Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
So in light of this news:
When May fails in parliament and there is no time or patience from the EU left to re-negotiate, meanwhile the economic forecasts continue to be terrible and companies either threaten to or actually leave the UK in anticipation of a no-deal Brexit. The chances of a no-deal vs cost/negotiation-free remain referendum should be pretty good then?
No deal v Remain!! :drool:
 
So in light of this news:
When May fails in parliament and there is no time or patience from the EU left to re-negotiate, meanwhile the economic forecasts continue to be terrible and companies either threaten to or actually leave the UK in anticipation of a no-deal Brexit. The chances of a no-deal vs cost/negotiation-free remain referendum should be pretty good then?

With one major problem (at least as I see it)

The only people who can legislate for a second referendum are the government

May says she wont... and if she did I suspect the 48 letters would go in so quick she wouldnt be able to follow through on it ... result is most probably a eurosceptic leader who will just go full hard on Brexit
 


Well....this is going to get interesting.

I don't know how we get there but this must happen, a referendum must happen.

It completely pulls the rug out of Mays risking a no deal ploy which is great.

In a weird sort of way, this might make it easier for May to pass her shit deal.
Imagine what's going through the minds of some Tories hearing this?
 
Interesting development. Obviously none of this is binding and we need to wait for the actual ECJ ruling, but it does look like the hard Brexiteers' "no deal" dream is in serious jeopardy - there will never be a majority in Parliament for it and MPs can now (probably) block it from happening, if necessary.
 
Interesting development. Obviously none of this is binding and we need to wait for the actual ECJ ruling, but it does look like the hard Brexiteers' "no deal" dream is in serious jeopardy - there will never be a majority in Parliament for it and MPs can now (probably) block it from happening, if necessary.

Surely you don't need anything to happen for a "no deal" dream, as since Article 50 was pulled, if nothing happens we just crash out?
 
More like Norway, who are pretty much in the EU without being in it

But it's not, customs checks still there which will kill the UK, plus services not covered sufficiently.
You still have no say, no seats in parliament , still pay contributions.

At least with May's deal the Uk is still in the customs union etc but doesn't have a say until NI is resolved which it never can be. There is only one sensible solution an that is remain in the EU.

My ratings on a scale of 1 to 10 where staying in the EU is 10.
May's deal is minus 27
EEA deal is minus 75
Canada deal is minus 256
No deal is minus 468.

Actually just saw this as well
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...l-brexit-outcomes-for-uk-say-eu-sources-rules
 
https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/1204/1014950-brexit/
The UK parliament has voted that the British government is in contempt of parliament for refusing to release full legal advice on Brexit.

MPs voted 311 to 293 in favour of the motion that found ministers in contempt and orders the immediate publication of the advice.

The leader of the Commons Andrea Leadsom told the House of Commons that the government will publish the "final and full" legal advice provided by Attorney General Geoffrey Cox tomorrow.

Earlier, the UK Attorney General said that Theresa May's government had "gone out of its way" to satisfy the call for the release of the advice.

The Attorney General's Office published a letter sent by Mr Cox to speaker John Bercow last night.

The letter follows a motion of contempt of parliament against the government submitted by opposition parties and the DUP last night.

That motion relates to a failure to release the full legal advice to MPs on the EU Withdrawal Treaty. It is now being debated in the House of Commons.

In his letter the Attorney General says that the amended terms of Keir Starmer's successful motion of 13 November were "extremely vague and it is not clear what is meant by them".
 
But it's not, customs checks still there which will kill the UK, plus services not covered sufficiently.
You still have no say, no seats in parliament , still pay contributions.

At least with May's deal the Uk is still in the customs union etc but doesn't have a say until NI is resolved which it never can be. There is only one sensible solution an that is remain in the EU.

My ratings on a scale of 1 to 10 where staying in the EU is 10.
May's deal is minus 27
EEA deal is minus 75
Canada deal is minus 256
No deal is minus 468.

Actually just saw this as well
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...l-brexit-outcomes-for-uk-say-eu-sources-rules

I said more like, not exactly like.
 
