May heading to Strasbourg... Presumably to announce some revision to the deal?
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Depends on whether there is any movement and if so, whether it is meaningful (excuse the pun).
I was actually hopeful that the legal guy Attorney General would come back from his meeting with the EU with something that says that the Backstop cannot be made permanent.
Anyway, we will soon find out.
According to BBC NI News the Irish government have been summoned to an emergency Brexit meeting tonight. Maybe something is afoot
The pound was trading pretty strongly earlier.
Extension looking likely?
Extension looking likely?
Maybe they've decided the easiest solution over the backstop is just to hand NI back
https://www.faz.net/aktuell/brexit/brexit-wortfuehrer-jacob-rees-mogg-im-gespraech-16083703-p3.html
An Interview with Rees-Mogg in the biggest German conservative (and free market) broadsheet. Maybe google gets you a workable translation.
He really wants to abolish with Brexit unilaterally all import tariffs. Together with his other policy's (no minimum wage, only high skilled immigration, low skilled immigration probably only when the home grown workbase is not sufficient, while deinvesting in education and community welfare) that will lead to an transformation of the UK unseen since Thatcher. Trapping the working classes in a vicious low wage cycle.
Money qoute:
"It is really exciting to leave with no-deal"
He sometimes comes around a very smart guy, but he is also an ideologue, that bends the facts when it suits him and he really has no consideration for a lot of people and hides it behind the "democratic will"
Good Luck if he ever gets into government, he supports Boris Johnson. I expect him to pander to BoJos vanity and he sees himself probably as an intellectual Dick Cheney to Johnsons George W. Bush....
An Interview with Rees-Mogg in the biggest German conservative (and free market) broadsheet. Maybe google gets you a workable translation.
He really wants to abolish with Brexit unilaterally all import tariffs. Together with his other policy's (no minimum wage, only high skilled immigration, low skilled immigration probably only when the home grown workbase is not sufficient, while deinvesting in education and community welfare) that will lead to an transformation of the UK unseen since Thatcher. Trapping the working classes in a vicious low wage cycle.
Money qoute:
"It is really exciting to leave with no-deal"
He sometimes comes around a very smart guy, but he is also an ideologue, that bends the facts when it suits him and he really has no consideration for a lot of people and hides it behind the "democratic will"
Good Luck if he ever gets into government, he supports Boris Johnson. I expect him to pander to BoJos vanity and he sees himself probably as an intellectual Dick Cheney to Johnsons George W. Bush....
Piecing all the political correspondents tweets together it sounds like May has flown over to make a unilateral statement she could have made here just to appear as a 'deal'.
I expect to be proven wrong but thats what it sounds like
I expect to be proven wrong but thats what it sounds like
Don't they have to file the motion in the commons before 10:30 tonight for it to be voted on tomorrow... Cutting it fine
Agreed. Other countries are of course interested in trade with the UK as it is a decent sized market but small compared to the UK. And other countries will also know how desperate the UK is for trade deals post Brexit so will bend us over a barrel in exchange for a quick deal IMO.
Honest John said:
It would but many people won't like it. So what? Everyone hates the current gridlocked shit show.
If we voted to leave again nobody could say they didn't know the stakes and then if there was a second question asking deal or no deal if we leave it would give parliament no real choice. You could even make it binding if that is possible.
"No deal" should never be an option.
I think it should. Pointless otherwise given the change in voter demographics since the original vote and more particularity that the purpose is to break the deadlock and not to simply keep Brexiteers or Leavers (who would prefer deal if we leave) happy.
Edit: As I want to minimise the damage I'd personally be happy if we took "no deal" off the table.
If Brexit has proven anything it is that you shouldnt offer the electorate an option that is so bad you dont want them to take it.
So this is what the Cox codpiece looks like
Legally binding changes
ERG view, prediction of how many votes the government loses by tomorrow anyone?
As a kid I had a teacher who once said "If you won't like the answer don't ask the question". I remember thinking that it was weird but only understood it later, when I faced this scenario.
Precisely
MPs currently tearing Lidington a new one and he's giving some pretty nonsensical answers
Think we already know, so the circus restarts tomorrow at least for another 18 days.
Between 50 and 150?... Depends how many abstain rather then vote against?
May making a joint-statement/holding a press conference now with Juncker.
Ive got a sneaky feelingg she may somehow pull this off.
Are you watching May's face on Sky News?
