Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

[clubchamp98]

The EU are the problem!
They can’t give us a good deal because everyone will want one and their project will blow up.
If no deal is off the table they can offer us diddly squat and we have no comeback.

 

[SocketRocket]

Only one of the conclusions, but not the be all and end all, we can keep negotiating if the EU agrees until Parliament supports a deal.
Why the sudden rush to crash out?

The can has been kicked down the road too long already, what's going to change by kicking it further. Unless a date is set for us to leave with no deal as a real option the EU will sit back and let our MPs tear each other apart and the public lose the will to live.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I don’t think you actually voted leave. I’m calling shenanigans on that.

You couldn’t possibly of believed a propaganda leaflet that came through your door, and based your vote upon that.

You seem an intelligent man, but to base your vote on what was written on essentially spam mail was pretty daft. Did you take the red bus literally as well?

As stated in previous posts, I did my own research through various sources, from all sides over a decent period, at the end of the day I believed, and still do, that we should leave the EU.
One of the main points for me was that the UK would not suddenly leave overnight without everything in place (were possible) to avoid the worst case scenario.

Happy to admit I’m a Labour supporter, happy to admit I put my faith in TM getting the negotiations right, unfortunately (and too simplistic for some) I blame this mess squarely on the shoulders of Cameron and May.
Johnson I simply don’t trust, great if he gets a deal, but I fear the worst under a No Deal.

 

[SocketRocket]

As stated in previous posts, I did my own research through various sources, from all sides over a decent period, at the end of the day I believed, and still do, that we should leave the EU.
One of the main points for me was that the UK would not suddenly leave overnight without everything in place (were possible) to avoid the worst case scenario.

Happy to admit I’m a Labour supporter, happy to admit I put my faith in TM getting the negotiations right, unfortunately (and too simplistic for some) I blame this mess squarely on the shoulders of Cameron and May.
Johnson I simply don’t trust, great if he gets a deal, but I fear the worst under a No Deal.

I can go along with that other than your no deal concerns.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

The can has been kicked down the road too long already, what's going to change by kicking it further. Unless a date is set for us to leave the EU will sit back and let our MPs tear each other apart and the public lose the will to live.

For the last time:
Set up a cross party negotiating team agreed by Parliament.

Give them a set time (6 months) to bring a deal back.

At the same time, publicly and openly prepare for no deal.

Bring in laws that stops profiteering off No Deal.

Can you honestly tell me why you think the PM can get a deal in 6 weeks that couldn’t be done in 2 years, and please don’t use the No Deal threat as the excuse.

 

[Jamesbrown]

As stated in previous posts, I did my own research through various sources, from all sides over a decent period, at the end of the day I believed, and still do, that we should leave the EU.
One of the main points for me was that the UK would not suddenly leave overnight without everything in place (were possible) to avoid the worst case scenario.

Happy to admit I’m a Labour supporter, happy to admit I put my faith in TM getting the negotiations right, unfortunately (and too simplistic for some) I blame this mess squarely on the shoulders of Cameron and May.
Johnson I simply don’t trust, great if he gets a deal, but I fear the worst under a No Deal.

I rescind the shenanigans.

 

[SocketRocket]

Cross party talks were a disaster, labour and others wanted a complete surrender deal where we stay in a customs union and the single market, this means staying in the EU with no say in how its run. How can parties with such diverse aims negotiate together.

My opinion is that if the EU believe we will leave on a given date with no deal unless they are prepared to soften on items like the backstop they will start negotiating in earnest.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Cross party talks were a disaster, labour and others wanted a complete surrender deal where we stay in a customs union and the single market, this means staying in the EU with no say in how its run. How can parties with such diverse aims negotiate together.

My opinion is that if the EU believe we will leave on a given date with no deal unless they are prepared to soften on items like the backstop they will start negotiating in earnest.

What we had previously was Labour trying to tweak TM’s deal, neither they or any other party were involved in actual negotiations with the EU.

The problem with getting the EU to soften their stance is the PM is doing it with threats and bluff, were have these options suddenly appeared from, and again why the rush, look at how much time the tories have wasted since TM decided to stand down, boris could of come in, recognised how much time if the extension he’d lost, asked the EU for that period back as a short extension and negotiated in a calm sensible manner, but instead he based his leadership campaign and now his current position on being out by 31 Oct come what may, that’s not very statesman like for me and says his interests are in himself.

 

[Hobbit]

For the last time:
Set up a cross party negotiating team agreed by Parliament.

Give them a set time (6 months) to bring a deal back.

At the same time, publicly and openly prepare for no deal.

Bring in laws that stops profiteering off No Deal.

Can you honestly tell me why you think the PM can get a deal in 6 weeks that couldn’t be done in 2 years, and please don’t use the No Deal threat as the excuse.

A cross party team was set up, led by Hilary Benn. However, from very early in its inception it was obvious it was Remain led, with a Remain majority.