Surely you don't need anything to happen for a "no deal" dream, as since Article 50 was pulled, if nothing happens we just crash out?

"No deal" was indeed the default position if the government couldn't agree an interim deal (and get it through the commons).

However, if the ECJ agree with the Advocate General's advice (and they usually do), then I'd say that "no Brexit" now becomes the default position - if it looks like we are going to plunge off the cliff, we'll simply revoke A50 and cancel Brexit.
 
"No deal" was indeed the default position if the government couldn't agree an interim deal (and get it through the commons).

However, if the ECJ agree with the Advocate General's advice (and they usually do), then I'd say that "no Brexit" now becomes the default position - if it looks like we are going to plunge off the cliff, we'll simply revoke A50 and cancel Brexit.

Surely that will go against the "will of the people"? Be a huge backlash if that ends up happening.
 
The complexities and knots tied up across all this are so fecking complex that the public have no chance.
Dominic Greaves has just tabled a motion countering a future ploy by the goverment placed in the withdrawal agreement around what happens if they're voted down. That is, when the goverment go before the house in january to say a deal can't be agreed they've snuck in that the motion can't be amended.

Constantly trying to circumvent parliament and play games.
 
"No deal" was indeed the default position if the government couldn't agree an interim deal (and get it through the commons).

However, if the ECJ agree with the Advocate General's advice (and they usually do), then I'd say that "no Brexit" now becomes the default position - if it looks like we are going to plunge off the cliff, we'll simply revoke A50 and cancel Brexit.

And my point above is directly in relation to this issue. The goverment doesn't want that default amendable but it's very likely they'll now vote to ensure it is
 
Theresa Villiers MP wants May to go back to Brussels and hopes for Brussels to be "reasonable".

These people are beyond helping.
 
This has been 90% May giving away to those who her support her so far. Scurtiny indeed
 
Theresa Villiers MP wants May to go back to Brussels and hopes for Brussels to be "reasonable".

These people are beyond helping.
I suppose if we go back with we are gonna revoke A50 then vote in a bunch of ukippers in the EU election they might decide they would rather devise a different backstop exit mechanism if it guaranteed getting rid of us once and for all?
 
I suppose if we go back with we are gonna revoke A50 then vote in a bunch of ukippers in the EU election they might decide they would rather devise a different backstop exit mechanism if it guaranteed getting rid of us once and for all?
Even if the UK is found capable of unilaterally revoking A50 (which i'd personally very much prefer) I can't see it happening practically within 100 days. I think it would need a new government with a new parliament for that to happen, and it's too late for that. Then again I've been wrong about May and her government, so who knows.

I just think it's grotesque for a member of the British parliament to suggest that the EU's position is anything other than reasonable at this point. We've been through this shxt for 3 years now, even brexiteers are fed up with brexit, to think coming back to Brussels one more time would change anything is borderline delusional.

The British people deserve better people to represent them.
 
Surely that will go against the "will of the people"? Be a huge backlash if that ends up happening.
This. Whilst I’d love us to stay and cancel brexit - I could see riots. Shouldn’t stop the cancellation of course, just saying.
 
Back in the debate May says the backstop is not a trick to keep the UK in the EU. It is something that gives the UK some benefits of EU membership without the obligations. The EU won’t want it to continue for long if it is implemented, May says.

Without the obligations? You don't know what you're doing.

She is just openly lying now, she's lied before but now doesn't even bother hiding it.
 
Unfit to lead, lost all backing & support, no direction for the future, blaming everyone else for the current failures, clinging on to power due to narcissism & ego.

But enough about José. When will May resign?!
 
Back in the debate May says the backstop is not a trick to keep the UK in the EU. It is something that gives the UK some benefits of EU membership without the obligations. The EU won’t want it to continue for long if it is implemented, May says.

Without the obligations? You don't know what you're doing.

She is just openly lying now, she's lied before but now doesn't even bother hiding it.

It's infuriating as she's not even allowed to be called out on it in the house. Cameron stuck to script but May takes it one step further beyond diversion
 
May reads her lines from the page well enough but she falls off a cliff with her hands tied behind her back whenever someone asks her a question.

Vicky Ford, what a bellend.