No - why?
She doesn't look too confident.
Juncker says tomorrow is the last chance- no more negotiations or reassurances.
Juncker's face when May was lying about unilateral withdrawal was the better picture. Not the least surprised she's willing to flat out lie though
Yes. She repeated the same robotic speech she has said in the HoC and to the press numerous times. I think Juncker knows it's not going to pass the HoC and so does May. But then again, nothing will.
May statement in full.
Last November, after two years of hard-fought negotiations, I agreed a Brexit deal with the EU that I passionately believe delivers on the decision taken by the British people to leave the European Union.
Over the last four months, I have made the case for that deal in Westminster and across the UK.
I stand by what that deal achieves for my country.
It means we regain control of our laws, by ending the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the UK.
Regain control of our borders, by ending free movement.
Regain control of our money, by ending vast annual payments to the EU.
The end of the Common Agricultural Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy for British farmers and fishermen.
An independent trade policy.
And the deal sets us on course for a good future relationship with our friends and allies in the EU.
A close economic partnership that is good for business.
Ongoing security co-operation to keep our peoples safe.
The deal honours the referendum result and is good for both the UK and the EU.
But there was a clear concern in Parliament over one issue in particular: the Northern Ireland backstop.
Having an insurance policy to guarantee that there will never be a hard border in Northern Ireland is absolutely right – it honours the UK’s solemn commitments in the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement.
But if we ever have to use that insurance policy, it cannot become a permanent arrangement and it is not the template for our future relationship.
The deal that MPs voted on in January was not strong enough in making that clear – and legally binding changes were needed to set that right.
Today we have agreed them.
First, a joint instrument with comparable legal weight to the Withdrawal Agreement will guarantee that the EU cannot act with the intent of applying the backstop indefinitely.
If they do, it can be challenged through arbitration and if they are found to be in breach the UK can suspend the backstop.
The joint instrument also gives a legal commitment that whatever replaces the backstop does not need to replicate it.
And it entrenches in legally-binding form the commitments made in the exchange of letters with Presidents Tusk and Juncker in January.
Second, the UK and the EU have made a joint statement in relation to the Political Declaration.
It sets out a number of commitments to enhance and expedite the process of negotiating and bringing into force the future relationship.
And it makes a legal commitment that the UK and the EU will begin work immediately to replace the backstop with alternative arrangements by the end of December 2020.
There will be a specific negotiating track on alternative arrangements from the very start of the next phase of negotiations.
It will consider facilitations and technologies – both those currently ready and emerging.
The UK’s position will be informed by the three domestic groups announced last week – for technical experts, MPs, and business and trade unions.
Third, alongside the joint instrument on the Withdrawal Agreement, the United Kingdom Government will make a Unilateral Declaration that if the backstop comes into use and discussions on our future relationship break down so that there is no prospect of subsequent agreement, it is the position of the United Kingdom that there would be nothing to prevent the UK instigating measures that would ultimately dis-apply the backstop.
Unilateral Declarations are commonly used by states alongside the ratification of treaties.
The Attorney General will set out in legal analysis the meaning of the joint instrument and unilateral declaration to Parliament.
Tomorrow the House of Commons will debate the improved deal that these legal changes have created.
I will speak in more detail about them when I open that debate.
MPs were clear that legal changes were needed to the backstop.
Today we have secured legal changes.
Now is the time to come together, to back this improved Brexit deal, and to deliver on the instruction of the British people.
Last November, after two years of hard-fought negotiations, I agreed a Brexit deal with the EU that I passionately believe delivers on the decision taken by the British people to leave the European Union.
Over the last four months, I have made the case for that deal in Westminster and across the UK.
I stand by what that deal achieves for my country.
It means we regain control of our laws, by ending the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the UK.
Regain control of our borders, by ending free movement.
Regain control of our money, by ending vast annual payments to the EU.
The end of the Common Agricultural Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy for British farmers and fishermen.
An independent trade policy.
And the deal sets us on course for a good future relationship with our friends and allies in the EU.
A close economic partnership that is good for business.
Ongoing security co-operation to keep our peoples safe.
The deal honours the referendum result and is good for both the UK and the EU.
But there was a clear concern in Parliament over one issue in particular: the Northern Ireland backstop.
Having an insurance policy to guarantee that there will never be a hard border in Northern Ireland is absolutely right – it honours the UK’s solemn commitments in the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement.
