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

[thecrashingisles]

40 minutes ago, crouch said:

Where did I say that Varoufakis was the Finance Minister at the time? I didn't did I?

You said he was the finance minister “at the time of the crisis”, which suggests to me that you weren’t paying attention until Syriza came to power.

Edited September 3, 2019 by thecrashingisles

[kzb]

1 hour ago, Dave Beans said:

The political declaration sketches out a basic plan on what happens next, so it’s not that a future relationship hasn’t been discussed..

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-8454

 

Bear in mind my original question was, where does it say the UK has to be a third country before trade deal negotiations can be held?

The only  treaty or law which could be interpreted like this is A218.  (That is the only one anyone has shown me at any rate.)  If A218 is interpreted this way, it means the WA is unlawful because it was negotiated whilst we were still an EU member.

So that can't be the correct interpretation of A218. 

That being the case, there is nothing to stop trade deal negotiations before we leave.  We should never have agreed to this.  The trade deal should've been in the framework, ready to swing into action on the nanosecond we left.  There was no treaty or law preventing this.

 

[Gigantic Purple Slug]

4 minutes ago, Goodafterbad said:

In the case of no deal, what would it take for you to admit you'd got it wrong?

This is supposed to be a question for both the leave and remain side of the debate. If the UK leaves the EU without a deal, what events/outcome would be necessary, and in what time-scale, before you'd admit your previous analysis was incorrect and the other side of the debate was right?

As someone who thinks we should remain, I'd need to see tangible economic improvements for the whole country. And being very generous, I'd want to see them within about two years. If all we had, was some abstract idea of 'more' sovereignty, this just wouldn't cut it for me.

Additionally, if any of the predictions which had been labelled as 'project fear' came to pass, then I'd need the tangible benefits to exceed them.

If we remain we are finished as an independent country. It basically green lights our entry into the superstate.

Chances that a government will allow another referendum after what has happened ? Practically zero.

We didn't get a vote on Maastricht or Lisbon. We will get zero votes in the future. 

[rockerboy]

42 minutes ago, pig said:

Their strategy is therefore limited to suspending democractic oversight, spinning their way into crashing out and having a GE before any of the negative effects start to bite.

No 'do' all 'die'.

 

What many remainer MPS are doing today, is making sure plebiscite voting can be ignored,

It is no suprise that Momentum and other hard left looney tribes want to encourage its adoption.

"Killing democracy" indeed - The intention of the after effects of this action will be for approving the exact opposite in the future to allow revolutionary agendas to be pushed through without recourse to the people.

We had it with Tony Blair and his inner cabal - do not be suprised it it makes future goverment more inclined to act against its own people.

This is worst part of what Boris is doing - its a serious mistake only in that the opening of a Pandora's box of tools for future extremist majority UK goverments makes it easier to press ahead with revolutioary agenda which is against the majority will of the people. 

 

Edited September 3, 2019 by rockerboy

[jonb2]

1 hour ago, rollover said:

 

There is still a strong possibility that it can go lower.

 

Well the Brexit boys must be laughing their pants off. Loads a' money!!

https://www.standard.co.uk/business/hedge-funds-make-7bn-bet-against-pound-as-brexit-bites-a4216371.html

Good thing the leavers here are so rich they can be part of it and share the dividends of Brexit.

[IMHAL]

10 minutes ago, Goodafterbad said:

In the case of no deal, what would it take for you to admit you'd got it wrong?

This is supposed to be a question for both the leave and remain side of the debate. If the UK leaves the EU without a deal, what events/outcome would be necessary, and in what time-scale, before you'd admit your previous analysis was incorrect and the other side of the debate was right?

As someone who thinks we should remain, I'd need to see tangible economic improvements for the whole country. And being very generous, I'd want to see them within about two years. If all we had, was some abstract idea of 'more' sovereignty, this just wouldn't cut it for me.

Additionally, if any of the predictions which had been labelled as 'project fear' came to pass, then I'd need the tangible benefits to exceed them.

Good luck with that one..... you will be lucky to get a straight answer in the form you expect from the leavers on here. They don't like to be pinned down on anything.

My view is if Brexit turns out to have a short to medium term mild negative economic impact 1-2% of GDP (over a period of 5 years), then it can probably be judged to be have been a damp squib and I will put up and shut up.

If on the other hand we start to experience significantly lower growth that other EU countries, jobs losses in the 100's of thousands, precipitous falls of inward investment, key industries starting to migrate to the EU, then I think most 'reasonable' people will judge that to be a failure... most leavers included I would expect...especially when their livelyhoods are affected. 

