Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Sounds like the government have staved off a rebellion at the last second. Cnuts.
Yep, was more comfortable than it looked a while back. Actually had hope that they'd lose
Have no idea why she's in Labour.
She's having a baby?
The government has won the fourth vote. MPs voted by 324 votes to 302 - a majority of 24 - to reject another Lords amendment on the exit day (ie, to put the exit day back in the bill after it was removed by peers).
The UK are leaving on that date anyway no matter what was voted for today.
Today is pretty meaningless (as has been the last two years) - they can keep arguing amongst themselves, won't change the final outcome.
The UK are leaving on that date anyway no matter what was voted for today.
Today is pretty meaningless (as has been the last two years) - they can keep arguing amongst themselves, won't change the final outcome.
"The government has won the third vote. MPs voted to reverse the Lords amendment removing the “exit day” from the bill by 326 votes to 301 - a majority of 25. That means 29 March 2019 is going back in the bill as exit day."
Why in the name of feck do they insist on this bollocks? It's just cutting the countries feet out from under it.
Why in the name of feck do they insist on this bollocks? It's just cutting the countries feet out from under it.
The government has won the fifth vote. MPs voted by 328 votes to 297 - a majority of 31 - to take out another Lords amendment relating to the exit day. (It was a Lords amendment taking the date out of the bill; now it is going back in
No vote on the final deal.
Theresa May has won the key vote on giving parliament a “meaningful vote” on Brexit - although only by offering Tory rebels a significant concession. MPs voted by 324 votes to 298 - a majority of 26 - to reject the amendment passed in the Lords enabling parliament to take charge of the negotiating strategy if MPs voted against the Brexit deal in the autumn.
Feck. I've got relatives who work at the Solihull plant.
There is no debate on free movement.
Brexiters apparently not happy.
Looking more and more likely that we are just going to remain in the EU legislatively with a few changes to show that we 'left' the EU.
The point d is the most important.
Sooner or later we have to start discussing free movement and they all know it
It's either that or we throw the economy in the gutter.
Yes but it's still back to the same two choices - off the cliff and economy in the gutter or stay in CU/SM which means free movement.
So if No Deal is dead and the Commons with its divisions will never agree on the terms of any deal (as any deal they present will be too Brexity for some, not Brexity enough for others) has Brexit effectively been kicked to the other side of another General Election?
What exactly has been passed that rules out a no deal?
The intention I think has always been to stretch it to the next GE.
However, if No Deal is dead, the UK are staying in the EU in all but name. To get past March 2019 the UK have to agree to the CU/SM for NI.
Well the Rebels and the Wankers appear to be under two different impressions. Govt has clearly been talking out of both sides of its arse in order to just get through tonight. If assurances made to rebels turn out to be not what they seem then this will get batted straight back by the Lords and the govt's credibility to negotiate its way out of a defeat second time around in the Commons will be shot to pieces.
So a pointless stupid Brexit rather than a nightmare apocalypse Brexit? That's a win, sort of.
In the short term that would be the most beneficial form brexit can take (in my opinion). The EU can try to evolve/improve/change without the UK's veto and continue trading with the UK who gets to do the same. In the long term an EU without UK input will become a new problem though (if the UK exits in name only).
At this point it is, aye. A hard Brexit seems like it can't be implemented due the Northern Irish issue alone, and even beyond that it'll cause all sorts of upheaval. Politicians complaining about how they won't be able to end freedom of movement should've considered that in the years during which they'd been arguing against the EU and had been expressing a desire to leave.
A soft Brexit is pointless, in that we'll basically remain in our current situation only without any leverage whatsoever over the EU, but I'd rather that than chaos.
They were the only choices really available other than no Brexit. The stupid Brexit also comes with no say for the UK in the EU.
I wouldn't yet rule out a No Deal though. If reality finally dawns on some Brexiters, there'll be some angry people about.
By worst exports you mean cnut?
Unless they force us into Schengen. That would be hilarious.
The CU/SM with the "horror" of free movement deal is inevitable. The trouble is no government can sign off on that deal. Any government that does that risks annihilation at the next GE
What I think will happen is, that deal is going to be put back to the people as either another referendum or a GE with both parties officially backing it.
I suspect no government is also going to want to be the ones to take us out of the EU without a deal.
What I think will happen is, that deal is going to be put back to the people as either another referendum or a GE with both parties officially backing it.
I suspect no government is also going to want to be the ones to take us out of the EU without a deal.
We haven't seen the last of this. It's going to become clear next week who HMG have led up a merry dance.
UK left themselves in the situation in which there can be no winners politically, country is divided as they get so sensible thing to do would be to put the economy and well-being of people first.
But when, the clock is ticking as Michel Barnier reminds the UK quite often, there is very little time left for anything.
The whole thing was avoidable. If leading politicians after the Brexit vote took the sensible approach that what followed should have been a national debate/consultation as to what Brexit meant we could have spent these last two years really discussing issues like the single market, the customs union and freedom of movement. It would have been the easiest thing in the world to not create an environment in which debate about what kind of future relationship we wanted wasn't considered toxic.
Sadly what happened is Nigel Farage broke wind and Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have spend 2 years falling over themselves over who could be seen to agree with him more. Didn't have to be like this, it really didn't.
Sadly what happened is Nigel Farage broke wind and Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have spend 2 years falling over themselves over who could be seen to agree with him more. Didn't have to be like this, it really didn't.
Yeah. When coming from full membership, soft Brexit seems pointless. However, Brexit is happening either way so it's better to be soft.
I don't get this talk that if we don't have a definitive, cast-iron leave date that there's no incentive for the 27 to give us a good deal. What incentive is there for them to do that anyway?
9 months away from leaving the EU and progress-wise on key points we're literally we were on the day of the referendum. They are yet to come up with any meaningful strategy/vision on what will brexit entail and how it is going to be achieved, mind blowing. No accountability seen here, two years of doing feck all - I presume it's laziness/ignorance in play.
I think this ignores a lot of what happened around Brexit.
From the start it now should have been evident that the only Brexit we could implement was one which didn't violate the GFA in Northern Ireland, which is a soft Brexit and remaining in the CU/SM. That was something any rational politician should've been able to realise within five minutes, and it's not something that required any widespread consultation.
For me this ignores a lot of what happened before the vote: freedom of movement was made central to the vote, and so people were made to think this was something that could happen irrespective of what path we took. We fecked it long before the vote, and even pro-EU politicians had arguably been fecking it for years by fawning to the public with harsh rhetoric on immigration while not planning to actually do anything about it.
Any consultation post-Brexit would've had people demanding that the central tenants of Brexit were made, i.e. that freedom of movement from the EU was now in our hands. The problem was that the only vision of Brexit under which that could be implemented was the softest one.
Spot on mate, the prevailing incompetence is astonishing. How did those people end up in their respective positions I don't understand.
Yeah. We've reach squeaky bum time after spending two years faffing about. I still think a deal will happen, somehow. I work for a French investment bank and in a meeting not long ago. Our head of operations was convinced CU/SM deal would happen. Don't know if it was his opinion or he knows something we don't. Seems other banks to are convinced that's what will happen.
None. It is in the interest of of a united EU that we don't benefit from leaving.
You work for BNP by any chance?
I thought you meant the political party for a moment there and was struggling to see what was so offensive about his post.