But if we ever have to use that insurance policy, it cannot become a permanent arrangement and it is not the template for our future relationship.
The deal that MPs voted on in January was not strong enough in making that clear – and legally binding changes were needed to set that right.
Today we have agreed them.
First, a joint instrument with comparable legal weight to the Withdrawal Agreement will guarantee that the EU cannot act with the intent of applying the backstop indefinitely.
If they do, it can be challenged through arbitration and if they are found to be in breach the UK can suspend the backstop.
The joint instrument also gives a legal commitment that whatever replaces the backstop does not need to replicate it.
And it entrenches in legally-binding form the commitments made in the exchange of letters with Presidents Tusk and Juncker in January.
Second, the UK and the EU have made a joint statement in relation to the Political Declaration.
It sets out a number of commitments to enhance and expedite the process of negotiating and bringing into force the future relationship.
And it makes a legal commitment that the UK and the EU will begin work immediately to replace the backstop with alternative arrangements by the end of December 2020.
There will be a specific negotiating track on alternative arrangements from the very start of the next phase of negotiations.
It will consider facilitations and technologies – both those currently ready and emerging.
The UK’s position will be informed by the three domestic groups announced last week – for technical experts, MPs, and business and trade unions.
Third, alongside the joint instrument on the Withdrawal Agreement, the United Kingdom Government will make a Unilateral Declaration that if the backstop comes into use and discussions on our future relationship break down so that there is no prospect of subsequent agreement, it is the position of the United Kingdom that there would be nothing to prevent the UK instigating measures that would ultimately dis-apply the backstop.
Unilateral Declarations are commonly used by states alongside the ratification of treaties.
The Attorney General will set out in legal analysis the meaning of the joint instrument and unilateral declaration to Parliament.
Tomorrow the House of Commons will debate the improved deal that these legal changes have created.
I will speak in more detail about them when I open that debate.
MPs were clear that legal changes were needed to the backstop.
Today we have secured legal changes.
Now is the time to come together, to back this improved Brexit deal, and to deliver on the instruction of the British people.
The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has responded to May’s statement, saying her “negotiations have failed”.
This evening’s agreement with the European Commission does not contain anything approaching the changes Theresa May promised Parliament, and whipped her MPs to vote for.
Since her Brexit deal was so overwhelmingly rejected, the prime minister has recklessly run down the clock, failed to effectively negotiate with the EU and refused to find common ground for a deal Parliament could support.
That’s why MPs must reject this deal tomorrow.
Presume he thought the backstop would be removed or Corbyn hopeful he gets his no deal Brexit.
This evening’s agreement with the European Commission does not contain anything approaching the changes Theresa May promised Parliament, and whipped her MPs to vote for.
Since her Brexit deal was so overwhelmingly rejected, the prime minister has recklessly run down the clock, failed to effectively negotiate with the EU and refused to find common ground for a deal Parliament could support.
That’s why MPs must reject this deal tomorrow.
Presume he thought the backstop would be removed or Corbyn hopeful he gets his no deal Brexit.
Noticed that. Makes one think he's not too bothered about no deal, rightly or wrongly.
As for unilateral withdrawal, I'm not an international lawyer, but history shows that treaties come and treaties go, no such thing as forever. I'd take the deal.
They could unilaterally move to end the backstop provided they uphold their obligations under the GFA and in all circumstances avoid a hard border? I'm confused. That sound like they could move to end the backstop provided they uphold the principles of the backstop.
Can someone explain to me (like I'm stupid) what has actually changed?
Oh right. Is it even the sort of nothing May can sell as something? Or just the sort of nothing that has wasted more of everyone's time?
I ask this with a horrible sense of what the answer will be.
Is the EU being complicit in letting us renege on GFA? Very ambiguous. Not the best basis to try and build a new relationship with the EU.
I don't see parliament agreeing. It is just a change of words but the backstop will not be removed and will not have a time limit, it's not possible and never has been. She's desperate for this deal to be approved but this was the last throw of the dice.
Unless parliament realise that no deal really is catastrophic they might just back her deal at the last minute.
Reminds me of a classic religious text, in that you could use it to argue any way you want. Not convinced by the backstop theory, five years time, you could bring in a hard border, blame someone else for having to bring it in, and claim it's not technically a hard border anyway. And things might be totally different by then in multiple ways. I'd take the deal.