The thing is, BJ will be pouring money into the economy to delay the negative effects for as long as possible, racking up debt to do so.... I don't know how long he can do this before the markets put a stop to it or he needs to go cap in hand to the IMF. I suspect that for 6 months to a year he can get away with it... after that he will be on very dodgy ground.

 

[crouch]

22 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said:

You said he was the finance minister “at the time of the crisis”, which suggests to me that you weren’t paying attention until Syria’s came to power.

Syriza not Syria's.We need to get things absolutely right and I mean absolutely right!

Edited September 3, 2019 by crouch

[thecrashingisles]

2 minutes ago, crouch said:

Syriza not Syria's.We need to get things absolutely right and I mean absolutely right!

Bloody iPad keyboard.

[jonb2]

40 minutes ago, Gigantic Purple Slug said:

Seems to me like the opposition is starting to congregate around not allowing a GE.

Dangerous route if you ask me. If you are trying to frustrate the government, but not willing to step up to the plate to take over yourself - can't see the public being very happy about that.

It's an elephant trap, as Blair said. Bit unfortunate that someone less toxic didn't point it out.

Whatever happens  - the Tories MUST get the blame for Brexit, full frontal - I am very OK with this. I know that Cummings is gearing to accuse anybody that is not part of his cabal - a massive misdirection campaign - again.

This cannot be allowed to happen. The Brexit Tories must own their disaster.

[IMHAL]

8 minutes ago, crouch said:

Syriza not Syria's.We need to get things absolutely right and I mean absolutely right!

Like for example supply or is it availability? ........like that kind of right?

He missed a z out you dork...  everyone knows what he meant to say.

Edited September 3, 2019 by IMHAL

[zugzwang]

3 minutes ago, rockerboy said:

What many remainer MPS are doing today, is making sure plebiscite voting can be ignored,

It is no suprise that Momentum and other hard left looney tribes want to encourage its adoption.

"Killing democracy" indeed - The intention of the after effects of this action will be for approving the exact opposite in the future to allow revolutionary agendas to be pushed through without recourse to the people.

We had it with Tony Blair and his inner cabal - do not be suprised it it makes future goverment more inclined to act against its own people.

This is worst part of what Boris is doing - its a serious mistake only in that the opening of a Pandora's box of tools for future extremist majority UK goverments makes it easier to press ahead with revolutioary agenda which is against the majority will of the people. 

 

Absolutist claptrap. Politics is the art of the possible; the art of the second best. You can't govern democratically without consent and when half the population is with-holding its consent you can't govern at all.

[crouch]

25 minutes ago, Gigantic Purple Slug said:

If we remain we are finished as an independent country. It basically green lights our entry into the superstate.

I genuinely don't think this will come about. the EU will disintegrate - and by this I don't mean an event but a slow process - because of its own internal contradictions. The people of Europe do not want a superstate and IMV simply will not have it.

[GrizzlyDave]

26 minutes ago, Gigantic Purple Slug said:

If we remain we are finished as an independent country. It basically green lights our entry into the superstate.

Chances that a government will allow another referendum after what has happened ? Practically zero.

We didn't get a vote on Maastricht or Lisbon. We will get zero votes in the future. 

It’s exactly this.

To think otherwise is utterly naive.

 

[crouch]

3 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

Like for example supply or is it availability? ........like that kind of right?

He missed a z out you dork...  

And I missed a "c" out you dik.

[jonb2]

32 minutes ago, Goodafterbad said:

In the case of no deal, what would it take for you to admit you'd got it wrong?

This is supposed to be a question for both the leave and remain side of the debate. If the UK leaves the EU without a deal, what events/outcome would be necessary, and in what time-scale, before you'd admit your previous analysis was incorrect and the other side of the debate was right?

As someone who thinks we should remain, I'd need to see tangible economic improvements for the whole country. And being very generous, I'd want to see them within about two years. If all we had, was some abstract idea of 'more' sovereignty, this just wouldn't cut it for me.

Additionally, if any of the predictions which had been labelled as 'project fear' came to pass, then I'd need the tangible benefits to exceed them.

Leavers are too embedded in the cult. They will continue to drink the Kool-Aid and blame everybody else for the rest of time. This will ensure the country remains divided for at least a generation.

"The EU were mean to us and everything would have been fine if remainers had got behind the vote" will be their narrative as the country sinks into the mire.

The only thing remainers will have is "I told you so" - as the country is sold off, lock, stock and barrel to foreigners.