BTW, around post 13775 you asked SR to explain his losers comment. Read post 13769, in which he very clearly and eloquently explains it.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Only one of the conclusions, but not the be all and end all, we can keep negotiating if the EU agrees until Parliament supports a deal.
Why the sudden rush to crash out?

Or if it is decided by parliament that leaving is the wrong course of action, for the country, revoking article 50 & remaining is an option.

 

[Beezerk]

Said that weeks ago that the only referendum (if we had another one) should be deal or no deal, either, but definitely out.

Would that be a binding referendum though?
The original Gina Miller case IIRC said any decision needed the backing of the commons, and even if No Deal were to win another referendum it would never get through the house.
Am I right or wrong in that assumption?
Going on a slight tangent, the best deal in the world would get voted down as well...

 

[Doon frae Troon]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1176465397094264832

Idiotic Lib Dem MP thinks people have extremely short memories.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I guess the emojis mean youre not really calling those that voted leave thick racists 🙄🚮

Get a grip of yourself - it wasn’t so long ago that you were making light jokes about stuff in regards Brexit and anyone who didn’t take it as a joke or was offended was immediately called a “snowflake”.

It’s just a joke - not a big a joke as this whole process but it isn’t helped with hypocrites like yourself

 

[Hobbit]

What we had previously was Labour trying to tweak TM’s deal, neither they or any other party were involved in actual negotiations with the EU.

The problem with getting the EU to soften their stance is the PM is doing it with threats and bluff, were have these options suddenly appeared from, and again why the rush, look at how much time the tories have wasted since TM decided to stand down, boris could of come in, recognised how much time if the extension he’d lost, asked the EU for that period back as a short extension and negotiated in a calm sensible manner, but instead he based his leadership campaign and now his current position on being out by 31 Oct come what may, that’s not very statesman like for me and says his interests are in himself.

Have a read of the threats and bluff coming out of the EU. Its 6 and two 3's.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Or if it is decided by parliament that leaving is the wrong course of action, for the country, revoking article 50 & remaining is an option.

I don’t agree with remaining as an option, we voted to leave.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Have a read of the threats and bluff coming out of the EU. Its 6 and two 3's.

I don’t believe the EU could ever be fully trusted as they are looking after their own interests, the PM is looking after his own imo.

 

[Foxholer]

Would that be a binding referendum though?
The original Gina Miller case IIRC said any decision needed the backing of the commons, and even if No Deal were to win another referendum it would never get through the house.
Am I right or wrong in that assumption?
Going on a slight tangent, the best deal in the world would get voted down as well...

That wasn't actually the argument/ruling (it was that laws made by Parliament could only be repealed by Parliament), but the effect is/was the same.
And I'm inclined to agree about 'the best deal...'. At least in THIS parliament!
And, indeed, the only way a referendum is going to really get Leave through is to make it a binding one! And go that way of course!

 

[Deleted member 16999]

A cross party team was set up, led by Hilary Benn. However, from very early in its inception it was obvious it was Remain led, with a Remain majority.

BTW, around post 13775 you asked SR to explain his losers comment. Read post 13769, in which he very clearly and eloquently explains it.

The cross party team had no authority, it needs a Parliament backed team to go to the EU (in my fantasy land)

As for SR’s Loser comment my reply goes back to 9th Sept when I picked him up on using the term losers (Post #12874) he then asked me to show proof or retract my post (Post #12890) so I did, I posted the following quote from him.

Post #12833,
“Leavers won and the Losers are inventing ways to make it seem they lost.”

Until last night he had not replied to me showing the evidence.

 

[Foxholer]

Cross party talks were a disaster, labour and others wanted a complete surrender deal where we stay in a customs union and the single market, this means staying in the EU with no say in how its run. How can parties with such diverse aims negotiate together.

My opinion is that if the EU believe we will leave on a given date with no deal unless they are prepared to soften on items like the backstop they will start negotiating in earnest.

I agree!

Though a form of deal where the desirable (to UK) parts of CU/SM, without the 'undesirable' ones - in effect an instant Free Trade agreement and 3 of the 4 Freedoms (dropping FofMvntofPeople) - would, imo, be fine. Getting opposition parties to agree to that, however, would be difficult as the entire issues provides the opportunity to 'bring the government down'!

 

[SocketRocket]

The cross party team had no authority, it needs a Parliament backed team tod go to the EU (in my fantasy land)

As for SR’s Loser comment my reply goes back to 9th Sept when I picked him up on using the term losers (Post #12874) he then asked me to show proof or retract my post (Post #12890) so I did, I posted the following quote from him.

Post #12833,
"Leavers won and the Losers are inventing ways to make it seem they lost.”.

Until last night he had not replied to me showing the evidence.

Its just beeen pointed out to you that I gave you an explanation, I have now given you one twice but you just won't acknowledge it. For the third and final time, the use of 'losers' was used in the context of losing the referendum and not losers in life. If you can't accept that then you are being purposely obtuse and making trouble. Just drop it as you're making yourself look silly.