and I mostly will now.

You constantly bugged me to reveal my "RW views", and when I finally did you was not happy. You have now suggested I never answered that before, I already told you the closest I came to involvement with political groups was with Labour in John Smiths day, so yes I did. You now are inferring that I am "probably" further to the right(on what basis having giving you a list), and many of us know where you yet again are trying to go with that.

How about you, what group, cult or left wing fascist idol  do you support, Owen Jones, Yasmin Alibhai Brown, Jess Philips, Jerry Adams and JC ?

PS  ... And for the record I don't see myself having "RW views", I was feeding your stereotype of those views, I don't really believe in Left or Right politics in many ways, I am also a massive fan of the NHS, regardless of my list I am the worlds biggest fan of the introduction of the welfare state, and given half the chance and if they built the infrastructure I would welcome 5 million more Polish, Czechs and Jews into the UK, nobody punches above their weight more than the Jewish community

[localhero1983]

8 minutes ago, kzb said:

No this is different.  He would be paraded in front of the media circus and May would be in charge.  She'd pat him on the head like a little poodle.

Anyhow she's never taken any notice of anyone outside her bubble any time previously, so why would she now?  He's just be there to take the blame.   His job is to win elections for Labour, that's all.

Well that's fine, seriously.

Just don't tell me then that JC has no ego and I no longer want to hear about him being above party politics.