[Confusion of VIs]

27 minutes ago, kzb said:

The trade deal should've been in the framework, ready to swing into action on the nanosecond we left.  There was no treaty or law preventing this. 

Who would have developed this trade deal, and how would they have agreed it with the thousands of stakeholders involved. Trade deals are very complex agreements built on the constantly shifting ground of both politics and economics. 

Once we are out without a deal it will take the usual +5yrs for us to agree a deal that is not as good as we have now.  

[rockerboy]

4 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Politics is the art of the possible; the art of the second best. You can't govern democratically without consent and when half the population is with-holding its consent you can't govern at all.

People can only give consent is it is made available to them. 

John Major never gave the electorate any consent before he signed up to Lisbon.

My point is that it makes controversial unilateral action by a government more likely in future 

trotting out "art of the possible; the art of the second best" is an empty phrase rather like "new labour" 

 

 

[DiggerUK]

3 hours ago, rockerboy said:

My prediction of next few days

Boris loses the vote...... Not enough Labour MPS vote for a GE 

Never considered that one. Never mind there not being enough Labour MP's, there simply might not be enough to get the 2/3rds majority needed for a GE.

Then on to the deadline, go past it, we are out. Then the negotiations start. Then it all goes for approval with the powers that be in europe. I seriously don't think many people realise everything will still need final approval from Europe. The debates there will go on, and on, and.......

 

Good 'ere, innit..._

[Confusion of VIs]

9 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:

It’s exactly this.

To think otherwise is utterly naive. 

So it is both inevitable both that the EU will break up and that if we Remain we will be part of a super state that never existed.

 

[thecrashingisles]

11 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:

It’s exactly this.

To think otherwise is utterly naive.

 

The Britain you imagine hasn’t existed at any point during your lifetime.  You are chasing after ghosts.

[zugzwang]

Just now, rockerboy said:

People can only give consent is it is made available to them. 

John Major never gave the electorate any consent before he signed up to Lisbon.

My point is that it makes controversial unilateral action by a government more likely in future 

trotting out "art of the possible; the art of the second best" is an empty phrase rather like "new labour" 

 

 

The issue of Maastricht, the UK's trading relationship with the EU or the very minor differences the UK has had over the years with the European Commission and the ECJ were never a concern to the Great British public prior to the referendum. The wisdom of crowds? All this sordid episode has done is confirm the superiority of representative democracy over the alternative.

[rockerboy]

2 minutes ago, DiggerUK said:

Never considered that one. Never mind there not being enough Labour MP's, there simply might not be enough to get the 2/3rds majority needed for a GE.

Then on to the deadline, go past it, we are out. Then the negotiations start. Then it all goes for approval with the powers that be in europe. I seriously don't think many people realise everything will still need final approval from Europe. The debates there will go on, and on, and.......

 

Good 'ere, innit..._

yep - After losing, Boris will do as he is asked - He'll ask for an extension and then vote against it  - ergo no deal

What will be interesting is how the MPS will legislate to tie Boris down - to stop him voting against it in the EU.

Now that is a political deamnd that steps too far...... 

[Kosmin]

10 hours ago, MonsieurCopperCrutch said:

Utter garbage as usual. Remainers and ex-leave votes want a second referendum to clarify the will of the people now that all the leavers lies have been exposed. 

I'm not sure a referendum is a good idea. There will still be the difficulty of interpreting the result. For example, arguing what the question should have been and whether a certain threshold should be reached.

It's time for remainers to push to revoke article 50 and leavers to vote for the Brexit Party if that's what they want.

[OnionTerror]

42 minutes ago, kzb said:

Bear in mind my original question was, where does it say the UK has to be a third country before trade deal negotiations can be held?

The only  treaty or law which could be interpreted like this is A218.  (That is the only one anyone has shown me at any rate.)  If A218 is interpreted this way, it means the WA is unlawful because it was negotiated whilst we were still an EU member.

So that can't be the correct interpretation of A218. 

That being the case, there is nothing to stop trade deal negotiations before we leave.  We should never have agreed to this.  The trade deal should've been in the framework, ready to swing into action on the nanosecond we left.  There was no treaty or law preventing this.

 

A fully blown treaty would take many years to agree; many more than the two years that is laid out in A50, and even beyond December 2020 - the supposed end of the transition agreement, had we left in March.

[zugzwang]

4 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

So it is both inevitable both that the EU will break up and that if we Remain we will be part of a super state that never existed.

 

Breitbart doomsday propaganda for every eventuality!